TH Ems Will!!! H mm 1m m n 1293 00 llllll'll This is to certify that the thesis entitled A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, 1967-1977 presented by Michael F . Caldwell has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for _Ph.D.__degree in _SpeciaL.Educat ion Major professor Date 7‘26/‘7L 0-7639 ovmnua FINES ARE 25¢ PER DAY . PER ITEM Return to book drop to remove this checkout from your record. A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, 1967-1977 By Michael F. Caldwell A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Elementary and Special Education 1979 ABSTRACT A HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL EDUCATION IN THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS, 1967-1977 By Michael F. Caldwell Through this study it was shown that, before l967, there was no indication of any effort to provide special education service in the United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. The development of special education service in the Trust Territory was determined to be the direct result of the inclusion of the Trust Territory in United States federal legislation relating to the handicapped. Since 1967, special education growth and development in the Trust Territory have been directly related to the availability of federal funds from the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. In this study, growth and development of special education were described and analyzed within the framework of three general topo- logical areas. These areas were: administration and planning; service delivery, training, curriculum, and materials-development activity; and legislative, judicial, and other activities related to special educa- tion development. In relation to administration and planning, it was found that the centralized structure of the Trust Territory's formal education Michael F. Caldwell system was a factor contributing to the initial development of a centralized special education administration and planning model. Support for this approach was found in international guidelines for special education development, recommendations for developing special education in an area similar to the Trust Territory, and in the ability of such a model to respond to United States special education legislation. Weaknesses in the centralized administration and plan- ning model were shown to be related to the fact that it lacked the capability to deal with the area's possible future political frag- mentation; to its strong basis in formal education and, relatedly, a failure to recognize the existence of nonformal education in the area; and to its heavy reliance on importing a foreign service model as opposed to developing a model that might relate more strongly to environmental factors within the area. The analysis of service delivery, training, curriculum, and materials-development activity was reflective of the early special education program's commitment to providing special education service within regular classrooms. In this regard, the training emphasis was on preparing all teachers to meet the needs of mildly handicapped children. This commitment was consistently evident throughout the entire period under study. This commitment represented a strength, in that it allowed for special education training, curriculum, and materials development to benefit handicapped and nonhandicapped chil- dren. Also, the concept of integrating handicapped children into regular classes was and continues to be supported by international Michael F. Caldwell guidelines, as well as by United States federal legislation. Weak- nesses in the service delivery, training, curriculum, and materials- development activity area rest in its emphasis on formal education at the expense of failing to recognize nonformal education. The analysis of the third general topological area (legisla- tive, judicial, and other activities related to special education) highlighted several significant problem areas. A compulsory education law was established for the area, but the law allowed for the pos- sible exclusion of the handicapped. Area-wide legislation for the handicapped was passed, but the responsibility for fiscal resources for its implementation was left to the United States government. This historical study culminated in some conclusions and recommendations that may benefit those persons charged with planning the future of special education in the Trust Territory and in similar developing areas. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to express his appreciation to his com- mittee chairman, Dr. Charles Henley, and other members of the doctoral committee, Dr. Charles Mange, Dr. Richard Featherstone, and Dr. Max Bruck, for their advice and assistance in the preparation of this study. The writer wishes especially to thank Dr. Raymond Lehrman, Dr. Ralph Carlson, David Piercy, Elsa Thomas, and Dr. Barbara Bateman for their expertise on matters related to special education program development in the United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Sincere appreciation is extended to Dr. Bruce Karolle for providing the map that was used in this study and to the many Micro- nesian special educators assigned to the Department of Education Headquarters office, the Community College of Micronesia, and the various District Departments of Education for their assistance in locating many of the documents used in this study. The writer also wishes to thank his wife, Dr. Sue Caldwell, Rosalind Unpingco, and Esther Pekkala for their many hours of assistance in the preparation of this study. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF MAPS ......................... Chapter I. INTRODUCTION ..................... Purpose of the Study ................ Importance of the Study ............... Methodology ..................... Parameters of the Study ............... Sources ....................... Organization of the Study .............. II. THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS ....................... Geography ...................... Demographic and Sociological Information ...... History and Political Structure ........... Economy ....................... Education ...................... Prehistoric Period ................ Spanish Period (l52l-l899) ............ German Period (1899-19l4) ............. Japanese Period (l914-1945) ............ American Period (l945-l967) ............ The United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands as a Developing Area ........... III._ SPECIAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FROM JANUARY I, T967, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1977 ..... Federal Special Education Legislation ........ Administration and Planning ............. The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 3l, l969 ................ Period 11: Planning and Initiating Training and Service--January l, l970, Through December 31, 1972 ...................... Page —I 0030\wa 50 SI 54 54 67 Chapter Page Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communication, and External Technical Assistance--January l, 1973, Through December 31, 1974 ................. 83 Period IV: Micronesian Leadership--January 1, 1975, Through December 31, 1977 .......... 92 Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Development Activity ........... 106 The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 31, 1969 ................. 106 Period II: Planning and Initiating Training and Service--January l, 1970, Through December 1972 ....................... 112 Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communication, and External Technical Assistance--January l, 1973, Through December 31, 1974 ................. 123 Period IV: Micronesian Leadership--January l, 1975, Through December 31, 1977 .......... 135 Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Territorial Special Education Development . . . . 143 The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 31, 1969 ................. 143 Period II: Planning and Initiating Training and Service--January 1, 1970, Through December 31, 1972 ....................... 146 Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communication, and External Technical Assistance--January l, 1973, Through December 31, 1974 ................. 147 Period IV: Micronesian Leadership--January l, 1975, Through December 31, 1977 .......... 149 IV. AN ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM ................... 155 Administration and Planning .............. 155 Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Development Activity ........... 165 Service Delivery .................. 165 Training ...................... 170 Curriculum and Materials .............. 173 Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Special Education Development .......... 177 iv Chapter Page V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ............. 179 Conclusions ...................... 179 Recommendations .................... 183 BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... 186 LIST OF MAPS Map Page 1. Micronesia and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands ........................ 12 vi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The Declaration of the Rights of the Child, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1959, affirmed that mankind owes to the child the best it has to give. Three of the ten principles espoused in that document are concerned with the education of the child: The child shall enjoy special protection and shall be given Opportunities and facilities, by law and other means, to enable him to develop physically, mentally, morally, spiritually, and socially in a healthy and normal manner and in conditions of freedom and dignity. In the enactment of laws for this purpose the best interests of the child shall be the paramount consid- eration. The child who is physically, mentally, or socially handi- capped shall be given the special treatment, education, and care required of his particular condition. The child is entitled to receive education which shall be free and compulsory at least in the elementary stages. He shall be given an education which will promote his general culture, and enable him on a basis of equal opportunity to develop his abilities, his individual judgment, and his sense of moral and social responsibilities and to become a useful member of society (United Nations, 1960, pp. 198-99). More recently, the United Nations' Declaration of the Rights of the Disabled affirmed the right of disabled persons to education that will enable them to develop their capabilities and skills to the maximum and hasten the process of social integration or reintegra- tion (United Nations, 1976, p. 89). These declarations, when con- sidered in the light of the even more recent United Nations General 1 Assembly Proclamation declaring 1981 as the International Year for Disabled Persons, clearly demonstrate a strong and growing inter- national concern for the rights of the disabled (United Nations, 1977, p. 67). Specifically, in relation to the education of handicapped children, the Twelfth World Congress of Rehabilitation International (1972) in Sydney, Australia, was presented with a set of guidelines relating to the future of special education. Those draft guidelines included the following specific recommendation relative to inter- national activities: "Countries which have highly developed special education programs have a responsibility to assist other countries plan and develop model special education programs" (p. 6). The writer chose to conduct the present study because of his interest in and concern for the develOpment of special education in third-world nations or developing areas, and especially the develop- mental factors that result from relationships with special education programs in more highly developed nations. Considerable reading about the development of special education indicated that very little has been written about the development of special education in third- world nations or developing areas of the world. Specifically, little has been written about the role developed countries have played or should play in helping third-world areas initiate and develop special education. The United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands (hereafter referred to as the Trust Territory or TTPI) was chosen for study because of the writer's familiarity with the region. Also, because of its ill-defined political status, the TTPI has a strong relationship to the United States, which, as the area's trustee, provides it with administrative structure and developmental assist- ance, and to the United Nations, which oversees the trustee's admin- istration of the area. These relationships, as well as the area's developmental level, establish a third-world-area—to-developed- nation relationship between the TTPI and the United States. The United Nations' role adds a significant international perspective. Purpose of the Study The writer's general purpose in conducting the study was to survey and analyze the development of special education in the TTPI from 1967 through 1977. From this general purpose followed a number of questions to be explored: 1. What models did United States educational administrators consider for the development of special education in the area? 2. Was the selected and deve10ped model appropriate to the area's needs? 3. What specific economic, geographic, historical, and sociological factors were considered in developing the model for the delivery of special education? 4. What factors in the service-delivery model assure the continuance of special education in the TTPI? 5. What negative factors influenced the development of the model? 6. Which factors relating to special education development in the Trust Territory should be considered by other developing areas as they implement special education? These questions served as a frame of reference in conducting the study. Importance of the Study As indicated earlier, the past two decades have seen a growing international concern for the development of special educa- tion. In 1958, the General Conference of the United Nations Educa- tional, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defined special education as "covering all general or vocational education given to chil- dren who are physically handicapped, mentally handicapped, socially maladjusted, or are in other special categories." In 1966 the General Conference of UNESCO in resolution 1.333, authorized the Director-General "to develop a programme in special education . . . on the basis of voluntary contribu- tions from Member States" (UNESCO, 1969, p. 3). The Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, held in Melbourne, Australia, in 1972, developed a set of guidelines for the future in special education. Among other recommendations, the guidelines stressed international cooperation and exchange relating to the following: 1. Professional information concerning Special Education. 2. Consultants for model programmes. 3. Assistance in developing teacher education programmes. 4. Awarding scholarships in Special Education. 5. Assistance in organizing regional conferences and seminars. 6. Assistance with evaluation and research. 7. Exchange of qualified personnel. (Rehabilitation International, 1972, p. 269). More recently, the World Education Commission of Rehabilitation Inter- national (1978) at its general assembly adopted a resolution calling upon the Director General of UNESCO to "propose a higher priority for special education activities in the Organization's over-all program and budget" (p. 2). The current study serves as a historical record of the develop- ment of special education in a third-world area; as such, it may have implications for the development of special education in similar regions throughout the world. According to Borg and Gall (1971), The historical study of an educational institution gives us a perspective that can do much to help us understand our present educational system, and this understanding in turn can help establish a sound basis for further progress and improvement. Historical research also can give us an insight into human behavior that can be very valuable in arriving at practical solutions for educational problems (p. 260). From this point of view, the study is of importance to those who are involved in educational administration and planning in the TTPI. The study provides a clear picture of how special education developed, and in doing so provides insight into problems other developing pro- grams might face. Furthermore, in view of the developing-nation nature of the TTPI and its indeterminate political future, it is especially important that such information be readily available to the area's decision makers. Methodology Thisstudy of the develOpment of special education in the TTPI used the historical method of research, which can be reduced to the following four essential components: l. The collection of the surviving objects and of the printed, written, and oral materials that may be relevant; 2. the exclusion of those materials (or parts thereof) that are unauthentic; 3. the extraction from the authentic material of testimony that is credible; 4. the organization of that reliable testimony into a meaning- ful narrative or exposition. (Gottschalk, 1964, p. 28). Parameters of the Study The U.S. Congress defined the TTPI as a state in relation to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (Public Law 89-10). Further legislation in 1966 and 1967 expanded Sections I and VI of this act, thereby creating a series of measures that favored the education of handicapped children. In November 1967, the Federal Programs Officer of the Office of the High Commissioner of the TTPI submitted a proposed state plan for the development of special educa- tion services. Information contained in the proposed plan and in other sources indicated there were no special education services before that date. Therefore, beginning the study with the year 1967 made it possible to review the development of regular education before any efforts had been made to provide special education, and thereby to develop a clear understanding of the educational environment in which special education was initiated. Using 1977 as the terminal year for the study was logical for several reasons. At that time a little more than a decade of special education developmental activities had taken place under United States government supervision in the TTPI. Using 1977 as a cut-off point also made it possible to include the results of the territory-wide pre-White House Conference on the Handicapped, and the participation of a Trust Territory delegation in the National White House Conference on the Handicapped held in Washington, D.C., in May 1977. The latter half of 1977 was a transition period in which the TTPI was required, as a result of the federal government's imple- mentation of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94-142), to develop and submit for approval an extensive plan that would provide for a free, appropriate public education for all handicapped children between the ages of 3 and 18. The writer focused on the provision of special education ser- vices in the TTPI, using resources made available through the area's inclusion in the definition of a state in various federal-level special education laws. Noteworthy is the fact that there was no indication of special education develOpment through any other means. The definition of special education adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO (1958) at its tenth session, cited earlier, and various federal legislative definitions based on classifications of handicapped children were used in this study. An early example of'a federal legislative definition based on classification is found in Public Law 88-164, and relates to the training of professional per- sonnel to provide services to those who are "mentally retarded, hard of hearing, deaf, speech impaired, visually handicapped, seriously emotionally disturbed, crippled or other health impaired children who, by reasons thereof, require special education." The most recent federal legislation relating to handicapped children and special edu- cation is Public Law 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975. This law defined handicapped children as "mentally retarded, hard of hearing, deaf, speech impaired, visually handicapped, seriously emotionally disturbed, orthopedically impaired, health impaired children or children with specific learning disabilities." The same act also established the most recent federal definition of special education, stating that it is "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." Whereas the initially cited UNESCO definition of special education tended to be broad and imprecise, the federal legis- lative definitions have gone through an evolutionary process that has culminated in the rather specific definitions contained in Public Law 94-142, cited above. In addition to the broad international definition quoted earlier and the federal definitions that evolved, a number of states have also defined special education. Unless other- wise specified, the term "special education“ has been used generically in this study; thus it includes international, national, and state definitions. Sources The primary source materials used to discover how special education developed in the TTPI were the Annual Reports of the High Commissioner of the TTPI to the Secretary of the Interior; the Annual Reports of the U.S. Department of State to the United Nations on the Administration of the TTPI; special studies and surveys contracted by the Department of Education of the TTPI; monthly reports of dis- trict directors of education; documents relating to state plans; personnel training projects funded and approved by the U.S. Office of Education/Bureau for the Education of the Handicapped; documents relating to special education projects developed and funded through various federal grants; materials related to special education con- ferences; newsletters; minutes of territorial and district board of education meetings; training materials and course outlines related to special education, primarily from the Community College of Micronesia; miscellaneous unpublished papers; reports from consultative services provided to the area; interviews with individuals directly involved in Special education during the period under study; and newspaper articles. The primary materials were supplemented by a variety of other items, such as books and federal documents relating to special edu- cation, and general books on history, geography, economics, political science, and social development in the TTPI. Organization of the Study The background of the study is provided in Chapter II. The validity of considering the TTPI a develOping area is established by examining the region in detail. Chapter III contains a chronological examination of the development of special education in the TTPI. The following topical areas are considered: administration and planning; service delivery, training, curricular, and materials development activities; and 10 legislative, judicial, and other activities related to territorial special education development. Provided in Chapter IV is an analysis of the development of special education in the TTPI in terms of the topical areas described in Chapter III. This analysis emphasizes those facets of special education development in the Trust Territory that might be important in the development of special education in other developing areas. Chapter V contains the conclusions and recommendations of the study. CHAPTER II THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS Geography The map of the TTPI forms a broad, irregularly shaped hexagon in the Central and Western Pacific. (See Map 1.) The northern boundary of the territory is the limit of most islands of the Pacific, except Wake and Midway in the north and east. The southwestern tip of the territory touches Indonesia; Melanesia lies across the long southern frontier; and Polynesia bounds the east. Anthropologically, the Trust Territory is contained within an area called Micronesia, meaning "Tiny Islands." However, two atolls within the area, Nukuoro and Kapingamarangi, are anthropologically defined as Polynesian. 0f significance is the fact that Guam, which is geographically and anthro- pologically part of Micronesia, is not part of the Trust Territory, but rather is defined politically as an unincorporated territory of the United States. In addition, the Gilbert Islands, anthropologically defined as Micronesian, are politically under British jurisdiction. The territory covers three million square miles from latitude 1° to 22° North and from longitude 130° to 172° East. Basically, it consists of three major island groups: the Marianas (except Guam), the Carolines, and the Marshalls. Although the territory's three island groups have a total land area of less than seven hundred square 11 12 .mccmFmH owewoma mcu co xcopwccmh “mach be“ new mwmmcocowz .. e... . x .n H l o .48. 3.2... .3. 0083. .80th 8.2.0 3.5.5. . 83.38 8. ., .. .15.... 5.... 2.2.2 . 3.3. ”OZ‘Jn— g‘ .. .‘3’ .n..b.§_8‘. . 2.6.8. FIND-=0 3.3.93593334 :28... .30» D . 5:850 £52, 8.33.. .292. 9.5 0.2a .83 moz o 93. no. . o . ...oa...a..< 8.3... 4 2:6! :21... 2...: 2,...» .99... 8595.2 5...: c. chaos: .55. 1.2.5... .3... . wOZGAm. 4441mm<2 235‘ 22.. \< x Q Q \ fix :1 .95? 625*. 5.1.“ V .w M. N 091. 2:53: 8 5:33.853: .325». coaoao ”02‘4”— ; . 3.2.3:... «255.: N : knees bribed 5...... . . b be I. .5 1\..\ 8.2.31... use! . I A L nos—ca to $50.0“? / .. . 4/8 . fy/ sill . . uiihipo ”/4 l (w. mm..- 3. 2 824.5. 2.64.. 2: .o Eotmmt 5:5 . .7 (I) / \\ 4. km/ . 49.? ,f/fl. .. l/l- a. 05 9:0 / . . t J .. a 53205.... / (LI). 13 miles, there are more than two thousand islands. These islands range from large volcanic islands to tiny coral islets linking the circular chain of rock and vegetation, which form a coral atoll. Most islands in the East Carolines and the Marshalls are the result of coral formingcnisub-marine elevations. The Marianas and Western Caroline Islands are remnants of a vast undersea volcanic ridge that stretches southward from Japan along the western perimeter of the territory. Elevations throughout the area range from about six feet on a coral atoll to 3,166 feet, the territory's highest point, on Agrihan Island in the Northern Marianas. For purposes of administration, the area has been divided into six districts. Of these four--Palau, Yap, Truk, and Ponape--lie within the Caroline archipelago. The Marianas Islands and Marshall Islands Districts are in separate archipelagoes of the same names. The provisional headquarters of the Trust Territory Administration is on Saipan, Marianas Islands District. Of these districts . . new data from aerial surveys show Ponape to be the largest of the Trust Territory's administrative districts in terms of land area (186.5 square miles). The Marianas and Palau Dis- tricts are next with 181.9 square miles and 177.6 square miles, respectively. The Marshall Islands' many atolls add up to 69.3 square miles; Yap and Truk Districts measure 46.8 square miles and 45.4 square miles in land area (TTPI, 1973, p. 1). Throughout the area, temperatures tend to be quite uniform, ranging from 75-85°F. Rainfall is heavy and humidity averages 80 percent. Seasonal changes vary slightly throughout the area, but most islands have pronounced wet and dry seasons. The territory lies in an area of the Western Pacific where major ocean storms develOp and strike. The Islands of Palau, Yap, and Marianas Districts were struck by strong typhoons in late 1967. In 1968, typhoon Jean struck the Caroline Islands and developed to full intensity as it passed the Marianas, 14 _ causing an estimated $16 million damage. During 1970, typhoons Elsie and Ida struck the sparsely p0pulated islands in the Northern Marianas. Typhoon Nancy struck Yap District, caus- ing damage to buildings and severe loss of crops, but no serious injuries or loss of life. In May of 1971, typhoon Amy hit Truk District with 100 mile-per-hour winds, causing an estimated $4 million property damage and one death (TTPI, 1973, p. 2). Plant and animal life varies from high island to low atoll. Coconut and breadfruit trees and an abundance of rich marine fauna are common throughout the area. Coral atolls are characterized by the coconut palm and its related plant associates--breadfruit, pandanus, and plants of a shore nature. The high volcanic islands, on the other hand, usually have mangrove swamps on the tidal flats, coconut vegetation on the slopes, and mixed forest growth on the uplands. The following quotation, taken from the 1973 Department of State Report, provides a description of existing animal life in the Trust Territory: The only presumably native land animals are two species of insect-eating bats and two species of fruit bats. These ani- mals are not found on all islands but are on both high islands and atolls. Dogs, pigs, and one species of rat were introduced by migrating islanders prior to Western and Oriental contact. . . . The water buffalo or carabao was introduced into the Marianas from the Philippines by the Spanish, and later spread to Ponape and Palau. Horses, cattle, goats, and cats were introduced in the post-European contact period. Deer were introduced into the Marianas by the Germans and later trans- ported to Ponape (TTPI, 1973, p. 2). Throughout the territory, open seas, reefs, lagoons, and shore areas contain numerous species of fish, including . . . tuna, barracuda, sea bass, sharks, eels, snappers, stone fish, lion fish, flying fish, porcupine fish, trigger fish, and many others. Other marine organisms such as starfish, spiny lobsters, crabs, sea cucumbers, octopi, clams, oysters, snails, and sea urchins are abundant. Porpoisesare abundant but whales are rare (TTPI, 1973, p. 3). 15 The geography of the Trust Territory was aptly described by David Ramarui (1975), Director of the TTPI Department of Education. In his remarks before the U.S. Congress/House Committee on Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education, Ramarui stated: It is very difficult to give a real idea of the vast size of the Trust Territory to anyone who has not actually traveled from one end of our islands to the other. . . . You will see that the area of the Trust Territory is roughly equal to that of the continental United States. But this gives only part of the picture of our situation. In order to fill out the pic- ture, try to imagine what it would be like if we were to flood the entire continental United States with water and leave only a couple of thousand mountain peaks and hilltops above the level of the water. We would have wiped out all the railroads, all the highways, all the major airports, all the telephone lines, and all of the radio and TV networks. Now let us in our imagi- nation pick out a hundred larger hillt0ps and settle them with people, clustering 7,000 in Los Angeles area speaking French, 2,500 in the Reno area speaking German, 12,000 in the Fargo area speaking Spanish, 9,000 in the Kansas City area speaking Japanese, 10,000 in the Indianapolis area speaking Greek, and 10,000 in the Washington, D.C. area speaking Russian. 0n the hillt0ps in between scatter another 65,000 people speaking Dutch, or Chinese, or Turkish. . . . By way of helping these people travel from place to place, on six of the hilltops, scratch out short dirt runways and put in a two airplane airline. Then toss in about a dozen small tramp steamers to go between the smaller islands. And for a communication system, install between those six major population centers a one channel radio telephone system, and put in each a low powered public radio station. Finally, move this whole area to the far Western Pacific, just above the equator, with its capital about as far away from Washington, D.C. as is Bombay, India. Demographic and Sociological Information The 114,973 people of the Trust Territory are anthropologically classified as Micronesians, except for about one thousand Polynesian inhabitants of Kapingamarangi and Nukuoru and a scattering of individ- uals of other racial groups (Kay, 1974, p. 13). 16 According to Shorett (1970): It is not certain when people first came to Micronesia, but archaeological diggings show that man was living in Saipan by 1527 B.C., Palau by 1500 B.C., Yap by 176 A.D., Tinian by 845 A.D., and in Ponape by 1180 A.D. Man is believed to have been living in the Marshalls and in Truk at about the same time as people were living in Ponape. From this archaeological evidence, it appears that man came to Western Micronesia (Saipan, Palau, Yap) earlier than to Eastern Micronesia (Ponape, Truk, Marshalls). It is believed that the first people who came to Western Micronesia were from the area of Southeast Asia and the Philip- pines. A group of pe0p1e lived in the Southeast Asia-Philippines region before 1500 8.0. . . . These people had developed sailing canoes and a system of trade between islands. The area where these people did their sailing was close to Palau and the south- ern Marianas. Currents flow northeast from Indonesia and Malaysia toward Palau. There is a strong current between the Philippines and Saipan. These currents, along with the winds of the south- west monsoon, would have made it very easy for these people to sail or drift into Saipan, Palau, or Yap. It is generally believed that peOple from these areas did sail or drift into Saipan, Palau, and Yap and that they settled the western part of Micronesia (pp. 34-35). He continued: At about the same time that the first men were traveling to Palau, Saipan, and Yap, there were other men beginning to settle in Melanesia and New Guinea. . . . At one point, these men in New Guinea and Melanesia began to sail near eastern Micronesia. They might have traveled in canoes from Melanesia and New Guinea to the Marshall Islands (p. 36). From there is is believed these travelers moved to Kusaie, Ponape, and then to Truk. "There is evidence from language and customs, which supports this migration" (Shorett, 1970, p. 36). Physically, the Micronesian of today is characterized by a "medium stature, brown skin, straight to wavy black hair, relatively little face and body hair, and high cheekbones. People of the Eastern Carolines tend to have stronger Malaysian characteristics than those elsewhere in the region" (TTPI, 1972b, p. 3). 17 Differences in customs among Micronesians do exist. The scattered and isolated nature of the islands has led to varying adap- tations and inventions. These differing patterns as well as the nine major languages of the territory generally tend to correspond to the six administrative districts described earlier. However, there is a basic similarity throughout the territory in terms of general cul- tural characteristics, such as a "fine adjustment to life on a small tropical isle; specialized technology using stone, shell, fibers, and other local materials; complex class distinctions; narrow politi- cal loyalties; close kinship ties; cult of ancestors; and leadership by chief" (TTPI, 1972b, p. 3). As discussed in more detail later in this study, differing degrees of acculturation can be noted, depending on contact with Spanish, German, Japanese, and American cultures. With the exception of Kapingamarangi and Nukuoro, whose cul- tures are anthropologically classified as Polynesian, society within the territory historically has been organized matrilineally. Within the Central Carolines, the basic political unit was the local commu- nity made up of several lineages tracing descent from a common ances- tress (TTPI, 1972b, p. 5). In other parts of the territory, social organization has tended to be more complex. The social organization of the Marshall Islands tends to reflect the prehistoric existence of "a number of petty warring, and unstable feudal states" (TTPI, 1972b, p. 4). This situation brought about stratification into sev- eral social classes. Even greater degrees of stratification developed in Kusaie, Palau, Yap, and the Marianas. This reached a peak on Yap where five of the original nine distinct social classes are still 18 recognized today. . . . The people of Ponape competed for social status through a complex system of bestowed titles. Much of the old pattern is still maintained (TTPI, 1973, p. 4). Despite the vast distances, social differences, and clan wars, some travel between adjacent island groups took place before European contact. Yap islanders sailed their large canoes to Palau to quarry the famous Yapese stone money from Palauan quarries. Other Yapese canoes regularly sailed to and from Guam. Trading voy- ages were made from the west-central Carolines to the Marianas where Yapese colonies apparently existed. In the Marshalls, sailing trips to the islands and atolls were made throughout the area as well as to Kusaie. Considerable trading, visiting and very likely war raiding took place (TTPI, 1973, p. 4). A variety of factors have influenced the size and distribu- tion of the TTPI population. Among these have been the importation to the area of European diseases, with a resultant decimation of popu- lation; administrative movements of indigenous island people by various external controlling powers for reasons of forced labor. military, and scientific land needs; two world wars; and a variety of climatic factors including typhoons, drought, and earthquakes. The 1973 census of the TTPI showed a total population of 114,773 (Kay, 1974, p. 13). Of particular significance is the fact that "because of the proportion of Micronesians currently ages 0-14 (47 percent) the numbers of persons seeking higher education and employment during the next 15 years will continue at rapidly increas- ing rates" (Kay, 1974, p. 20). Additionally, the median age of 16.0 years for Micronesians is one of the lowest in the world (Key, 1974, p. 13). Furthermore, this already extremely young population is being augmented by "an annual population growth rate of 3.6 percent 19 calculated between the 1967 and 1973 censuses," which is an indica- tion that "the p0pulation of Micronesia is growing at a rate which is among the highest in the world" (Kay, 1974, p. 16). Given the general trend hithe area toward large families, a lack of medical services, and the complications of multiple consecutive pregnancies, of significance for this study is the likelihood that the population of handicapped children will increase at a rate that is at least pro- portionate to the explosive general population increase. The 1973 census also noted a significant trend toward increas- ing numbers of individuals taking up residence within district cen- ters. Between 1958 and 1973, in a period of "only 22 years the pro- portion of people residing in these district center municipalities increased from one-third [of the total population] to two-thirds" (Kay, 1974, p. 19). Heine (1974) observed: The great population influx into district centers is an indication of the numbers who want to escape the hard- ships of subsistence-level living on the outer islands and who want a part of the new economy and lifestyle (p. 28). Although it is possible that the increasing concentration of the population in district centers may make it somewhat easier to pro- vide education, including special education, it is also quite likely that such a trend will create environmental problems, particularly in view of the lack of health services, which may result in increased numbers of handicapped individuals. An example of this type of envi- ronmental problem was seen in the Marshall Islands' crowded district center of Majuro, where in 1962 an outbreak of polio dramatically 20 contributed to the number of children with handicapping conditions (Nevin, 1977, p. 123). History and Political Structure Except for specifically cited quotations, the following mate- rial was paraphrased from introductory and orientation material found in the Annual Reports by the U.S. Department of State to the United Nations on the Administration of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Micronesia has been known to the western world since the sixteenth century, when Spanish and Portugese explorers first visited the islands. Beginning with Magellan's visit to the Marianas in 1521, the Spanish policy was directed toward pacification and Christian- ization of the island people (Shorett, 1970, p. 129). The Jesuits mis- sionized the Marianas Islands, and their influence is today still in evidence in those islands. However, the Spanish neglected the adminis- tration of the Caroline and Marshall Islands until the nineteenth century. During the nineteenth century, German activities in Micro- nesia culminated in an international crisis that saw both Germany and Spain claiming the islands.~ The Germans first claimed the Marshalls, where Spanish control was weakest, and then through intimidation attempted to seize the Carolines. Spain reacted violently. A serious international situation was avoided, however, when the Pope adjudi- cated the issue and upheld Spanish sovereignty, while permitting Germany free access to the area for trading. 21 As a result of the Spanish-American War, Spain lost Guam to the United States. Spain decided to withdraw from the Pacific and sold her remaining Micronesian possessions, including the Marianas Islands (except Guam), the Marshall Islands, and the Caroline Islands, to Germany. German administration was efficient, being mainly con- cerned with trade. The German administration ended when World War I began. The Japanese seized Micronesia in 1941 and were given a man- date over the islands by the League of Nations. A civilian adminis- tration took over control from the military authorities in the early 19205. Colonization by Japanese citizens was encouraged. Economic development was for the benefit of Japan. From 1935 to 1945, the governing of the islands was again dominated by military policies, and the islands were fortified in violation of the League of Nations Mandate. Micronesia served as the inner and outer defenses of Japan during World War 11. Many bloody battles were fought before United States troops occupied the islands. Final Japanese surrender came in 1945. The status of Micronesia was clarified in 1947, when a trusteeship agreement between the United States and the United Nations was finalized. Under the agreement, the United States is responsible for political, economic, social, and educational deve10p- ment of the Micronesians. The Navy administered the islands on an interim basis until 1951, at which time the Department of Interior assumed control. In 1974, Carl Heine, in commenting on United States administration of Micronesia, stated: 22 Before the 1960's United States policy had been one based on a "zoo theory," a "holding operation." Fifteen years ago, the budget for the islands was about $7 million annually. The official justification for so small an appropriation was that the United States did not want to create permanent wards by establishing a budget which Micronesia could never hope to meet from her own resources. But a change in philOSOphy occurred when the Vietnam war began to escalate and pressure began mounting for the reversion of Okinawa to Japan. Within a few years, the budget rose to about $40 million, and today it stands at $60 million. . . . Sometime in the early 1960's, when Washington was forced to bring the islands out of the "zoo" and into the orbit of the twentieth century, education was placed in the forefront of deliberately fostered cultural changes. This was done on the premise that trained manpower was essential for increased econ- omic activity and in informed citizenry necessary for self government (Heine, 1974, p. 146). From an American educational viewpoint, the movement of Micronesia out of a "zoo" theory operation to one with education in the forefront coincided with a general movement in the United States for federal government investment in education throughout the nation. Bailey and Mosher (1968) pointed out: "In the single year 1965-66, for example, largely as a result of the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Act, Federal funds supporting elementary and secondary edu- cation about tripled" (p. viii). Given the parallel development of increased federal govern- ment interest in bringing change to Micronesia, and a massive expan- sion of federal involvement in education throughout America, the specific inclusion of the TTPI in federal legislation pertaining to education occurred. The historical significance of this legislation to special education development is clearly evidenced later. The era of American administration in Micronesia really began as the American military forces of World War II captured island after 23 island. The initial American military administration of the area tended to be reflective of a victor freeing what was seen as a sup- pressed people. The history of the legal status of the territory under the United States began with "the trusteeship agreement between the United States and the United Nations Security Council which entered into force on July 18, 1947, under which the United States administers the territory" (TTPI, 1973, p. 10). Subsequently, the "United States Public Law 451 signed June 30, 1954 . . . states that until Congress determines otherwise, the President shall provide for the civil administration of the territory" (TTPI, 1973, p. 10). Although this law has subsequently been amended, it continues to serve as the basic federal law providing for the administration of the ter- ritory. Executive Order 11021 of the President of the United States, signed May 7, 1962, makes the Secretary of the Interior responsible for the territory's civil administration. "A Code of Laws for the territory was promulgated on December 22, 1952 and served as the initial legal framework for the territory" (Anttila, 1965, p. 147). From time to time the administering authority has amended this code. It was totally revised in 1966 and again in 1971. In 1965, Secre- tarial Order 2882 of the U.S. Department of Interior provided for the establishment of the first territory-wide legislative body, called the Congress of Micronesia. This legislative body may also amend the existing code of the Trust Territory or pass new laws. Both actions are subject to approval of the administering authority. Signifi- cantly, there exists, to varying degrees in each of the six districts, 24 a local legislative body. These bodies may also pass laws and have powers similar to state legislatures in the United States. The chief administrator of the territory is referred to as the High Commissioner. United States Public Law 90-16 provides for appointment to this office by the President of the United States with advice and consent of the Senate. Secretary of Interior Order 2918 of September 27, 1968, as amended, delineates the nature of the authority of the Trust Terri- tory government and prescribes the manner in which that government shall establish and maintain relationships with the U.S. Congress, the Department of Interior, other federal agencies, and foreign bodies. Working under the High Commissioner are a headquarters staff and six district administrators. All officers function under the Trust Territory Code. The Office of the High Commissioner; the Executive Officer; the Attorney General; the Special Consultant; the Program and Budget Officer; and the Directors of Education, Finance, Health Services, Personnel, Public Affairs, Public Works, Resources and Development, and Transportation and Communications compose the headquarters staff. The eight directors, the Executive Officer, and the Attorney General perform both line and staff functions in assisting the High Commissioner in overall Operation of the executive branch. With the Deputy High Commissioner, they serve collectively to advise the High Commissioner on matters of policy and program, functioning as a de facto "cabinet." 25 Under the directors are division chiefs and specialists, who are responsible for technical operations throughout the territory, and for providing necessary staff and technical services. During recent years there has been a general tendency for the administration to appoint Micronesians to executive-level positions within head- quarters. General executive responsibility in each of the six districts is designated in Section 40 of the Trust Territory Code. At the dis- trict level, the district administrator is the High Commissioner's principal representative; he exercises general supervision over all operations, programs, and functions of the territory within the area of his jurisdiction. He is also reSponsible for executing all dis- trict laws. Each district administration consists of a number of officers and departments paralleling those of the headquarters staff. In recent years a decentralization policy has tended to increase the authority and responsibilities of the district administrators. Addi- tionally, as a result of the increasing tendency of the administering authority to appoint Micronesians to executive posts, all six district administrators are Micronesians indigenous to the districts they administer. Subject to all territory-wide laws, district governments are primarily responsible for: 1. Liquor control, including collection of wholesale liquor license fees and imposition of taxes on alcoholic bever- ages. Land law. Inheritance law. Domestic relations. Construction and maintenance of secondary roads and docks. (II-boom 26 6. Exclusive licensing and collection of license fees of wholesale businesses other than banking, insurance, sale of securities, and public utilities. 7. Imposition and collection of sales taxes. Support of public education and public health as may be required by law. As indicated earlier, the High Commissioner's relationship is established by Department of Interior Secretarial Order 2918. Section 3, Part III of the order provides that at any time during a legislative session the High Commissioner may submit proposed legis- lation to the Congress. Section 4, Part III of the same order provides that before submitting to the Secretary of the Interior the annual request for U.S. funds for the government to the territory, the High Commissioner must present a preliminary budget plan to the Congress of Micronesia. The plan must outline the proposed requests for U.S. funds as well as the High Commissioner's requests to the Congress of Micronesia for appropriation of funds raised pursuant to territory revenue laws. The Congress reviews and may make recommendations relative to those portions of the plan relating to expenditures of funds whose approp- riation is being requested from the U.S. Congress. The High Commis- sioner must transmit to the Secretary of Interior any of the Congress of Micronesia's recommendations he does not adopt. The Congress of Micronesia may take whatever action it deems advisable on the High Commissioner's requests for appropriations of locally derived revenues. According to the Twenty-Sixth Annual Report to the United Nations (1973): 27 To encourage Micronesian participation in the planning and decision making processes, the executive branch has made it a matter of policy that the final Trust Territory budget request for Federal funds is a product of the combined efforts of the executive and legislative branches both at the district and territorial levels (p. 21). Section 13, Part III of the order provides that the High Com- missioner has the power to approve or disapprove every bill passed by the Congress of Micronesia. He may also disapprove items within bills otherwise approved. He must veto a bill within ten consecutive calendar days, unless the Congress by adjournment prevents its return; otherwise it becomes a law. If adjournment prevents return of a bill, it becomes law if the High Commissioner signs it within 30 days after it has been presented to him. The Congress may re-pass a bill vetoed by the High Commissioner. If within 20 days the High Commissioner does not approve a bill so passed, he must send it with his comments to the Secretary of the Interior, who either approves or disapproves the bill within 90 days. All six districts' legislative bodies act under charters granted by the territorial administration. Except for the chief mem- bers of the Palau Legislature, who acquire nonvoting membership because of hereditary Chieftain status, all members of district legis- lative bodies are elected for four-year terms by popular vote. Bills passed by district legislatures are presented to the respective district administrators, who have the power to approve or disapprove them within 30 days. District legislatures may pass dis- approved bills over the district administrators' veto by a two- thirds majority of the entire membership. If the district 28 administrator does not then approve a bill so re-passed, he must send it to the High Commissioner, who must either approve or dis- approve it within 30 days. Judicial authority is independent of the other two branches of government and is vested in the High Court of the territory and such other courts as may be established by law. The Chief Justice and two Associate Justices of the High Court are appointed by the Secretary of the Interior. The role of traditional rulers exists in much of Micronesia. Chiefs and other traditional rulers of comparable rank acquire their rank and title through a combination of hereditary rights and accept- ance by their people. In some districts, upon the death of a high- ranking or high-titled person, a community council of elders or the general populace must pass upon the qualifications and endorsement of his successor before he assumes title. When a chief fails to ful- fill his obligations to his people, the people of the area or a coun- cil of elders representing the people may revoke his title or rank. In some districts, hereditary positions or rank have been extremely important. Thus, as democratic procedures were introduced, the tradi- tional or hereditary leader often would automatically be elected to office. As the elective process has become more popular and as the demands of office increase, voters increasingly elect candi- dates who are knowledgeable and who have won their confidence. The hereditary or traditional leader who runs for office can no longer rely exclusively on traditional prestige. In some districts, chiefs who realize the importance of the elective office . . . but choose not to run themselves, support younger men who are more educated in the processes of modern govern- ment (TTPI, 1973, p. 26). 29 The provision for the role of the United Nations in relation to the Trust Territory is contained in the Preamble to the Trustee- ship Agreement: "Whereas Article 75 of the Charter of the United Nations provides for the establishment of an international trustee- ship system for the administration and supervision of such territories as may be placed thereunder by subsequent agreement" (Heine, 1974, p. 188). According to Anttila (1965), the supervisory role of the United Nations was defined as follows: 1. The General Assembly must approve a trusteeship agreement for each Trust Territory. 2. The Trusteeship Council will carry out all functions and powers relative to the operation of the trusteeship system. It will set up questionnaires to be sent out to administer- ing authorities. 3. The Trusteeship Council will examine annual reports and make observations, conclusions, and recommendations. 4. A principal function of the Council will be to accept and examine petitions relative to the territories. Petitions may be submitted in writing or in some cases, orally. 5. The Council will send periodic visiting missions to observe the Trust Territories at first hand (p. 302). It is in relation to this generally defined role that the United Nations through its Trusteeship Council has conducted an overall monitoring of the United States' administration of the Trust Ter- ritory. Annually the United States prepares a report to the United Nations, which is transmitted through the U.S. Department of State. Annually the United Nations Trusteeship Council meets and reviews the report and makes comments and recommendations. Periodically the United Nations' visiting missions visit the territory for a first- hand observation of progress. Of significance is the fact that the TTPI is the only remaining United Nations trust area. 30 Article 6, Section 4 of the Trusteeship Agreement for the TTPI states that: In discharging its obligation under Article 76(b) of the [United Nations] Charter, the administering authority shall foster the develOpment of the inhabitants of the Trust Terri- tory toward self government or independence as may be approp- riate to the particular circumstances of the Trust Territory and its people and the freely expressed wishes of the pe0ple concerned and to this end shall give the inhabitants of the Trust Territory a progressively increasing share in the admin- istrative services in the territory; shall develop their par- ticipation in government; shall give recognition to the customs of the inhabitants in providing a system of law for the terri- tory; and shall take other appropriate measures toward these ends (Heine, 1974, p. 189). In relation to this article of the Trusteeship agreement, Heine (1974) offered the following information: At one time, its [U.S.] policy was to keep Micronesia out of the mainstream of the twentieth-century world, a policy popularly known in Micronesia as the "zoo philOSOphy." This policy was rejected by the Micronesians. Later on, beginning with the Kennedy administration, an altogether different policy was adopted, one designed to accelerate the educational, social, economic, and political process. Coincidental with this approach, attempts were made to bring Micronesia politically closer to the American system. Actions were taken to incor- porate Micronesia as a U.S. territory; commonwealth status was offered. Both were rejected by the Micronesians. When it became apparent to Micronesians that Washington was in fact disregarding the terms of the Trusteeship Agreement and was trying to annex their islands, steps were immediately taken by the Congress of Micronesia to institute the process of decolonization and proceed with future political status negotia- tions. Free association or independence, shall free association prove unacceptable to the United States, were proclaimed the goals of Micronesia by the Congress of Micronesia (p. xv). It is within this general context that formal negotiations between the United States government and what is now the Congress of Micronesia Joint Committee on Future Status began. From initial activity in 1967 to the present, progress toward determining a per- manent political status for the area has been somewhat limited. 31 Problems exist not only between the Joint Committee on Future Status and the United States delegation, but also between districts and among members of the Congress of Micronesia. In addition, there is the problem of conflict between the old and new, for the tradi- tional past is still very much part of the territory, as are modern- ization and the rising levels of expectations it has brought. One issue has been resolved: The Northern Marianas has by separate nego- tiations resolved its status and as of January 1, 1978, that group of islands has moved toward becoming a formal part of the United States and is now known as the "Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas." The final status of the remaining islands remains under negotiation. Significantly, the present, generally agreed upon timetable calls for the United States trusteeship of the area to end in 1981. ml Article 6, Section 2 of the Trusteeship Agreement for the TTPI states that: In discharging its obligations under 76(b) of the [United Nations] Charter, the administering authority shall promote economic advancement and self-sufficiency of the inhabitants, and to this end shall regulate the use of natural resources; encourage the development of fisheries, agriculture, and industries; protect the inhabitants against the loss of their lands and resources; and improve the means of transportation and communication (Heine, 1974, p. 189). Although the Japanese were able to develop an active and pro- ductive economy in Micronesia, it was done in Japan's best interest. According to Shorett (1970): Few Micronesians were able to share wealth produced by Japan's economic development of Micronesia because economic development was done mainly by the Japanese for the benefit 32 of Japan. . . . The Japanese brought in Okinawans and Koreans to do most labor for industry. All the important positions in government industry were held by Japanese. In contrast in 1937, 85% of the adult Micronesians were working in agriculture mainly on their own small farms and in copra production. Many Micronesian men worked in mines at Angaur, Peleliu, Tobi, Yap, and Bebelthuap. . . . A few Micronesians Operated small stores and some Operated services for Japanese communities--shoemaking, blacksmith, dressmakers, janitors, and mechanics (p. 297). As World War II ended, first the American military and, shortly thereafter, the U.S. Department Of Interior were responsible for the economic development of Micronesia. Beginning with the mili- tary and continuing to the present, little has been accomplished in helping the area gain any degree of self-sufficiency. According to Hughes and Lengenbelter (1974): The overall economy of the area is still based on subsis- tence farming and fishing. Cash flow in the Micronesia econ- omy is mainly employment in various capacities within the United States administration. Outside Of the district centers, the major source Of cash income is still through copra products (p. 22). Nevin (1977) commented on the Micronesian economy: Micronesia could not exist in its current state without the United States treasury. There are many indications of this, but two basic figures particularly demonstrate the frightening disparity between what Micronesia spends and what it earns. . The current American contribution to the Trust Territory budget is about $66 million a year, a pittance in U. S. government terms, but a fortune when spread among 112,000 people who have grown from a subsistence heritage. The money accounts for more than 90 percent of the Trust Territory' 5 budget of about $72 million. While the total budget figure includes some $5 million raised locally, the source for most of that $5 million is income taxes paid on salaries which are paid from the $66 million, and business taxes that come largely from the same source. Thus, directly and indirectly, the United States not only supports Micronesia--in effect, it is Micronesia's fiscal life. These are estimates and no one really knows that in real terms the United States supplies about 98 percent of Micronesia' s funding. That is a startling figure for a land that is throwing off a sub- sistence lifestyle in favor of a money economy (p.30). 33 In 1976, "only one citizen in Micronesia earned more than $25,000 a year; 6,921 of 16,616 wage earners in 1976 earned less than $1,000 (TTPI, 1976b, p. 242). In this relation it is estimated that at least two out of every three jobs are provided by the government. Nevin (1977) pointed out: The second frightening figure is the growth of Micronesia's imports when cast against its static and even shrinking exports. Micronesia's only real product is copra, coconut meat that has dried in the sun and is sold, usually in Japan, for its 011. Each year c0pra provides more than half Micronesia's export total. Otherwise there is a pitifully small--disgracefully small--fishing industry; some vegetables sold to American mili- tary bases at Guam and Kwajalein; a tiny handicraft industry; some trochus shell sold for buttons when the market is up; and a few dwindling sales of scrap metal left over from World War II. A limited tourist industry also brings in a little money not counted in export totals. For years, depending largely on the price Of c0pra and the market for trochus, exports have run between $2 and $3 million. In 1972, for example, they were $2,363,735. In the same year imports were reported at $26,334,062, more than ten times exports. . . . Reported imports of beer and booze alone ran well over the total export of capra, Micronesia's only real crop (pp. 30-31). Education To provide a clear presentation, the education section is chronologically arranged, beginning with the prehistoric period, followed by the Spanish, German, and Japanese periods, and ending with the American period. Prehistoric Period Before contact with the western world, formal schools did not exist in Micronesia. According to Shorett (1970): "Children learned their place in society mainly through their mother for the child 34 received membership in his clan from his mother . . . and the child learned what he was supposed to do when work was done" (p. 82). By word Of mouth or by example, the valued cultural tradi- tions were transmitted from generation to generation. More formal specialized education also existed; some youths were apprenticed to those expert in more technical trades such as canoe building, house building, toolmaking, and other related skills. These artisans initiated young people into the crafts. Spanish Period (1521-1899) Early Spanish endeavors in the field of education were Often colored by the Spaniards' zealous efforts at religious conversion. Throughout the Spanish administration of Micronesia, educational efforts varied greatly, depending upon the Spanish interest in each island group. The Spanish best knew the Marianas Islands of Guam, Saipan, Tinian, and Rota. Guam, the largest, served as the source of supply for Spanish shipping on the Acapulco-Manila run. According to Smith (1968): Mission schools were established as early as 1674, and by the end of the Spanish period, every village had a school. The majority of the Spanish priests sent to the Marianas were Basques who taught a rigid medieval Christianity (p. 108). The education Of the people of the Marianas Islands by the Jesuits was not based on understanding, tactfulness, or love. With little understanding and appreciation for the native culture, they thrust Christian concepts of religious, moral, and social values upon the natives. 35 It was a planned and a ruthless destruction Of the people who would not, or could not, drop their traditional customs, religion, life patterns, and even language. All these ele- ments they must overnight replace with those dictated by the Spaniards (Anttila, 1965, p. 91). The destructiveness Of the Spanish educational policy to the people of the Marianas Islands was evident in the early nineteenth century. At that time the Spanish permitted groups of natives to leave Guam, where for administrative convenience the Spanish had confined them since the early days. They were then permitted to reestablish themselves on other islands in the Marianas. "They were devout Catholics, but had lost their arts of boat building and navi- gation so essential to an island people" (Anttila, 1965, p. 92). Despite earlier claims, Spain's actual rule of the Eastern and Western Caroline Islands began in 1886 and ended in 1899. Efforts in the Western Carolines, according to Oliver (1951), were feeble. Though Palau and Yap were tacitly under her sovereignty, Spain did nothing to civilize these islands after the failure of a Catholic mission there in the eighteenth century. . . . After her sovereignty was confirmed in 1886, Spain made a few half-hearted attempts to keep order--meaning to protect the lives and prosperity of traders. . . . The priests, of course, accompanied the Spanish garrisons, but few souls were saved (p. 244). Spain also neglected the Eastern Carolines until the late nineteenth century, when other European nations forced her to estab- lish an administrative center on Ponape. Significantly, the American Boston Missionary Board "set up a mission in Ponape in 1882" (Anttila, 1965, p. 116) and was also active in Truk during the same period. Within much of the Eastern Carolines, wrote Smith (1968), 36 Trouble between the Protestant and Catholic missions . . . prevented any substantial undertaking by the Capuchins. Dif- ficulty with the natives persisted until the end of Spanish rule. Education that did exist was conducted by the American Protestant missionaries from Boston (pp. 111-12). Western-world education in the Marshall Islands and Kosrae (formerly Kusaie) of the Eastern Carolines was effected in the 1850s by Protestant missionaries sent by the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions, even though the area was nominally under Spain. Smith (1968) listed the following accomplishments of the American missionaries in the Marshalls, and to some extent the Eastern Carolines, during the period 1852-1900: 1. They taught the islanders the alphabet, and to read and write the English language. They translated the Bible and hymns into native dialects. They introduced American beliefs and patterns of behaviors. They organized a network Of schools with the most systematic form of education known to that time in the islands. Some Of the missionaries saw beyond the myoptic [sic con- fines of religious prOpaganda, and refused to degrade educa- tion by refusing consistently to use it in forcing religious doctrine on the natives. 6. They left Protestant religion strongly entrenched in the Eastern Carolines and Marshall Islands (p. 120). U"! bWN German Period (1899-1914) On August 7, 1899, the Americans formally took Guam from the Spanish; by presidential executive order it was placed under the jurisdiction Of the U.S. Navy. From this point, the educational his- tory of Guam diverges from the rest of the Marianas and Micronesia and is no longer relevant to this study. With their defeat in the Spanish-American War, the Spanish in 1899 sold their remaining pos- sessions in Micronesia--the Carolines, Marshalls, and the Marianas (except Guam)--to Germany (Kruger, 1915, p. 265). 37 Despite their short interlude and domination, mainly with commercial motives, the Germans made notable contributions that changed the educational environment of the natives. According to Smith (1968), "The German philosophy in business as well as in edu- cation could be summed up in a few words: the minimal investment to bring about the greatest profit to the Fatherland" (p. 121). The Germans replaced the Spanish padres with German Capuchins and required that the German language be used as the medium Of instruc- tion and religion. The first government school was not opened until 1906. Despite a lack of facilities, school attendance was Obligatory for children between the ages of 7 and 13; noncompliance brought a fine. Anttila (1965) wrote: Education of Micronesians during the German rule did not develop primarily through formalized instruction. Natives learned new ways and new values from foreigners who held absolute authority over their lives. New beliefs, new cus- toms and new life patterns were forced upon the islanders, but the time was too brief and contacts few to bring about many profound changes (p. 136). Japanese Period (1914-1945) As mentioned earlier, with the outbreak of World War I, Japan seized Micronesia and subsequently was given a mandate over the area by the League Of Nations. According to Smith (1968), to under- stand the aims and objectives of the Japanese in relation to the edu- cation of Micronesians, One had to look at the overall colonial policy of the Japanese. This policy included three main points: 1. Economic development by and for Japan; 2. A place for surplus population to be sent; and 3. Japanizing of the Opulation through education and propaganda (p. 1251 38 The Japanese intended to do the latter by maintaining control of political affairs and emphasizing Japanese language and customs in the schools. 'Theyfelt these goals would eventually lead to the area's “political-economic integration into the Japanese Empire and the advancement of the natives by civilizing them" (Fisher, 1961, p. 87). However, just as Japan's own educational system during the period differed for the elite and the commoners, it is not surpris- ing that two systems would be established in Micronesia. According to Anttila (1965), "there were schools for the Japanese children and separate ones for the indigenes" (p. 199). Japan put much effort into develOping an educational program for its mandated Micronesian peoples. However, the program was developed to fit the Micronesian child into a predetermined, ordered, and somewhat stratified society. The needs of the society were to be met by molding children to the desired forms. According to Shorett (1970), this meant that "Micronesians were trained in school to become laborers and housekeepers" (p. 285). Education consisted of three to five years Of schooling, equivalent to a third-grade education. Smith (1968) described Micronesian education under the Japanese as . . a matter of mass production, with little emphasis on the individual. Emphasis was on Emperor worship, Japanese culture, and Japanese language. The Japanese introduced a curriculum based on the needs, locality, and level of develop- ment of the people (p. 144). American Period (1945-1967) The American forces established military garrisons in the Marshall, Western Carolines, and Marianas Islands before the war 39 between the United States and Japan ended in 1945. Although there was no established education policy, "the Naval administration con- sciously fostered education by establishing an education foundation in those areas under its control" (Smith, 1968, p. 145). The first Naval directive related to education stated that "It is expected that island and atoll commanders will make provisions for . . . educa- tional as well as physical needs of the natives as is practical under present conditions" (Richard, 1957, p. 255). There are some indica- tions of the American Naval administration's educational activity in Majuro, Marshall Islands; Saipan, Marianas Islands; and the Western Caroline Islands. According to Richard (1957), the following were included in the Naval educational directives: 1. Instruction in English would be desirable but should not be compulsory. 2. Education programs were not to interfere with military matters. 3. Education expenditures were to be kept to the minimum (p. 400). These particular directives related specifically to the Marshall Islands; however, they tended to be typical of the entire Trust Ter- ritory area and the time period. By July 1947, both the United Nations Security Council and the U.S. Congress had approved an arrangement whereby Micronesia became a trust territory under the United States. Subsequently, there arose a controversy over the area in terms Of who would administer it--the U.S. Department of Navy or the U.S. Department of Interior. The controversy was resolved by President Truman in favor of the civilian-administered Department of Interior. However, the Department 40 of Navy was given interim responsibility for administering the area from 1947 to 1951. In discharging its obligations under 76(b) of the [United Nations] Charter, the administering authority shall: promote the education advancement of the inhabitants, and, to this end shall take steps toward the establishment of a general sys- tem of elementary education; facilitate the vocational and cultural advancement of the p0pu1ation; and shall encourage qualified students to pursue higher education, including training on the professional level (Heine, 1974, p. 189). During the interim Naval administration (1947-1951), Admiral Louis Denfield, first High Commissioner of the Trust Territory, stated in a public address in Honolulu that his first aim was the "establish- ment of an education system" (Mason, 1948, p. 196). There is indica- tion that at the time Navy personnel were involved in the administra- tion of the area they saw at least five alternative sets of aims and objectives that could be used as a basis for developing an education system in the Trust Territory. 1. DOOM The natives might be educated to become what Dr. Margaret Mead called "world-mobile" in one generation. The natives might be educated to become world-mobile over several generations. The natives might be educated to the point where they could be exploited by more advanced economies. Education could be kept to a minimum, thus leaving the islanders untouched since they had such meager natural resources and labor. The native education could provide opportunities for choice on the part of the islanders themselves, thereby offering the stimulus of new skills and knowledge, but allowing cul- tural development to follow lines of cultural autonomy. (Smith, 1968, p. 155). According to Smith (1968), "evidence indicated that the Navy accepted a compromise between objectives one and two with due defer- ence to five" (p. 155). Under the Navy's administration, "elementary schools were established on all islands where eleven or more children 41 of school age were living" (Richard, 1957, p. 993). These schools were set up as indigenous institutions and served as community cen- ters, with each municipality responsible for the upkeep of building and grounds. The Naval administration provided equipment and supplies, and attempted to pass on to the natives an education that would per- mit them to work with the resources within their own environment. The Department of the Interior took over administration of the Trust Territory from the Navy in 1951. At that time, according to Anttila (1965), there was a "free public educational system of 250 teachers and over 9,000 students in 130 elementary and intermediate schools" (p. 382). For the most part, these schools were locally based and tended to be supported at least partially by the local community. Anttila (1965) stated, "The Trust Territory, by July of 1952, was able to report 266 Micronesian teachers employed . . . 'less than a dozen' of whom had any experience under Japan" (p. 387). Formal teaching was a new field. Since the supply of teachers was inadequate, at least half the elementary schools offered only the first three grades. Additionally, the Department of Interior budget for elementary education for fiscal 1952 allowed $9,164.74 for the entire area (U.S. Department of Interior, 1952, unpaged). On December 22, 1952, by Executive Order, Elbert Thomas, High Commissioner of the TTPI, promulgated "the Code of Laws of the Government of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands." Chapter 8, Section 565 of the code dealt with education, stating that There shall be provided a free public school system for the inhabitants of the Trust Territory. The system shall, within the limit of funds available, consist of elementary, 42 intermediate, professional and technical, and adult education. The establishment and operation of the public school system is the res onsibility of the High Commissioner (TTPI, 1952, unpaged) Section 566 of the code stated that: Except as the High Commissioner may from time to time direct, all public elementary schools shall be supported, maintained and operated from revenues derived within the community in which such elementary schools are located (TTPI, 1952, unpaged). This provision of the code clearly placed elementary education respon- sibility at the local level. The code also provided for district and community boards of education, which could "be organized under the direction of the District Educational Administrator with the approval of the District Administrators" (TTPI, 1952, unpaged). District and community control of the elementary schools was further made possible, in that the code provided that "teachers in elementary public schools shall be selected and appointed by community Boards of Education, by and with the advice of the District Education Administrator" (TTPI, 1952, unpaged). Nonpublic schools within the territory were required to obtain a charter from the High Commissioner and were subject to periodic inspection by the District Educational Administrator. Section 577 of the code provided that Attendance at a public or non-public school shall be required of all children between eight (8) and fourteen (14) years of age, inclusive, or until graduation from elementary school, unless excused for good reason by the Community Board of Education and District Education Administrator. Any par- ent who knowingly permits his child to be absent from school without good excuse shall be guilty of violation of this sec- tion and upon conviction thereof shall be fined not more than $10 or imprisoned not more than one month or both (TTPI, 1952, unpaged). 43 In essence, the code provided the framework for public education, but it did not contain provisions that would assure the resources necessary to deliver the service. The Trust Territory tended to lack money from the time of its transfer to the Department of Interior. This lack of funds was traced to the U.S. Congress, which placed a ceiling on the budget for the territory. According to Smith (1968), the budget limit of $7,500,000 was established by Congress in 1954 and was supported by High Commissioner Nucker, who held office from 1955 to 1961. It was Nucker's view that the $7,500,000 . . . would pro- vide the minimal basic services to people who were largely on a subsistence economy. He believed that additional funds beyond the capacity of the island economy to absorb them would be harmful (p. 213). As a result of the budgetary limitations and of the "limited thinking of the educational leadership, undue haste resulted in the total transfer of the financial responsibility for the operation of the free elementary schools to the local communities" (Smith, 1968, p. 207). From 1951 to 1962, secondary education remained at a near standstill. Each of the six district centers, however, did develOp one public intermediate school, which according to Anttila (1965) “corresponded roughly to United States junior highs and offered 3 years beyond the elementary level . . . these six schools . . . were coeducational and were of the boarding type" (p. 419). The Pacific Islands Central School was the only public high school in the entire territory. On a district-by-district quota basis it enrolled the "best graduates of district intermediate schools" 44 (pp. 419-20). From 1951 to 1962 its enrollment never exceeded 150 students. Even though the Central School was considered a high school, in reality it only provided two additional years of education beyond elementary school. Smith (1968) stated that: From 1951 to 1962, the education staff in Micronesia was so small that the researcher could not find information to indi- cate the staff positions held by Americans. Evidence at hand indicated that there were a director of education, six district educational administrators responsible to him, and a handful of supervisors who worked as teacher educators of the Micro- nesians (pp. 204-205). As stated by Nufer (1978), "The more than doubling of the annual budget for Micronesia by the American Congress in l963--to $15 million-~would seem to be a 'turning point' in the overall develop- ment of the Trust Territory" (p. 127). In signing the bill that brought about the increased appropriations, President Kennedy stated that changes were taking place in Micronesia that demanded a vital phase of development. He emphasized the role of education: The accelerated program that is contemplated will place great emphasis upon education for, in our Opinion, education is the key to all further progress--politica1, economic, and social. It is our hope that through this authorization, funds will be made available to meet the urgent need for immediate initiation of programs leading to striking improvement of edu- cation at all levels in the Trust Territory, upgrading educa- tion to a level which has been taken for granted in the United States for decades. At the same time we intend to move for- ward, as rapidly as possible with the cooperation and full par- ticipation of the citizens of the Trust Territory, in all other areas requiring development (TTPI, 1963, pp. 22—23). As the potential availability of funds for the territory dramatically increased, another drastic policy change took place. In 1962, after 11 years of attempting to prepare educational materials in the vernacular and to adapt the school system to local needs and 45 interests, the administration announced that English was to become the medium of instruction in the elementary schools. The period 1962 to 1967 saw dramatic changes in education in the territory as a result of vastly increased fiscal resources pro- vided by the U.S. Congress, as well as the adoption of the English- language philosophy. Nith policies that determined English to be the language of instruction at the elementary level, and a mandate that a high school education should be available to every Micronesian, it became necessary to build classrooms and recruit teachers. Accord- ing to Smith (1968), "of the fifteen-million-dollar budget, four million was designated for construction of schools and housing units for American teachers" (p. 213). Accompanying the extensive direct involvement of Americans in education came the need for additional administrative support for the elementary schools. In “1965 . . . the Trust Territory Government assumed the responsibility of Micro- nesian elementary teachers' salaries" (Smith, 1968, p. 207). In secondary education, five districts--Saipan, Truk, Ponape, the Marshalls, and Palau-~were operating high schools by 1965. Yap was the only exception, but in 1966 it followed suit. This came about through continually increased funding from the U.S. Congress. The territory budget, which had been increased from 7.9 million in 1962 to 16.9 million in 1963, became $25.9 million in 1967. Despite progress made by the United States, it was thought that substantially more could be done and that, in addition to money, the territory needed "the injection of new vitality, the Peace Corps, the Kennedy spirit, anything that will help it make a clean 46 break with the bureaucratic past" (Smith, 1968, p. 279). In 1966, the Congress of Micronesia requested that President Johnson send Peace Corps members to assist in meeting the needs of the Trust Ter- ritory. The President endorsed this request and stated: Micronesian leaders recognize the contributions Peace Corps members have made in developing areas of the world and feel that many of the unique problems facing the islands of Micronesia can be solved with Peace Corps assistance (Smith, 1968, p. 279). The role of Peace Corps volunteers was described as follows: Volunteer elementary school teachers will work with Micro- nesian counterpart teachers. These two-man teams will help develop curriculum and up-grade teaching methods. To help overcome a communication problem . . . these volunteers will help teach English. They will also teach elementary health and hygiene, community development techniques and the elements of democratic organization (Peace Corps Goes to Paradise, undated, p. l). In 1965, President Johnson signed into law Public Law 89-10, more commonly called the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. Although this legislation was of landmark significance to the United States, it has had an equally profound effect on the Trust Territory. Congress specifically provided for the inclusion of the TTPI within the various titles of the act. The following subsection of Title II of the act indicates such inclusion. Section 203(a)(1) From the sums apprOpriated for making basic grants under this title for a fiscal year, the Commissioner shall reserve such amount, but not in excess of 2 percent thereof, as he may determine and shall allot such amounts among Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, according to their respective needs for such grants (Bailey & Mosher, 1968, p. 236). The rapid expansion of educational services in the territory between 1963 and 1967, first with direct budget funds and later with 47 ESEA monies, was accompanied by a variety of problems. In testimony before a House subcommittee, Ruth Van Cleve, the director of the Department of Interior, Office of Territorial Affairs at that time, stated: The pressures have been so acute that the administrators in the Trust Territories, starting with the first moment of the accelerated program in 1963, felt that it was more important to do something, even if it was not the perfect thing, in a hurry. The consequences are in many ways unfortunate. We have schools without plumbing, schools without water, schools without elec- tricity because we did not pause to decide how electric lines should be run, or to resolve in some instances very acute water problems. There is good question now as to whether this was a sensible way to proceed. The fact is that some three hundred classrooms were con- structed on what now appears to be a very haphazard basis. We have certainly now concluded that we must pause and look again (U.S. Congress, 1967, p. 1052). In a June 1966 letter to United States contract teachers who were about to come to the Trust Territory to teach, Peter Hill, then a Trust Territory educational administrator, described the Micronesian educational setting: Elementary schools are of two types. The first is housed in whatever building the local community could build--this may be a thatched meeting house, a frame building with crumbling tin roof, or a concrete structure in poor condition. Most floors are dirt or sand and the kids sit on that. They have masonite writing boards on which all paperwork is done. These schools are generally open sided, and when it rains with a wind, water may enter from the sides and thru roof holes . .. which effectively drowns out the voice. At the present time there is no electricity in any of the elementary schools. The second types are new concrete block schools with cement floors. . . . Since furniture delivery is behind schedule, there are a number of these schools which must still seat the children on the floors. . . . Our students are quite friendly and cooperative, however you will find some differences in general school attitudes. Where we consider strong classroom control imperative to teach- ing the class, the Micronesian teacher can see the desirability of the goal but often cannot manage it well. He is handicapped 48 by the lack of a traditional respect for teachers (in prestige, he may bee [gig] on par with an office clerk), by sometimes being rather young and without a tremendous gap in educational level between himself and the students he teaches. He often finds that he is related to quite a few of the students in his class through his clan. He may well adOpt a lessez [gig] faire attitude in the classroom. . . . Your recruitment is part of the greatly accelerated develop- ment of education in the territory, which now has an announced goal of general educational Opportunity for all through the 12th grade, with a high quality standard. I wish to emphasize that we are still quite a distance from the objective (Truk District Department of Education, 1966, pp. 1-4). The United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands as a Developing Area Adams and Bjork (1958, p. 6) indicated that the following are often-mentioned characteristics of underdeveloped areas: 1. High birth and death rate (but often with death rates declining and a consequent 2 to 3 percent growth in popu- lation). 2. Poor sanitation and health practices (great lack of health services). 3 Poor housing. 4 High percentage of p0pu1ation in agriculture. 5. Low per capita income. 6. Low food intake. 7. High illiteracy and very low enrollment in schools (particu- larly secondary and higher schools). 8 Weak and uneven feelings of national cohesion. 9 Traditional directed behavior and an ascribed system of stratification. 10. Low status. 11. Poor technology (communication and transport system limited). 12. High prevalency of child labor. 13. Export of raw materials in any foreign trade arrangements. 14. Low saving and low investments. 15. Poor yield on the land and much soil depletion. 16. Military or feudal domination of state machinery. 17. Health in hands of landlords (a very tiny class as a prOpor- tion of the population) and the absence of a middle class. 18. Poor credit facilities and high interest rates. 19. Prevalency of nonmonetized production. 20. Much)of the productive land in small holdings (often tenant held . 49 21. Health concentrated in one or two large cities (or exported to "safe" developed countries). 22. Social loyalties and concern mainly family-centered or local in focus. It would appear that the vast majority of these descriptors apply to the Trust Territory. Factors such as high birth rates and poor sanitation and housing clearly apply, as does the item relating to a high percentage of the population in agriculture. The problems of illiteracy and low enrollment in secondary schools also apply. The nine varying cultures and languages, geographic vastness, and poor communication and transportation have all contributed to weak and uneven feelings of national unity. Tradition-directed behavior, an ascribed system of stratification, and mainly family-centered social loyalties and concern have tended to cause a feudal domination of land holdings and local government. Generally speaking, the TTPI fits the accepted criteria for a developing area. The superimposi- tion by the United States of an artificial government and economy has not brought about a high level of development in the area. CHAPTER III SPECIAL EDUCATION DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS FROM JANUARY 1, 1967, THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 1977 After a brief review of the federal legislation relating to special education, the develOpment of special education in the Trust Territory is discussed topically. The areas discussed are Adminis- tration and Planning; Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Development Activity; and Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Territorial Special Education DevelOpment. Information in each of the topical areas is organized in terms of the following four periods: 1. Initial Period: January 1, 1967, through December 31, 1969. This phase relates to tapical activity that occurred as the special education concept was being introduced into the area. 2. Period 11: Planning andinitiating training and service-- January 1, 1970, through December 31, 1972. In this period, t0pical activities were initiated in the Trust Territory by expatriate (U.S.) contract special education personnel. 3. Period III: Expansion of direct service through increased communication and external technical assistance--January l, 1973, through December 31, 1974. In this period, direct special education 50 51 service in some form came into existence in all six districts. News- letters, a territory-wide special education conference, and joint district-level training activities all contributed to increased com- munication. External mainland (U.S.) special education resource centers provided formalized technical assistance services. 4. Period IV: Micronesian leadership. During this period, a Micronesian was permanently appointed to the position of territory- wide special education coordinator. Federal Special Education Legislation As indicated earlier, the U.S. Congress passed major legis- lation to provide federal funds for improvement and development of educational services in the United States, its possessions, and those areas under its administration. This legislation, known as the Ele- mentary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, or ESEA Public Law 89-10, promulgated a series of programs in different areas of educa- tion and related supportive fields. These programs were identified by variously titled categories. Further study was carried out by Congress, and as reports of developments and difficulties were received, additional legislation modifying and increasing the range and effectiveness of ESEA was deve10ped and passed. Existing Titles I and III were modified to include specific efforts on behalf of handicapped children. In 1966, passage of Public Law 89-750 amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. This amendment created a new title (Title VI) within ESEA, which specifically established federal intent, resources, 52 and a process for improving educational services to handicapped children. In this regard, Bonham (1975) stated, "This Title VI amendment introduced specific legislation and authorized token appropriations for flowing funds to state agencies" (p. l). Subse- quently, as Bonham pointed out, Title VI of E.S.E.A. was amended by the 9lst Congress [1970] in Public Law 91-230 and became Title VI-B Education of the Handicapped Act [EHA]. Under 91-230, other components of the handicapped [law] dealing with such topics as teacher training, media centers, regional service centers, child demonstration projects, and early childhood funding were con- solidated under the same bill in sections C through G (p. 2). Congress extended the provisions of Title VI, part B, of the Education of the Handicapped Act in the Education of the Handi- capped Amendments of 1974 (Public Law 93-380). In addition to pro- viding states/territories with additional resources by developing an expanded funding formula, this extension also mandated that states/ territories establish a full-service goal, prioritize funds to pro- vide education to those presently unserved, establish wide-ranging procedural safeguards, provide for nondiscriminatory testing, detail policies and procedures for a child-identification system, assure least restrictive program alternatives, maintain confidentiality, and give public notice regarding state plan amendments (Bolick, 1974, pp. 52/1-52/2). Public Law 94-142 further amended the Education of the Handicapped Act. In describing the provisions of P.L. 94-142, a National Association of State Directors of Special Education publica- tion stated that it 53 . . provides for a large authorized increase in funding through 1982; it also carries tremendous state and local edu- cation administrative responsibilities. Procedural safeguards and due process set forth in the law will insure that the handicapped children in the nation will be treated equally with normal children with regard to identification, placement and education service (An Analysis of Public Law 94-142, n.d., unpaged). Furthermore, P. L. 94-142 states that "every school system in the nation must make provision for a free, appropriate public education for every child between the ages of 3 and 18 (ages 3 to 21 by 1980) regardless of how seriously he may be handicapped" (Hallahan & Kauffman, 1978, p. 22). All of the aforementioned legislation contained provisions for the inclusion of the Trust Territory. In addition, the following legislation relating to the handicapped was part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and included the TTPI: Program: Supplemental Educational Centers and Services Special Programs and Projects to the Handicapped (E.S.E.A. Title III) Purpose: To provide grants and supplementary or exemplary programs or projects designed to meet the special educational needs of the handicapped which hold promise of solution of critical educational problems (Not less than 15% of Title III funds shall be used for handicapped) (Goodman, 1967, pp. ll-l6). Special education services in the TTPI were deve10ped in relation to the availability of federal funds resulting from the aforementioned legislation. Throughout the period of the study, such legislation had direct bearing on special education in the Trust Ter- ritory. 54 Administration and Planning The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 31, 1969 Title VI-A of the ESEA provided the basis for initiating special education in the TTPI. Funds allotted to the State pursuant to ESEA Title VI (Section 603) will be used only for the initiation, expansion, and improvement of programs and projects for the education of handicapped children at the pre-school and elementary and secon- dary levels by the Department of Education pursuant to §121.22 (a)(1) (of the Title VI Regulations) and local education agencies pursuant to §121.22(b)(1), except that not more than 5 percent of the amount allotted to State for any fiscal year or $75,000 ($25,000 in the case of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands), whichever is greater, may be expended by the State educational agency for planning and for proper and efficient administration of the plan pursuant to §121.22(a)(2) and by local education agencies for planning at the local level pursuant to §121.22 (b)(2) (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). The Title VI state plan was submitted by Sam Murphy, Federal Programs Officer, Office of the High Commissioner of the TTPI, to the U.S. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. In his November 7, 1967, submission letter, Murphy stated, "We have made the plan effective November 15. . . . He will only request funds for FY 1968" (Murphy, 1967). Perdew, who in 1967 was Deputy Director of Education for the Trust Territory, indicated that Murphy's office drafted the necessary plans for a variety of federal programs, including the Title VI plan. Perdew (1977) indicated that in drafting such plans there was con- siderable formal and informal consultation among Murphy and other staff members of the Department of Education. The Title VI state plan "for the initiation, expansion, and improvement of programs 55 and projects for the education of handicapped children" (TTPI, 1967, unpaged) was approved by Harold Howe II, U.S. Commissioner of Education, on January 11, 1968, retroactively effective November 15, 1967. Section 1.0 of the plan designated the TTPI Department of Education as the sole agency for administration of the plan, author- ized the TTPI Department of Education's Director of Education as the officer who would submit state plan materials, and provided legal authority for the Director of Budget and Finance to receive and have custody of federal funds related to the plan. Furthermore, the state plan provided that The office and administrative unit within the state [Trust Territory] Educational Agency who will administer the Title VI program will be the Education Specialist for Education for the Handicapped (when such position is filled) under the supervision of the Director of Education. Until an Educational Specialist for Education of the Handicapped is employed, the Director of Education will administer the program (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). Although there was no professional special educator involved in writing the plan, the Trust Territory state plan did outline the duties and qualifications for a professional staff position as follows: The Education Specialist for Education of the Handicapped will be responsible for planning and directing a special educa- tion program for the handicapped in the territory. Therefore, his duties will include long range planning for the establish- ment of facilities, the development of curriculum for handi- capped programs, the determination of staff needs, the supervision of teachers of handicapped children, planning in-service insti- tutes for present teachers who will have to handle part of the teaching load for the handicapped children within the over-all education program, and such other duties related to educating the handicapped as may be delegated by the Director of Edu- cation. 56 Minimum qualifications for the position will include: (1) minimum of masters degree in special education, educa- tional psychology, or a related field, with specific training and certification in at least one area of special education, and (2) minimum of three years experience in teaching and/or supervision in special education (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). Federal regulations required that a Title VI state plan des- cribe the present state-wide plan for handicapped children. The Trust Territory plan provided the following information: There is at present no state program for education of handicapped children. Our first project application will be for screening and identification of handicapped children. When handicapped children are identified and classified, appropriate steps will be taken to establish priorities for education of the handicapped programs (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). The preceding quotation indicates the Trust Territory's intention to initiate a screening and identification process. Sec- tion 3 of the state plan further justified and elaborated a project to "locate and identify handicapped children of the Trust Territory before additional planning for specific types of programs can be completed." The state plan indicated, From discussions with principals and teachers, we know many children are enrolled in regular classroom situations who should be receiving special education. He do not know how many more seriously handicapped children are in the communities due to the tendency on the part of the people to hide these chil- dren (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). The state plan clearly stipulated that the first priority for educational services for the handicapped would be to locate and identify the handicapped child population. Information contained in the state plan indicated that a thorough survey of the child popula— tion within the territory would provide the necessary information. Furthermore, the plan suggested that "agencies such as the Peace 57 Corps, Medical Services Department and the Missions . . . conduct the survey, under the direction of the Educational Specialist for educa- tion of handicapped" (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). The state plan provided for a special education project advisory committee comprising a Commissioner for Community Services, a Director of Education, a Federal Programs Officer, a Coordinator of Elementary and Secondary Education, an English Program Supervisor, and a Director of Public Health (or his designee). The plan indi- cated that this committee would "review and approve all projects and programs administered under this State Plan, as well as . . . assist in the planning and development of the various projects" (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). The composition of the advisory committee supports the idea that the committee was also intended as a device to bring about coor- dination with the regular education program as well as with two other human service departments within the Trust Territory government. Two priority areas were established in the state plan. The first reiterated the already discussed need to screen and identify handicapped children so that appr0priate special education programs could be developed. The second was a "need for competent leadership personnel in special education to establish, coordinate and super- vise comprehensive special education programs for the Trust Territory" (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). In the state plan the Trust Territory is described as having a . unilateral educational system without local autonomous, independent school districts. It is divided into six adminis- trative districts--with local District Educational Administra- tors who are responsible directly to the Director of Education at the Headquarters Department of Education (TTPI, 1967, unpaged). 58 This administrative arrangement makes the planning and programming of special education in the territory a centralized government function. With the approval of the initial Title VI State Plan, the Trust Territory applied for and received funding in the amount of $50,000 for fiscal year 1969. The actual funding period was from September 1, 1968, to August 31, 1969. In accordance with the state plan, personnel were recruited "to come to the Trust Territory and make a study for the design of a Title VI Program" (TTPI, Department of Education, 1969, p. 4). The actual details of the recruitment are obscure, but Perdew (1977) reported that a couple referred to as "the Hunts" were hired under a special contract to initiate special edu- cation in the Trust Territory. A further search revealed that their full names were Robert and Geraldine Hunt (Project VI, 1969, p. 5). The TTPI Department of Education's Annual Report of ESEA, P.L. 89-10 Title VI, August l968-August 1969 stated that: The original plan was to make a survey of the Districts and calculate the statistical probability for the existence of certain numbers and types of handicapping conditions. It was decided that rather than take a sample, it would be more reasonable to study first the types of conditions that could be located, provided for, and reported within the limitations of funding and time (p. 4). The report indicated that handicapping conditions relating to emo- tional disturbance and mental retardation were unsuitable for initial services. For emotional disturbances, "it was felt that there was not sufficient knowledge about the psychological make-up of the peoples of the various districts to define normal behavior. . . . This is necessary before definitions of deviation from normal deve10pment and 59 adjustment can be made" (p. 4). In the case of mental retardation, "it was not felt that a reliable instrument, or more correctly, group of instruments, necessary to the measurement of intelligence and intellectual abilities in individuals from various cultures of Micro- nesia, was available" (p. 4). Furthermore, each of these areas would require "a number of specialists whose cost would not only be prohibitive, but . . . would be out of proportion with the services and financial support for the child in the regular classroom who does not have an emotional disturbance'I (p. 4). Consideration was given to develOping programs for children with cerebral dysfunction or brain damage. In this case the report stated, "the incidence is suspected to be relatively low, the costs and availability of personnel and facilities prohibitive, and such services would require much time in order to develop a minimum of efficiency in the programs for these children" (p. 5). Vision and hearing were then considered and "selected as the focal points" for initial efforts at developing special education in the Trust Territory (p. 5). This decision was based on the fol- lowing: First, it was determined that the tests needed to measure vision and hearing ability would be relatively simple to admin- ister . . . the tests are not limited by cultural factors, which cannot be controlled, nor is language ability a barrier, since instructions are simple enough to be given in pantomime, should an interpreter not be available. Second, a large number of children could be seen in the course of a year making testing of many children in each dis- trict possible. . . . Another factor in the selection of hearing and vision for major emphasis was that Micronesian associates in each district could probably be trained to continue testing and could train 60 other Micronesians in the screening techniques. This step would be consistent with the premise that extra effort should be extended to insure full participation by Micronesians and steps should be taken to have them assume responsibility for the pro- gram's continuation and expansion in the future. It was also determined that the tests and equipment necessary to screen vision and hearing would be relatively inexpensive, easily obtainable, and comparatively easy to maintain in the tropics. The size and weight of this material makes them suitable for mobility required to reach the distant communities and schools of Micronesia. Another important aspect was that a child with normal abili- ties other than vision or hearing, could continue his education in the regular classroom if steps were taken to compensate for or correct the vision and/or hearing difficulty. The importance of vision and hearing abilities has not generally been pointed out to the Micronesian teacher, and this project was expected to bring emphasis on the needs of children for adequate vision and hearing in order for the learning process to take place (pp. 5-6). The following are the objectives as stated for the year-long project: 1. To reach and screen as many children as possible, hopefully 100% during the year's time. 2. To test in each of the six districts until one or more Micro- nesian Associates were trained in each district to continue the project with minimal reliance upon outside assistance. 3. To evaluate and assess results and modify approaches during the year to assure maximum quality in testing and results obtained. 4. To encourage projects related to services for children as quickly as they could be initiated in the district. 5. To gather information for the whole of the Trust Territory, and at year's end, draw this information into report form. 6. Using the information gathered, to draw new projects for the coming year, as well as to provide for the maintenance of present projects. 7. To make provision for follow-up, and where possible, treat- ment of difficulties in children located by screening project, through referral to the various Public Health and Educational Agencies of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. 8. To acquaint administrators with, and train teachers to use and create, techniques for palliative treatment of diffi- culties in the regular classroom (pp. 6-7). It is not known exactly how the special education specialists, a husband and wife team, were recruited to conduct the survey. Perdew (1977), Deputy Director of Education in 1967, believed someone in the 61 education department knew them. The district-level Micronesian associates were quite likely individuals at district level who assumed special education screening duties in conjunction with their regular positions. Included below is an overview log of the year's work of the special education specialists, as presented h1the annual report of the project: August 6. Education Specialists for Education of the Handicapped arrived in Saipan for introduction to the Trust Territory. Through the month of August, the Specialists designed the project, studied the various Districts and prepared to conduct testing and training throughout the school year. In the first weeks of September the testing of children in the Marianas District was studied and steps were taken to have testing continue. September 16. Specialists flew to Yap District and initiated testing and training through the schools of Yap proper. J. Tutuu and Delores Gray were trained and testing was conducted in a num- ber of schools. October 26. Specialists flew to Guam for conference and carried out brief planning session in Saipan. November 1. Testing team flew to Palau where Mike Ngarairik was trained and testing was conducted for six weeks. December 13. Specialists returned to Guam and Saipan for re- grouping and further conferences and planning. December 18. Conference on Guam was held with Public Health per- sonnel and specialists from Guam Rehabilitation Center. January [sigJ. Reorganization of testing and ordering of materials was followed by composition of Mid-Year Report. During this month the first News-letter was published and distributed. January 29. Specialists flew to Ponape where training and testing was carried out for six weeks. Danny Leopold was trained and assumed work load for further testing and training. March 10. Specialists sailed to Truk on M/V Hoi Kung and attempted testing preliminaries. Circumstances were found to be negative for beginning testing as the potential trainees were out of District. 62 March 13. Specialist returned to Saipan and continued report- ing and administrative duties for two weeks. New equipment [audiometers] arrived, and arrangements were made to take it to Truk. . . . March 29. Specialists returned to Truk and training and test- ing was continued. 505 Maras and Stem Salle assumed responsi— bility for testing and program details. April 30. Specialists flew to Majuro in the Marshall Islands and testing was initiated. Kenja Majena was involved in the program and a number of schools were tested. May 26. Specialists flew to Kwajalein with Kenja to conduct testing on Ebeye Island and Enniburr Island in the Kwajalein atoll. Kenja assumed responsibility for the program and returned to Majuro on June 7. June 10. Specialists returned to Saipan for final reporting and planning for next year's programming. . . (pp. 7-8). The project began in August 1968 and ended a year later. It consisted of a territory-wide (all six districts) vision and hearing survey of 12,676 students. Vision testing was "conducted with the use of the Snellen 'E' chart'I (p. 13). Audiometers initially pur- chased for the project were replaced with an improved variety at mid-year. The total of 12,676 students who were screened represents 38.7 percent of the school children in grades 1-12. 0f the students screened, 2,324 were found to have vision and/or hearing deficien- cies. Thus, 18.3 percent of the students tested were possibly having their education restricted because of hearing and/or vision loss. In the Truk District, dispersion of the population and related transportation problems made it extremely difficult to con- duct the screening program. Heather problems limited the survey to the actual testing of 2,886 students out of a total student population 63 of 8,199. Of these 465 (16.1 percent) were found to have hearing problems and 5 (.2 percent) had vision problems (p. 69). The Marshall Islands District had a total student population of 5,817. Of these, 1,966 were tested; this resulted in the identi- fication of 339 students (17.4 percent) with hearing problems and 39 (2 percent) with vision problems. These percentages might be related to a measles epidemic. As in the case of Truk District, transporta- tion problems in the Marshall Islands District made it difficult to screen a greater number of students (p. 73). Yap District, the smallest in terms of population, had 1,146 of its 2,435 student population screened. Some 169 students (14.7 percent) were identified as having hearing problems and 23 (2 percent) as having vision problems (p. 71). Marianas District has a school enrollment of 3,942, of which it was possible to screen 2,488 students. Of those students screened, 156 (6.3 percent) were found to have hearing problems and 276 (11.1 percent) had vision problems (p. 79). Palau District had 4,362 students, of which it was possible to screen 2,752. Of those, 554 were found to have hearing problems and 73 to have vision problems. Students in the outer islands of the Palau District were not screened (p. 72). The project report stated that "an expected and witnessed result of this project was . . . the increase in understanding by some teachers and the resulting increased participation of some children who would have otherwise gone unnoticed or unassisted" (p. 76). Another result of the project was that "knowledge and skills introduced 64 to the districts by this project will be continued and expanded in the coming school years for the benefit of all children in the class- rooms of Micronesia" (p. 76). The report concluded: It has been proven that a minimum of 2 in 10 children will have difficulty in learning because of vision and/or hearing problems. The numbers not in school and those with difficul- ties not studied could raise this figure even further. . . . Another conclusion reached was that until such time as the regular educational facilities and programs have reached a level of sufficiency, the need for special education should be next within the regular classroom, with the emphasis on training all teachers to meet the needs of these children in every classroom of Micronesia (p. 78). The preceding conclusive statements served as the initial documen- tation of need for special education in the Trust Territory. The suggestion that special education needs should be met within regular education classrooms is of significance. The special education specialists who directed the project made both immediate and long-term recommendations. They recommended that the Micronesian associates within each district be placed under the FY 1970 Title VI budget in order to "help maintain interest in the area of Special Education, and . . . also help assure continued effort at the district level" (p. 80). They also recommended that "a person, preferably Micronesian . . . be brought to the Trust Territory Education Department to maintain administrative support for the associates" (p. 81). An additional recommendation was "to con- tinue vision and hearing screening in the schools of Micronesia“ (p. 81). The long-term recommendations were that scholarships for training specifically for special education be established, a program 65 of summer special education workshops for regular teachers be insti- tuted, and that a budget from regular education monies be established to meet some special education needs (p. 82). The survey project, as described, used most of the Title VI Public Law 89-750 Trust Territory allocation of $50,000 for fiscal year 1969. In late 1969, another couple, Hill and Jan Walker of the Department of Special Education, University of Oregon, served as principal investigators for the development of a three-year plan for delivery of services to handicapped children in the Trust Territory (ESEA Title III Pr0posal for Special Education, 1969, unpaged). The plan was designed to meet the ESEA Title III federal legislation requirement that at least 15 percent of the Title III funds provided to a state or territory must be used to implement services for handi- capped children. In designing the ESEA Title III application, it was stated that: This project will provide the guidelines for develOping a Special Education program in Micronesia over a three-year period and bring Special Education into the present elementary teacher education program of Micronesia. A model program will be devel- oped to focus on established behavioral patterns for Special Education personnel with a selected group of specialists and/or classroom teachers. . . (ESEA Title III Proposal for Special Education, 1969, unpaged). The actual project, implemented later in 1970, focused primarily on training of personnel; for that reason it will be discussed in detail in that section of this study. However, several assumptions discussed in the project narrative as well as its presentation of a suggested 66 philOSOphy of a Trust Territory-wide special education relate signifi- cantly to administration and planning, therefore giving it merit for consideration at this point. The proposal stated that the writers assumed . that a workable plan adaptable to the elementary schools of Micronesia requires that special education services for the handicapped be delivered through the elementary teacher in the regular classroom setting. Geographical, physical, and school population variables in Micronesia dictate against the develop- ment of special classes for handicapped children except in rare cases such as the class for deaf and hearing impaired in Saipan. In addition, research data on the issue of special versus regu- lar classroom placement for handicapped children is inconclu— sive on the question of which one provides for the best edu- cational adjustment and greatest academic achievement (ESEA Title III Proposal for Special Education, 1969, unpaged). This early assumption, as will be shown herein, has served as one of the focal points for developing special education throughout the TTPI. Furthermore, this assumption, in effect, added strength to what was the first stated philosophy of a territory-wide special education program (TTPI, Department of Education, 1969, p. 2). Because of the influence of the expanded philosophy statement on special education, that statement and its rationale are detailed as follows: Typical Special Education programs begin by screening large numbers of school age children for specific handicaps. These handicaps are of a physical (spasticity), social (emotional disturbance), or intellectual (mental retardation) nature. Experience has shown that these children are defined in terms of their handicaps, assigned to categories and labeled accord- ingly and then related to by the educational structure in very characteristic ways, e.g. segregation and isolation, lowered expectations for learning, development of social stigmas, etc. This approach has abused, albeit inadvertently, many handicapped children and resulted in inferior educational planning for others. . . . 67 Educational programming for handicapped children has suffered from an unfortunate emphasis upon definitional criteria for vari- ous handicaps. We speak of various levels of retardation such as educable, trainable, untrainable, etc. rather than focusing upon performance levels on specific educational tasks that have direct implications for classroom learning teaching. . An appropriate criterion for application of Special Educa- tion techniques should be interference with the learning process, not the final definition of some handicapping condition. The teacher's responsibility is to adapt the learning environment to the child's learning processes and performance level. This demands a recognition of individual differences among children in the rate of learning as well as ability to learn. . . . The teacher should facilitate the learning process for individual students as opposed to aiming instruction at one level and ignor- ing those who fail to learn by assuming it is the child's respon- sibility for learning to occur (ESEA Title III Proposal for Special Education, 1969, p. 3). As will be shown, administrative support of this philoSOphy resulted in its having impact on special education service delivery, training, curriculum, and materials-deve10pment activity; and legislative, judicial, and other activities related to special education deve10p- ment in the Trust Territory throughout the period under study. Period 11: Planning and Initiating Training and Service--January 1, 1970, Through December 31, 1972 Legislation by the U.S. Congress resulted in the Title VI, Elementary and Secondary Education Act Amendments of 1969 (Public Law 91-230 EHA). This act tended to strengthen the coordination role of the state and territorial departments of education in provid- ing special education services within their respective jurisdictions. On June 23, 1970, R. Burl Yarberry, then Director of Education of the Trust Territory, submitted a state plan under Part B of the newly amended law. In a letter dated July 29, 1970, Edwin Martin, Asso- ciate Commissioner of the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, 68 informed Yarberry that "the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands state plan under Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act, P.L. 91-230 has been approved. . . . In accordance with Section 613 (a)(1) of Public Law 91-230 an amount not to exceed $35,000 may be expended for proper and efficient administration of the State plan" (Martin, 1970, p. 1). Earlier efforts of the Trust Territory government had resulted in the recruitment of Raymond Lehrman for the position of Special Education Coordinator. With a doctorate in education from the Uni- versity of Oregon and professional experience as a professor of special education and a state director of special education, Lehrman had an academic as well as a practical background. He became the Trust Territory's first Special Education Coordinator in August 1970. Administratively, he was assigned to the Headquarters (Saipan) Department of Education and was responsible to the Deputy Director fOr' Elementary and Secondary Education. A memorandum outlined the headquarters' role as follows: 1. Technical and catalytic support for Districts in the areas such as: a. Process of Program Development b Identification of Education Objectives c Process of Budget Development d. Fiscal accountability e Personnel accountability f. Evaluative 2. Provide opportunities for cross-district and Headquarters exchange of information, participative development of com- mon goals, and criteria for decision making, i.e. Trust Ter- ritory statement of Education Goals. 3. In collaboration with districts to plan and implement exemplary programs for the purpose of developing models [§jgfl instructional program which includes teacher training and methodology, curriculum direction, curriculum classroom, materials and evaluation. 69 A focus will be on the positive transferability of the program from one district to another (Headquarters Depart- ment of Education, 1969, unpaged). Although this is a generic statement pertaining to the general role of Headquarters' education staff, its applicability to the Special Education Coordinator is self-evident. During the first several months of his appointment, the special education coordinator . . . traveled over 6,000 air miles to visit the Department of Education in each of six admin- istrative districts of the Trust Territory. . . . Conferences with the District Director of Education and his staff in each district were held. Meetings and discussion with the District Director of Health Services were held in each district. . . . In each case, the Coordinator of Special Education took to each district the known numbers of handicapped children . . . and a review of the territory-wide survey of Hearing and Visually Impaired Children which was conducted in 1969. The main goals of the Coordinator of Special Education were as follows: b.l. Bring to the District all available data on numbers and types of handicapped children. b.2. Explain the new position of Coordinator of Special Educa- tion and plan together assessing the needs for special education and program models for special education believed important to the district. b.3. Obtain sufficient information and communication to estab- lish values and priorities for programs under Public Law 91-230 Parts 8 and 0. (State Education Agency Plan, 1971, p. 4). At the conclusion of the territory-wide information and planning tour, Lehrman stated: In the five districts no district funds are being expended in the education of handicapped children during the 1970-71 aca- demic year and . . . one district is operating a special edu- cation program for preschool deaf children, under carryover funds from Public Law 89-10, Title VI (State Education Agency Plan, 1971, p. 4). Thus it is clearly established that the only existing special educa- tion service during the 1970-71 school year was the preschool deaf program in Saipan. This program is discussed in detail in the section 70 of the paper relating to direct service activity. Lehrman reported that the only special education training activity in existence was . the Title III E.S.E.A. project at Community College of Micronesia. . . . The allocated 15% of Title III fund is being used to train all teacher trainees at the Community College in providing special education 'h3 handicapped children in the regular classroom (State Education Agency Plan, 1971, p. 4). This Title 111 project was discussed earlier, and will be considered in more detail in the section dealing with training activity. Subsequent to his travel throughout the entire territory and after conferring with the Title III Special Education Training Coor- dinator at the Community College of Micronesia, Lehrman submitted to the Bureau of Education of the Handicapped the State Education (Trust Territory) Agency Plan for Participation in the Program for Training Professional Personnel in the Education of the Handicapped Act, Part D. This plan is also discussed in detail in the section dealing with training activity. However, the plan contains a definition of special education that, according to Lehrman, was established by the Department of Education: Special Education consists, in part, of the efforts of trained and knowledgeable teachers to utilize special tech- niques, arrangements, interventions, and consequences to solve teaching-learning problems presented by handicapped children in the regular classroom as a direct or related consequence of their handicap(s). Special Education is further defined as pro- vision of those special facilities, techniques, arrangements, interventions, and consequences which are necessary to solve the teaching-learning problems presented by handicapped children whose degree of handicap and disability cause them to be unable to benefit from instruction within the regular classroom despite the presence of the teacher who is specially trained to teach handicapped children (State Education Agency Plan, 1971, p. 3). The basic elements and philosophical intent of this definition have had strong impact on special education in the Trust Territory 71 throughout the entire period under study. Also of significance is the fact that this definition, with slight modification, has con- tinued to serve the Trust Territory since its inception. In January 1971 the writer met Dr. Lehrman on Saipan, Head- quarters, Trust Territory. Discussions on this occasion led to Lehrman's development of a proposal designed to serve moderately handicapped children in Palau District. The project, which was intended to use funds under ESEA Title VI-B, was designed to have a direct service as well as a training dimension. In that the project's planning was in effect an administrative process, its general objec- tives are included at this time; however, the project's actual opera- tion is discussed in the division of this paper dealing with direct service. The purposes of the proposed Palau program were: A. To provide special education to 40 moderately handicapped children with hearing and/or visual impairment, under the direction of a highly qualified and trained special educa- tion teacher. 8. To train two Micronesian teachers to the fullest extent possible toward qualifications, knowledge, and skills required to operate a program of special education. C. To compare the efficiency of two special education program models in the Palau District, the Special Education Resource Room Model and the Itinerant Special Education Teacher Model. (Program Proposal for Moderately Handicapped Children, Palau District, 1971, p. l). The project plans called for a three-year operational period, at a cost of approximately $18,000 for each of the first two years and approximately $8,000 for the third year. It was planned that opera- tion beyond the third year would be with resources from the regular district education budget (p. 1). 72 In February 1971, Lehrman presented a paper at the Pan Pacific Conference in Honolulu, on planning for the education of exceptional children in the Pacific Islands. The paper, entitled "Planning Special Education in the Pacific Islands," provided some insight into the systematic process he was using in developing a long-term plan for special education service delivery in the Trust Territory. In rela- tion to planning, Lehrman stated that a key factor in develOping a plan to solve an educational problem relates to delaying the . . selection of solution models (such as establishing special schools or classrooms) until thorough exploration of the problem has been made. It [his planning model] is product oriented, not process oriented, in initial planning phase. This is a cru- cial point of departure from traditional planning for the handi- capped, which has assumed that the problem is that of finding ways to get handicapped children into special classrooms, special buildings, or special institutions (Lehrman, 1971, p. 3). In effect, Lehrman's planning process used the following sequence and steps (p. 4): To identify the problem. Analyze the concerns of significant persons. Ascertain exact facts and conditions which apply. Determine values associated with ideal solutions. Write about [place it in a question framework] the problem statement. —l—ul-l-—l—J o o o o o boom-do The paper dealt in detail with the planning process that was used in reaching long-term performance criteria relating to special education development in the Trust Territory. Of particular significance are the performance criteria, which stated that (p. 11): A desirable special education program for the Trust Territory must, in the next five years: 1. Provide Special education for mildly handicapped children within the regular classroom insofar as possible. 2. Provide special education for 625 mildly handicapped chil- dren a year in 1976. 73 3. Aid at least 100 moderately handicapped children each year by 1976. 4. Provide special education for at least 50 severely handi- capped children by 1976. 5. Teachers of the handicapped will have a minimum of two semes- ters of college in special education of the handicapped and a minimum of 250 trained teachers will be in the schools. 6. Be based upon the values developed by the people of Micro- nesia and upon their interests and concerns as reflected by enabling legislure [gig] passed by the Congress of Micronesia by 1976. 7. Be funded at least 33-1/3% by Trust Territory budget, rather than the present 100% funding by U.S. Grant-in-Aid Funds. 8. Be based upon the formulation of measurable objectives stated in behavioral terms in areas of academic achievement, social behaviors, physical health and prevocational skills. With long-range performance criteria established in the early part of 1971, Lehrman began developing detailed implementation plans. The Palau District plan alluded to earlier received Title VI-B monies and the researcher was contracted as the special education special- ist to implement the program. A Part VI-D summer training program, described in the initial Title VI-D State Education (Trust Territory) Agency plan for participation in the program for training professional personnel in education of handicapped children, was detailed and resources allocated for its implementation. By July 1, 1971, the Palau program funded under Title VI-B and the summer training program funded under Title VI-D were Opera- tional. Lehrman, as Headquarters Special Education Coordinator, provided the administrative and fiscal resources to support these programs, as well as the on-going Northern Marianas' deaf education program. All three of these programs are discussed in greater detail in the portion of this study dealing with direct services. 74 In the last half of 1971, the Special Education Coordinator visited all districts of the Trust Territory. Activities during these visits were intended to generate the interest and understand- ing needed to initiate special education services for the handicapped. Typical of these activities was the meeting of the Special Education Advisory Committee, Marshall Islands District, on December 19, 1971. At this meeting a number of questions were asked and answered. The minutes of the meeting stated that: The meeting began when Aliksa Andrike [a Marshallese Islands teacher trainee in the Title 111 special education project alluded to earlier] reported on his work in observing elementary school classroom management problems at Rita and in recording behavior of children who did not behave properly. . . Alik Alik [also a Marshallese Islands teacher trainee in the Title III special education project alluded to earlier] then talked; he described the evaluation of handwriting, spelling, and math performance of children at Rita Elementary School. He showed sample records of a pupil with math problems, showing "acceptable performance rateJ'. ..(Special Education Advisory Committee, 1971, p. 1). An earlier visit of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator had resulted in the establishment of the advisory committee. The return of Aliksa Andrike and Alik Alik for in-district practicum work relating to the Title III special education training project at the Community College of Micronesia had also increased general in-district interest in Special education. During the meeting, Lehrman was asked a number of general questions: 1. What is Special Education? Answer: Special Education is education of handicapped chil- dren not just handicapped in a medical sense, but handi- capped in education, in learning and behaving in a school setting. 75 2. What are Handicapped Children? Answer: Handicapped Children are children who have serious difficulty in learning and/or behaving. There are three degrees of Handicapping Conditions: Mild Handicapped is the first degree. These children look like other children--not different. It is when you examine their academic school learning performance that you see serious problems. Or it may be their school social behavior is very disturbed, or both of these. If such children are examined by the medical staff of Health Services, a mild eye or ear problem may be found. Or sometimes there is no physical problem--just learning problems and behaving prob- lems. About 10% of school age children may be mildly handi- capped. Moderately Handicap is the next degree. These are children who may begin school but soon drop out. Most moderately handicapped are not in school. Some are in school, but failing badly. They are more apt to have a noticeable physi- cal defect. They may have a 30-40% loss of hearing or vision. They may have a crippling condition of body. The moderately handicapped child can stay in school in a regular classroom if the teacher can give him special education. About 2-1/2% of school age children may have a moderate handicap. Severe Handicap: This kind of child is the one many people think of when you say "handicap" because you can easily notice his handicap. He is deaf or blind or crippled and cannot walk. This child is not in school and he cannot suc— ceed in a regular classroom. He can be helped in school in a special skills room, by a specially trained teacher. Only about l/2% of the children may have a severe handicap. Marshall Islands District has about 6,000 elementary school age children. If we use our estimate of incidence, we get 10% = about 600 mildly handicapped, 2-1/2% = about 150 moderately han- dicapped, and 1/2% = about 30 severely handicapped. We think this is a "soft" estimate and there may be more than this many handicapped children in the Marshalls District (Special Educa- tion Advisory Committee, 1971, pp. 1-2). These basic definitional answers, for the most part, have served as a framework for special education deve10pment throughout the Trust Territory. Specifically, in relation to a Marshall Islands District long-range special education plan, Lehrman stated: 76 1. Community College of Micronesia trains [Title III Special Education Project] all graduating teachers to teach mildly handicapped in their regular elementary school classrooms. 2. Travelling District Special Education Elementary School Support Teachers go to these classroom teachers and help them do Special Education. "Special Education means (a) diagnose a child with learning or behaving problems, (b) use selected methods and materials to improve his per- formance, and (c) evaluate his performance in the problem area to see if the methods are working." Alik Alik and Aliksa Andrike are in training to be Special Education Elementary School Support Teachers [Title III Special Education Project]. 3. A Special Education Resource Room Teacher would teach an ele- mentary school classroom in which moderately handicapped are placed with regular children. Special Education in the Resource Room would try to get the moderately Handicapped child to be ready to go to school in a regular classroom under a special education trained teacher. Palau District has a Special Education Resource Room [Title VI-B project alluded to earlier]. 4. The District would help Severely Handicapped by operating a special classroom for deaf or blind severely handicapped. This is a special skills classroom where very special teacher training is required because of the severe handicap of the children. Marshall District has discovered a number of young deaf children and is interested in considering starting a class for severely handicapped deaf children. 5. The classroom teacher needs support or outside help to go with their training when they teach handicapped. C.C.M. is developing special packages of materials, "teaching support packages" to help the special education teachers diagnose, teach, and evaluate the handicapped pupils. 6. A District Special Education Teacher Trainer could carry on inservice teacher training with elementary school teachers at Teacher Education Center and in their classrooms. He would also deliver the Teacher Support Packages and instruct teachers in their use. He would have a B.A. and one year of special training at C.C.M. He would be stationed in Dis- trict Teacher Education Center, but his salary would be paid by H.Q. Department of Education. (Special Education Advisory Committee, 1971, pp. 2-3). This general long-range special education service development model was used to varying degrees in all Trust Territory districts with the exception of the Northern Marianas. Basically, the model relied on special education personnel training provided at the Community College 77 of Micronesia. Such training is discussed in greater detail later in this paper. The model also provided for combining district-level educational funds with federal Title VI special education funds. At the Marshall Islands special education advisory committee meeting, Lehrman also discussed a plan for operating a special class for the deaf. Lehrman concluded by describing how a special class for Deaf could be operated by Marshalls Department of Education with the help of the Department of Health Services. 1. Helath [gig] Services would bring an audiologist to examine the deaf children and fit them for a hearing aid where necessary. 2. Health Services would do physical examination and ear exami- nation for each deaf child. Some could be referred to Guam or Hawaii for surgery or treatment or further examination. These steps should be completed by June 1972. 3. Marshalls Department of Education would agree to provide the salaries of two elementary school teachers to train to teach the deaf. They should be carefully selected for these abilities: Very good command of English Language. Demonstrates ability to work with young children. Very enthusiastic voice and face--smiling, talking, gesture. Able to work closely with another teacher in same room. Dependable to stay in helping the children. Good teacher of early elementary subjects. These teachers should be selected by January 15,1972. 4. Marshalls Department of Education would provide a full size elementary school classroom by June 15, 1972. 5. H.Q. Department of Education would provide teacher training for the two Marshall Islands District Teachers as follows: Go to Saipan and train in the Marianas District Classroom for deaf for March, April, and May. Start the Marshall Class for deaf on Majuro, June 15 with a U.S. Teacher of Deaf to teach the young Marshallese deaf children and train their teachers for 8 weeks to middle of August. 6. The Marshall Islands District program for deaf children would open in September 1972, with the two Marshall Islands teach- ers in full charge of the class. The extra expense to the District Department of Education would be: 0301-5 (AN-d 78 1. The cost of two elementary classroom teachers' salaries. ‘ 2. The cost of one elementary school classroom and ordi- nary elementary school supplies. Teacher Training, hearing aides [gig] and special equipment for the room would be paid for the first year by Headquarters, Department of Education. Upgrading of the teachers' educa- tion during summer would be paid for by Headquarters, Depart- ment of Education. All teaching expenses would be paid for by the school. (Special Education Advisory Committee, 1971, pp. 3-4). The committee discussed the deaf education plan, which was of particular interest because of the unusual number of deaf children in the Marshall Islands as a result of the 1966 measles epidemic. The committee voted to recommend that the Marshall Islands District Direc- tor of Education implement the deaf and the itinerant resource programs as discussed (Special Education Advisory Committee, 1971, p. 4). In early February 1972, Lehrman prepared a Description of Projected Activities for Fiscal Year 1973 for the Education of Handi- capped Children. The report detailed special education federal reve- nues as coming from Title III (15 percentcn~more) $29,396, Public Law 90-576 (10 percent or more) $21,028, Title VI-D $50,000, and Title VI-B $80,000. The total amount projected for Fiscal Year 1973 was $181,424. In describing the Trust Territory Special Education Program, Lehrman stated: Given a sparce [gig] child p0pu1ation which is scattered over a very large ocean among many small islands; given a ten-language, multi-cultural setting where educators, legislators, and the gen- eral public are at an early stage of awareness and conceptuali- zation of special education for handicapped children; given a marked absence and limitation of medical, diagnostic, and treat- ment staff and facilities; and given very limited data regarding the numbers and types of handicapped children: It is held that (1) use of screening or diagnostic techniques to discover handicapped children should be confined to districts 79 or areas where the resources and evidence indicate a high proba- bility that a program of direct services to the handicapped will closely follow the survey effort, and (2) that handicapped children are best reported under the noncategorical labels of mild, moderate, and severe insofar as possible. This is particu- larly true in program efforts wherein mild and moderately han- dicapped children are given special education services within the regular classroom (Lehrman, 1972, p. 2a). Lehrman estimated that of the territory's 31,204 children ages 7 to 20, some 6,925 could be classified as having a handicapped condition severe enough to interfere with the educational process (p. 3). In stating the long-range special education objectives, Lehrman indicated that (p. 3): 1.A. 1 l .B. .C. By the end of FY 1973, 510 mildly handicapped will be given special education in regular classrooms by Special education trained teachers, and by FY 1975, 915 such chil- dren will be served. By the end of FY 1973, 20 moderately handicapped, and by FY 1975, 50 moderately handicapped children are expected to be served in special education resource rooms. By 1973, 50% of these children are expected to be returned to regular classrooms under special education-trained teachers. By FY 1975, 65% are so expected. By the end of FY 1973, 18 severely handicapped children in special Skills rooms for deaf children are expected to be helped. By FY 1975, 22 deaf and 4 blind children are expected to be helped in special skill rooms. In conjunction with these long-range objectives, Lehrman outlined the following activities for FY 1973 (p. 3): 1. 01 b u N I o o o Operate Trust Territory Special Education Manpower Develop- ment Program, providing additional help to mild, moderate, and severely handicapped children by training teachers to serve them. Initiate Marshall Islands Special Skills Program for Deaf Children. Continue Marianas District Special Skills Program for Deaf Children. Continue Palau District Resource Room for final funding year. Initiate Ponape District Education Program for visually handicapped children. 80 In terms of the overall administration of the Trust Terri- tory Special education program, the following were cited as major activities for FY 1973 (p. 3e): 1. Administrative activities under Program Planning and Development. A. Develop joint special education handicapped planning and advisory committee. B. Plan with district departments of education toward district funded special education support teachers. C. Plan with districts toward formation and utilization of district special education advisory committees. 0. Conduct a joint meeting with representatives from these committees. 2. Administrative activities under Trust Territory Special Education Manpower Development Program. A. Review and evaluate teacher training activities and results. B. Review activities under ESEA III 15%. C. Review teacher training activities and results under P.L. 90-274. An amended TTPI State Plan for Fiscal Year 1973 under Part B, Educa- tion of the Handicapped Act (P.L. 91-230), which was submitted to the Bureau for Education of the Handicapped, contained additional infor— mation relati ve to the overall administration of the Trust Territory special education program. Within that plan the duties and respon- sibilities of the headquarters Special education coordinator were described as: Duties: To administer Title VI, Parts B and D, EHA; to coordi- nate effort with District Department of Education toward development of special education service programs for handicapped children; to assist in initiation, expan- sion and improvement of services for handicapped chil- dren; to evaluate program effort and to disseminate information concerning the needs, welfare and progress of handicapped children; to provide professional assist- ance and planning support toward maximum use of teacher- training effort to increase the supply of trained professional personnel, both at Community College of Micronesia and in the District Teacher Education Centers. 81 To train a Micronesian "counterpart" administrator for the position of Coordinator of Special Education, toward the self sufficiency goals of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Responsibilities: As Above, under duties. To represent the Department of Education of the Trust Territory in developing, planning and implementation of programs for handicapped children. Micronesian Counterpart: (1) Name: Not Available Title: Coordinator, Special Education (deve10pmenta1) (2) Duties: Same as for Coordinator, prefaced by the phrase, "assist in the . . ." (coordination of, etc.). Responsibilities: "To assit [gig] in representing the Department of Education. . ." (TTPI, 1972a, p. 10). The plan is of particular significance in that it specifically called for a Micronesian "counterpart" administrator to receive admin- istrative training. The plan also outlined planning activities that have been conducted as well as those that will be conducted on an on-going basis. C. PLANNING ACTIVITIES Planning activities have included contact and conferences with the following agencies: Department of Health Services, Department of Education, Community College of Micronesia, representative from non-public schools. Planning has included the use of educationally oriented system techniques which were described in some detail in the appendix to the FY 1972 Projected Activities Report [described as Lehrman's planning process]. For accuracy, let it be noted that planning contacts are limited to two or three visits a year to each district, when conferences with the District Director of Education, with the District Director of Health Services, and with the Department of Education's Special Education Advisory Commit- tee, and with other interested agency staff members, are held. Conferences at this stage of development consist essentially of information exchange, interpretation of the scope and purpose of grant in aid programs, expression of concerns and needs of handicapped children, and efforts to suggest and work out meaningful activity plans to provide services. 82 The emerging organization of the District Department of Education Special Education Advisory Committee promises an avenue for more effort in "planning with" and a decrease in "planning for" insofar as the orientation of planning effort is concerned. Parents, community leaders, agency repre- sentatives, educators, and other key citizens are on these committees in three districts (TTPI, 1972a, pp. lO-ll). The plan also outlined administrative procedures, which indicates that the Trust Territory Department of Education was operat- ing its Special education program with this agency providing both state and local agency functions. D. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES Project applications are not written by District Depart- ment of Education. Where extant they are written with the Department. The Coordinator of Special Education then takes the project application to the Director of Education for approval. Review of projects is conducted by Site visit by the coordinator of Special Education, in company with other Department of Education staff members if they are making the same District visit. During a Site visit, reports to the Special Education Advisory Committee are made when possible. No outside consultants have been used to review Part B projects (TTPI, 1972a, p. 11). The plan called for evaluation activities to be related to product inspection, through the Special Education Coordinator's work- ing directly with district project directors. The basis for such would be "the actual outputs of projects as compared with stated goals" (TTPI, 1972a, p. 11). Before leaving the position of Trust Territory Coordinator of Special Education in August 1972, Lehrman was able to complete planning for a hearing project in Yap District, which utilized the services of a Peace Corps volunteer funded under Title VI-B funds. In addition, the direct service projects in Palau, the Marshall 83 Islands, and Ponape were allocated resources which made it possible for them to continue to operate. Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communica- tion, and External Technical Assistance-- January_], 1973, Through December 31, 1974 The Headquarters position of Special Education Coordinator was vacant from about August 1972 until December of that year, when David Piercy, a contract expatriate special educator, became the territory's second Coordinator of Special Education. His initial efforts involved visiting on-going projects within the districts and the training project at the Community College of Micronesia. In April 1973, Piercy convened the First Annual Special Education Conference on Saipan. Representatives from all six Trust Territory districts attended. The minutes of the meeting indicated: The first topic of discussion was EHA-B Projected Activities for 1974. Mr. Piercy stated that although the budget for next year is still not known for certain, the total projected budget is $80,000. Money will be allotted for each district, although at this point he does not know how much. In reviewing the guide- lines for Part B, Mr. Piercy stated that the emphasis is on direct service to handicapped children, not teacher training although such training is an integral part of the project. . . (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). Also discussed were other funding sources, including Parts C and D of the Education of the Handicapped Act as well as the 15 percent portion of ESEA Title 111. Details regarding these programs are discussed in subsequent sections of this study. The subject of reports was brought up and Piercy stated that the Trust Territory was fortunate in that it did not have to report 84 numbers categorically. He requested that anyone completing forms for grants write "'non-Categorical' across the categorical tests for their own protections [gig]" (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). During that conference, Piercy reviewed the various special- education-related organizations that used the name of the Trust Ter- ritory in their accounts of areas served. Among these were the University-of-Oregon-based Northwest Regional Resource Center and the Northwest Special Education Instructional Materials Center; the Southwest Region Deaf/Blind Center located in Sacramento, California; and the Northwest Laboratory (a private educational consulting firm) located in Eugene, Oregon. Since most of these organizations receive federal monies, Piercy indicated that he was going to take advantage of any service they might be able to offer. Controversy arose in dealing with the question of what popu- lation of children should be served by special education in the Trust Territory. It was pointed out that: The present aim of the special education program is the remediation of children with reading, math, and behavior prob- lems. These children fall into the mildly and moderately han- dicapped categories, the remaining category being reserved for severely handicapped (e.g., blind, deaf, etc.). The District Director of Education of the Northern Marianas disagreed with the present direction stating that the retarded, the blind, deaf, etc., should be assigned to special education and he did not feel that remediating deficiencies in the regular classroom is the job of special education. In response to this Piercy cited figures of expenditures of $1,500/year/deaf child which indicates that providing special services to severely handicapped children outside the regular classroom's quite expensive. The DOE [District Director of Education] from Palau commented that special education Should be involved in the training of regular teachers to deal with handicapped children in the regular classroom. . . . 85 Mr. Piercy provided a definition of mildly, moderately, and severely handicapped as stated in the official special educa- tion state philosophy (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). Later during the conference, a short discussion was held regarding the role of the Special Education Coordinator, during which the district representatives "expressed their desire for increased communication between Headquarters and the districts. Mr. Piercy will put together a newsletter each month with pertinent informa- tion. . ." (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). Piercy published and circulated a Review of Special Education Activities, June 15, 1973. Several items in the newsletter indicated the activities of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator. Of particular Significance is the following: IV. I was recently invited to Oregon to work with the Northwest Regional Resource Center [University of Oregon] in develop- ing an agreement between the Center and the Department of Education, Trust Territory. The Regional Resource Center receives funding from the Office of Education, the Bureau for the Education of the Handicapped, in order to facilitate the States and Terri- tories in reaching their goals. By means of a sub-contract to the Trust Territory, we will be receiving $44,000 to accomplish the following: 3.1 The SUBCONTRACTOR shall provide personnel and undertake a program in the SUBCONTRACTOR'S State to: 1. Develop a survey instrument to identify exceptional children, and to field test and revise instrument. 2. Administer screening instrument to all children in two targeted districts in order to identify handicapped students currently enrolled. 3. Develop educational needs assessment procedures relevant to reading, math, and behavioral problems in all handi- capping conditions, taking into account the varied cul- tural conditions of the Trust Territory. ll. 12. 13. 86 Develop and test a model for training people in the use of needs assessment instruments at CCM and the local school level. Implement and field test the assessment process in two target districts as part of an exemplary program. Plan and develop a model for comprehensive service delivery to meet the identified educational needs of handicapped children which will allow for integrated remediation at the local school. Develop and test a model for training people in the use of educational programming procedures to meet the edu- cational needs of handicapped children. Implement and field test the educational programming procedures as part of an exemplary program. Develop plans for the improvement of Special education services in targeted and non-targeted districts. Provide for the expansion of teacher competencies in special education techniques for regular and special education teachers who have handicapped children in their classroom. Develop an evaluation model to [measure the] effective- ness of identification, needs assessment and service delivery in terms of learner outcomes-child gains. Implement the data system with the data currently avail- able from all local schools in the target districts. Develop an evaluation model for special education pro- grams in the Trust Territory. Also included in the agreement is $3,000 for consultation and for technical assistance to the Trust Territory. This year Palau, Ponape, and CCM will be participating in the development of assessment and service delivery models (Review of Special Education Activities, June 1973, unpaged). The initiation of this contract made available a new form of resource, quite dissimilar to any previously available. Program- ming for use of this resource resulted in expansion of the responsi- bilities of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator. During the summer of 1973, the Headquarters Special Educa- tion Coordinator refined and made possible implementation of the following proposals. Marianas: Deaf Education [actually a continuation program] Marshalls: Deaf Education, Special Education Itinerant Program Palau: Resource Room and Speech Training Program 87 Ponape: Remedial English Reading for Special Children Truk: Itinerant [teachers] identification and training Yap: Deaf Education in an integrated classroom, Special Education and individualization in an Outer Island School (Review of Special Education Activities, June 1973, unpaged). In addition to providing administrative support and direction to these specific district-level projects, the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator also coordinated a wide range of district-level summer training activities. As the general level of special education programming increased, there was a need for an increased administra- tive function at the district level. This resulted in the develop- ment of a stronger district-level coordination role during the summer of 1973. There is indication that most of the districts began to assume this role. In discussing Peace Corps activity in Truk, Piercy stated that three volunteers “will be working under Bill Sewell also a Peace Corps volunteer, and Coordinator of Special Education for Truk District" ("Peace Corps in Truk," 1973, unpaged). In many ways it would seem that, in terms of the Special education program, the districts within the Trust Territory were beginning to function as local education agencies, even though in reality they were adminis- tratively still a part of one large centralized state (territorial) system. In September 1973, Elsa Thomas, a Micronesian who had under- gone graduate special education administrative training at the Univer- sity of Oregon, returned to the Trust Territory to become the first Headquarters Assistant Special Education Coordinator. In original Special education plans, Thomas had been scheduled to assume the 88 special education training coordination role at the Community College of Micronesia. In effect, however, she was serving as a local coun- terpart to Piercy, an expatriate, the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator. Throughout the remainder of 1973, Piercy and Thomas provided administrative support and coordination to district-level projects and to the flow-through training and related services provided by the Northwest Regional Resource Center and the Special Education Instructional Materials Center. In November, both Piercy and Thomas attended the Northwest Regional Special Education Instructional Materials Center--Pan Pacific Conference. On February 10, 1974, notification was received from Edwin Martin, Associate Commissioner of Education and Director of the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, that the Trust Territory's total funding under Part 8, Education of the Handicapped Act, would be $115,000 (Martin, 1974, attachment). Other than the $35,000 allocated to the state (territoria1)-1evel administration, these funds were allocated to the existing district-level projects, as described earlier. Between January 26 and March 15, 1974, Piercy and Thomas visited all of the District Directors of Education and district-level Special educators. They discussed the following topics: Project Proposals submitted to Washington for funding. Project Activities for next year both district and terri- tory wide. District plans for the next fiscal year. District problems in the area of Special education and possible solutions. 4:0: N—J 89 5. District programs were visited, observed and discussed with program staff. 6. Districts were also reminded about the need to start working on program proposals for next fiscal year (Visits to All Districts, 1974, unpaged). Additionally, during the first half of 1974, Piercy and Thomas were involved in a number of other administrative and planning activi— ties. Among these were (1) further planning with the Northwest Regional Resource Center for technical assistance and training in Micronesia; (2) joint planning between the Trust Territory, Univer- sity of Guam, and the University of Hawaii toward preparation of special education personnel; (3) joint planning with the Community College of Micronesia relating to Special Education Instructional Centers; Materials Production, Special Education Title 111 Project; Special Education Manpower Development Project; and a Preparation of Regular Educators to Work With the Handicapped Project; (4) initial planning with the Southwestern Region Deaf-Blind Center relating to a Search for Handicapped Children, and district-level planning and project preparation for fiscal year 1975 EHA, Part B projects (Bgyigy- of Special Education Activities, 1974, unpaged). Planning relating to the Northwest Regional Resource Center activities resulted in the following goals and objectives: The tentative goals and objectives listed below indicate the areas of assistance we can expect from the Regional Resource Center for next year. GOAL 1.0 By March 31, 1975, to have completed identification and screening of all handicapped children, ages 0-21, in the Trust Territory. Objective: By September 1, 1974, assist the Trust Territory in their screening of potentially handicapping condition, geographical location and demographic data for the purpose of planning programs. Objective: GOAL 2.0 Objective: Objective: GOAL 3.0 Objective: GOAL 4.0 90 By March 1, 1975, assist the Trust Territory in their processing of referral information compiled on han- dicapped children for the purpose of analyzing data for a listing of children by condition and location as well as for referrals for educational/medical evaluation. Develop an algorithm to analyze data and complete a computer run on the data. By June 30, 1977, to have developed and implemented a system to insure the educational/medical evaluation of all identified handicapped children in the Trust Territory. By February 29, 1976, provide testing and educational and medical evaluation of 80% of those children iden- tified in the screening effort who represent severe and moderate handicapping conditions requiring special facilities and also those children referred by the Trust Territory Department of Education. Produce diagnostic statements in terms of medical and educa- tional needs of children for programming services. By September 1, 1974, provide technical assistance in the Trust Territory in training teachers to: implement a program to train regular teachers in edu- cational evaluation; implement a program to evaluate the effectiveness of the training program; and imple- ment a method to evaluate the Special Education teacher training program at the Community College of Micronesia, to facilitate the development of the Trust Territory's capacity to meet the educational evalua- tion needs of handicapped children. By June 30, 1976, to have developed, field tested, evaluated and revised a program planning, monitor- ing and evaluation model that would facilitate the delivery of service to handicapped children and to teachers of the handicapped in the Trust Territory. By July 30, 1975, provide technical assistance in training for and implementation and evaluation of the Special Education Management System (PPME Unit) for facilitating the development of the Trust Territory's capacity to meet the educational evaluation and edu- cational program description needs of handicapped children. By January 31, 1977, to have completed evaluation of on-going future alternate service delivery models for the Trust Territory and to present recommendations to the legislature and Board of Education based on that evaluation. 91 Objective: By June 30, 1975, provide technical assistance in implementation and evaluation of the regular classroom educational programming model for handicapped to regu- lar education teachers in the Trust Territory to facilitate their capacity to meet the educational evaluation and educational program prescription needs of handicapped children. (Northwest Regional Resource Center, 1974, unpaged). This rather precise enumeration of goals and objectives served as the operational basis for technical assistance received from the Northwest Regional Resource Center. Another technical assistance component briefly mentioned earlier was that provided by the Southwestern Region Deaf/Blind Center of Sacramento, California. The program of the Southwestern Region Deaf/Blind Center was established by act of Congress to meet the needs of deaf/ blind children, many of whom were born with the dual handicap as the result of the rubella epidemic of the mid-1960's. Serv- ing the States of California, Nevada, Arizona, Hawaii, American Samoa, and the Trust Territory, the center directs its efforts toward developing and bringing to each deaf-blind child, as early as feasible in life, those specialized, intensive profes- sional and allied services and aids that are found to be most effective in enabling him to achieve his full potential for use- ful, meaningful participation in society and for self-fulfillment (Southwestern Region Deaf-Blind Center, 1974, unpaged). Given the above work scopes of the Southwestern Region Deaf- Blind Center and the Northwest Regional Resource Center, a program called Search for Handicapped Children was planned for 1974-1975. In cooperation with the Southwestern Region Deaf-Blind Center and the Northwest Regional Resource Center, we will be conducting a search for handicapped children throughout the Trust Territory. The purpose of this search is to locate the majority of handicapped children so that we will be able to communicate to legislatures, to be able to make appropriate pro- jections as to program and training needs, and for us to mobi- lize the necessary persons to assist us in educational evalua- tions of the handicapped. The survey will have three major components which will be implemented cooperatively between the Departments of Health Services. 92 a. Review of school files and screening of school children. b. Review of medical files and screening of children seen by physicians and other health personnel. c. A visit to the various municipalities and outer islands to survey the population and receive data from local magis- trates, education, and health personnel. (Descriptions of Programs, 1974, unpaged). With the availability of increased funding (Trust Territory $15,000 for FY 1975), the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator and Assistant Coordinator assisted the district-level projects in developing FY 1975 plans that would make use of the increased resources. Basically, the objective for fiscal 1975 was "to continue existing district level Special Education Programs and provide service to 10% more children than in FY 1974" (TTPI, 1974a, unpaged). These projects and their fiscal allocations were: FY 1975 Marianas: Deaf Education $18,078 Palau: Resource Room and Special Training $28,545 Yap: Deaf Education in an integrated classroom, Special Education and Individualization in an outer island school $12,828 Truk: Itinerant, identification, and training $14,699 Marshalls: Deaf Education, Special Education Itinerant Program $18,641 Ponape: Remedial English Reading for Special Children $22,243 (TTPI, 1975b, unpaged). Period IV: Micronesian Leadership-- January 1, 19754'Through_ December 31, 1977 In December 1974, upon completion of his two-year contract as Headquarters Special Education Coordinator, David Piercy left the 93 Trust Territory. Subsequently Elsa Thomas, a Micronesian who had served with Piercy as Headquarters Assistant Special Education Coor- dinator (actually Piercy's Micronesian counterpart), assumed the territory-wide Headquarters Special Education Coordinator role. It was at this point that the administrative leadership of Special edu- cation in the Trust Territory moved into Micronesian hands. In a Speech delivered in February 1975, Thomas summarized his perceptions of the dimensions of the Trust Territory Special edu— cation program at that time: Special education is very new in the Trust Territory. I guess it arrived on our Shores in 1968. There were some funds, but no professional persons. In 1970 two professionals were hired from here [U.S. Mainland] to start the program. Now we have 30 people in the program--administrators and teachers serve approximately 500 kids in all those districts. Each dis- trict has a special education coordinator. Because we could not possibly train everyone within two years, we are trying to bring inservice people to the islands. . . . In each district we are trying to provide services to the mildly, moderately, and severely handicapped. It is not easy to identify all of our handicapped cases, especially when you think about an island that is 500 miles away, and the ship only goes three times a year. In our dis- trict they have completed a search without any funds and have identified about 30 children with hearing problems. Now until this is done it iS very difficult for us to do any kind of com- prehensive plan that is developed out of our dreams. We must get this search project completed and identify all of our handi- capped children, the kinds of handicaps they have, where they are, and then start thinking in terms of what services can be provided. Of course we have some ideas, the itinerant model may be the most workable one. Then you can shift a person from school to school and with a minimal amount of expenditures. We also have manpower training designed to provide two ter- ritorial trainers who would visit each district and then work with a district trainer. They would go to school and train the total staff. It is designed to address problems as they are identified in the classroom. We are also operating an early childhood project and we're hoping to expand it. We also have a Title 111 project which is basically involved in developing materials. One of the problems is the nine 94 languages. The Title III program tries to evaluate what is going on in the classroom, see what kinds of problems the kids are having with the materials to be used in the classes. The materials are actually diagnostic and remedial packages (Imple- menting Special Education Services, 1975, p. 201). In addition to providing administrative support and coordi- nation for on-going Special education program activities, Thomas was faced with the task of developing a territorial Special education service plan that would comply with new legislation. In 1974, the role of the Federal Government in the education of handicapped children was significantly increased with the passage of the Mathias amendment to S. 1539 the amendments to ESEA of 1974. At full funding, the amendment authorized over $660 million to be made available . . . under Part B, for fiscal year 1975 only. The intent of the amendment was to provide financial assistance. . . . To meet mandates set in the Act, to identify, locate and evaluate all handicapped children, to estab- lish full educational opportunities for all handicapped children, and to establish a full service timetable. S. 1539 was Si ned into Public Law 93-380, thus the new provisions of Part B Aid to States) laid the basis for comprehensive planning, additional financial assistance to states and protection of the rights of handicapped children by due process procedures and assurances of confidentiality (An Analysis of Public Law 94-142, n.d., unpaged). To write the Public Law 93-380 plan, Thomas was able to obtain the assistance of Ireneus Akapito, a Micronesian from Truk District. Subsequently, Akapito was appointed to the position of Headquarters Assistant Special Education Coordinator (August 1975). With the assistance of David Piercy, the former Special Education Coordinator, who had been appointed Pacific representative for the Regional Resources Center, a plan was developed under Public Law 93-380 and subsequently submitted to the Bureau for Education of the Handicapped in October 1975. The plan, as submitted and subsequently approved by the U.S. Office of Education, is of particular significance, in that several 95 of its components seem to represent a Shift in focus and emphasis from previous plans. Whereas earlier plans had focused upon deve10p- ing services for children who, for the most part, were already a part of the education system, the Public Law 93-380 plan indicated that: In order that all handicapped children in the Trust Terri- tory can achieve their maximum potential, they must be identi- fied, located, and evaluated so that appropriate programs and services can be planned and provided (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). The plan, in effect, was committing the territory to develop services for severely handicapped, who, for the most part, had not thus far been served. Furthermore, in assigning responsibility for the planning of child identification, the plan stated: In the Trust Territory the Headquarters Department of Edu- cation, in cooperation with the District Department of Education (LEAS), the Department of Health Services, and Headstart agencies, is responsible for coordinating and implementing the planning of all child identification procedures. This results in individual and appr0priate district planning and implementation of child identification procedures with common data collection require- ments (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). This statement clearly pointed out the coordination role of Head- quarters in the child-identification process and at the same time established the treatment of the districts of the Trust Territory, for the purpose of this plan, as Local Education Agencies (LEAS). The localizing of child-identification processes was even more clearly pointed out in the following: The responsibility for the implementation of child identi- fication procedures lies with the Headquarters Department of Education, Special Education Section. But because the actual implementation of identification activities occurs within the districts and by district staff, this responsibility is dele- gated to the six district Special Education Coordinators. Implementation procedures must be tailored to the individual 96 district as there is great variation among districts. Head- quarters Department of Education, Special Education section with the assistance of the six district coordinators will coor- dinate child identification procedures with other government or private agencies that deal with the handicapped population (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). In describing the outcome of the child-identification pro- cess, the plan stated that by the end of FY 1977 the following would have taken place: 1. An on-going process for identification/referral of handi- capped children both in and out of school will be in opera- tion. 2. All children who are both identified and evaluated will have access to appr0priate special education programs within their home district. 3. Plans for providing services to identified but un-evaluated children (because of lack of capability) will be matched with programs and budget projections will be prepared for submission to the Trust Territory High Commissioner and the Congress of Micronesia. 4. A systematic educational appraisal program will have been in operation for at least two years in one district, and in five districts for at least one year. (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). Although there had been discussion and some preliminary plan- ning for child-identification activities with the Southwest Regional Deaf-Blind Center and the Northwest Regional Resource Center, the plan established under Public Law 93-380 formalized the process, procedures, and expected outcomes of such activities. In relation to the confidentiality requirements of P.L. 93-380 the following was included within the plan. The Special Education office in each of the six districts will develop its own procedures which will be reviewed by the Trust Territory Department of Education for com liance with the confidentiality guidelines. The Districts [sic Special Education Coordinator will be responsible for the collection, safekeeping and dissemi- nation of such data and information. Additionally, he will maintain a current existing [list] of potential users of the file and ensures [gig] that users Of the filed records comply with the guidelines and procedures established for such purpose. 97 The coordinator will also be responsible for arranging confer- ences between parent(s) or legal guardian(s) and requestors of the information, and for documenting decisions of parent(s) or legal guardian(s). The Special Education Coordinator will be provided train- ing in the operation of the data system to ensure that such operation meets local, Trust Territory-wide and Federal regu- lations. At the Trust Territory-wide level, the Special Education Coordinator is responsible for maintaining the confidentiality of information released to his or her office. He must also maintain an up-to-date listing of the Districts [gig] Special Education Coordinator or their designees whose responsibility is to guard and ascertain at all times that the data and informa- . tion do not fall into the hands of individuals who have no responsibility in providing services to the handicapped children. The Trust-Territory-wide Management System which is being devel- Oped, will comply with Confidentiality requirements specified by the Commissioner of Education, U.S. Office of Education, Wash- ington, D.C. The Trust Territory Special Education Management System will include, in its manual of usage, specification of data which will exclude personally identifiable information. Only information related to population of handicapped children, handicapping con- ditions, breakdowns in terms of population of male and female, age ranges, number served or unserved, etc., are to be trans- mitted through the system to the Trust Territory Special Educa- tion Coordinator's office. Any other type of information will have to be handled through procedures which comply with the con- fidentiality requirements. It is to be kept in mind that the Districts in the Trust Territory do not have access to computers and therefore will have to rely on traditional ways of keeping files. Data and infor- mation collected will be stored in filing cabinets with locks, and all record of cards will be coded so that no personally identifiable information will appear on the cards in the file. The key to the coding system will be kept in a separate locked cabinet that is only accessible by the Special Education Coordi- nator or his designee. Specific details pertaining to retrieval of information by other agencies in terms of procedures and specific formats which will guarantee the confidentiality of information on records will be identified with the help of Consultants from the NWALRS who are to be hired to develop the Trust Territory-wide Manage- ment System. The first input meeting with representatives from theBgix districts and Headquarters is scheduled for January 26 to , 1976. 98 Destruction of Data: All information collected on a child which pertains to his or her skill deficits which necessitated the child being provided special education services will be destroyed by burning. During the burning process the District Special Education Coordinator will assign a responsible person to see to it that all the mate- rials are burned and that no information is readable. All the information filed and stored which can be used to identify a specific handicapped child, or what his or her spe- cific skill deficits were, shall be destroyed after a period of five years following the termination of services for that child. The information to be destroyed shall not include those data :hich are routinely collected and maintained on all school chil- ren. Parent(s) or legal guardian(s) will be provided with notifi- cation 60 days prior to the destruction of the information and will be offered the opportunity to review documented statements about the child and the purpose for which information on the child was entered into the System. They will also be given the option of retaining the child's record (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). The confidentiality section of the plan, as developed by Thomas and Akapito, took into consideration the realities of the ter- ritory while at the same time meeting federal requirements. The full services statement within the plan was as follows: The Department of Education, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, hereby establishes the following goal of providing full educational opportunities to all handicapped children. By 1981 all handicapped children, as defined in the Act, will be provided full educational opportunities in programs meeting standards established and approved by the State Educational Agency. This goal is consistent with the legislation being considered by the Congress of Micronesia in January 1976 (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). Although the statement itself was laudable, the fact that the children for whom it promised to provide services were yet to be identified leaves some question about whether it was realistic. Also of significance is the statement that: Except for the few severely handicapped children in Marianas project, it is expected that no severely handicapped will be found in the in-school handicapped population. The reason for 99 this is that almost all severely handicapped children don't go to school in the Trust Territory and hence it is anticipated that they will be found in the out-of—school and pre-school handicapped population (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). The plan stated that the "goal of Special Education in the Trust Territory is to provide educational services to all mildly, moderately, and severely handicapped children in all districts" (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). In relation to this provision, the plan stated: Handicapped children, . . . to function as much as they can like normal individuals, must be in as normal a situation as possible. In keeping with this philoSOphy in its attempt to help the handicapped child to be able to interact with his school- mates, friends and family members, the Trust Territory Special Education sets up [the] program for the child in an integrated environment, providing him and his teacher with needed resources in the regular classrooms. Special class approach is utilized only when the child's conditions warrant such arrangement (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). In relation to service need, Thomas and Akapito included the follow- ing statistics in the Public Law 93-380 plan: On the basis of a 10% incidence rate of handicapped children in a given population, the Trust Territory as a whole should have approximately 6,800 handicapped children in need of Special edu- cation, an extremely conservative estimate in light of high infant mortality and morbidity rate within the Trust Territory between the ages of O and 19. Of the 6,800, approximately 3,200 are between 6 and 14 years of age and are within the mandatory school age for Micronesian children (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). The P.L. 93-380 plan also provided an excellent description of the barriers and constraints to full implementation of special education services by 1981: a. The unavailability of adequately trained personnel is one basic problem the Trust Territory faces in meeting the full services goal by 1981. Since least restrictive placement is a high priority and children should be mainstreamed as much as possible, recycling already recruited teachers becomes a difficult proposition aS substitutes are not always avail- able. 100 The Community College of Micronesia, the only specialized teacher training institution in the Trust Territory, has a Special education training program which specializes in training teachers to work with mildly and moderately handi- capped children in the regular classroom. Although it might be possible for the Community College of Micronesia program to include training of teachers for the severely handicapped, this might be unwise as the demand for continuous training of such teachers for the target population will be small. Training of these teachers will have to occur in outside-of- Micronesia institutions through Special arrangements. The Trust Territory must be able to influence the type of train- ing given to these teachers in order to prevent adoption of Skills which will not be useful in meeting the Trust Terri- tory handicapped children's needs. Legislation specifically designed for the needs of handicapped has been introduced twice into the Congress of Micronesia but failed both times. Although both houses agreed with the content of the bill, passage is made difficult by legisla- tive requirement for implementation. Thus, the Trust Terri- tory right now is currently with a [gig] special legislation. The Trust Territory does not have money to hire teachers and furnish special classrooms for the handicapped. The Trust Territory Government is dependent on an annual U.S. Congres- sional allocation for basic government support. Recently, such support has not been sufficient to meet all the needs not including support for handicapped programs. Cultural attitudes on the part of the general public toward Spending money for handicapped presents another problem. Parents both of handicapped and non-handicapped have argued that funds can be put to "better" use by spending them on "normal" children rather than on handicapped. This attitude appears to be changing with increased numbers of handicapped being successfully placed. (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). To deal with the constraints and barriers described above, the plan cited the following: a. At least 26 people will be trained for the various openings in Special Education: (1) 21 will be trained as Itinerant Special Education Teachers; (2) 3 master degree level trainees in pre-school, deaf-blind and administration; (3) Two B.A.‘S in Deaf/Hard of Hearing Education and general Special Education. A third attempt will be made to pass the special education legislation in January at the Congress of Micronesia regular se551on. C. 101 A Special Education budget will be prepared and submitted to the Administration for final submission to the Department of Interior. Districts will prepare programs for educating parents and the general public in order to establish good public rela- tions. (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). It is difficult to ascertain how effective these proposed actions will be in overcoming the barriers and constraints to full implemen- tation of special education. However, they do represent an organized attempt to meet the requirements of federal legislation. In describing the administrative responsibilities of the office of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator, the plan included the following: 1. 10. tomNOSU'l-th Acquisition and administration of funds to operate child identification system and with the LEA to provide approp- riate programs for all handicapped children. Coordination of all programs for the identification, edu- cational evaluation and education of all handicapped children. Monitoring and evaluation of all educational programs for the handicapped. Development of legislation. Coordination and liaison between all agencies: Health Ser- vices, Headstart, CCM, districts. Working with BEH and regional projects on behalf of the districts. Development of policies and regulations required to implement the "plan." Assist the Districts in the development of appropriate prob- lems. Organize and coordinate periodic awareness campaign(s) (in conjunction with other state human service agencies) on a state-wide basis, including news releases to state-wide newspapers and media, High Commissioner's office support, etc., to inform the public about programs and services. Develop, publish, update and disseminate guidelines and pro- cedures to ensure due process and which lead to full educa- tional services for each child needing special education services. These should include the following: (1) parental or guardian's permission prior to education evaluation; (2) prior notice to change of child's education status; (3) important due process hearings; (4) parental/guardian 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 102 access to student records; (5) confidentiality; (6) discrimi- nation; (7) surrogate parents; (8) parental/agency appeal. Provide technical assistance and consultation to other agencies (state/local) in developing and implementation [gig] due process procedures within their respective agencies. Develop, publish and disseminate guidelines and procedures to ensure that assessment of all handicapped children will be multifaceted and multisourced and include at least the follow- ing: (1) school information (educational functioning, psychomotor & sensory development, and adaptive behavior); (2) home information (adaptive behavior, sociocultural back- ground, and health and developmental history). The evaluation should include procedures for children with linguistic and cultural differences. Provide minimum state standards for basic curricula used in all educational programs for handicapped children receiving SEA support (excess cost support, etc.). Work with other state agencies and to determine their needs for training/technical assistance in functions. Determine most likely target groups within local educa- tional agencies (EMR teachers, school psychologist, itiner- ant resources personnel) to expand roles where necessary to implement full service goal. Compile data on training/ technical assistance needs of staff from local or other agen- cies to carry out functions in 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 5.0. Work with other state agencies to determine appropriate deve10pmental job sequences for SEA and other state agency staff to facilitate operation of "full services" system. Work with a Title VI-D Committee to review state-wide train- ing needs and plan in-service/summer/institute/other training of existing staff to ensure meeting "full services goal." Issue RFP'S for needed specialized regional or state-wide training or technical assistance/consultation programs to facilitate intra-state response to full services goal. Plan and consult with training institution personnel to ensure establishment of needed pre-service training programs. Fund special state-wide or regional training projects to assist local agencies in development of capability to respond to full services goal. Provide for temporary support of personnel in training insti- tutions to assist them in developing the capacity to provide pre—service and in-service training needed to meet the full service goals. Fund, provide or arrange for consultation and technical assistance to meet state standards for the full services goal for local educational agency staff. Provide or arrange for consultation or technical assistance in curriculum planning for difficult cases where regional services are not available. (TTPI, 1975a, unpaged). 103 Although the above responsibilities tend to be somewhat broad, they do outline the strong coordination and supportive role of the office of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator. Within the plan, the general role of the district department was spelled out as follows: 1. To implement child identification at the local level. 2. To develop and implement programs for all identified handi- capped children with the assistance of Headquarters Department of Education. 3. To coordinate efforts of the various agencies delivering service to the handicapped. 4. To monitor and evaluate the various educational service delivery programs. 5. To identify program needs and hire personnel. 6. Refer children to other appr0priate district and territorial agencies. 7. Comply with due process procedures. 8. To provide for the comprehensive educational appraisal of identified handicapped children. 9. To develOp long-range educational plans for evaluated children. 10. To collect and provide data as required by the SEA. 11. To provide periodic progress reports to SEA. 12. To design appropriate educational placements of each handi- capped child. 13. In c00peration with Headquarters and CCM provide on-site in-service training programs for teachers. 14. Identify material needs to CCM for acquisition and develop- ment. (TTPI, 1975, unpaged). In functioning as local education agencies (LEAS) within the plan, the districts have become responsible and accountable for child placement and the actual delivery of services, as well as identifying and locating the handicapped child. As Thomas and Akapito were completing the plan under Public Law 93-380, the President of the United States signed into law Public Law 94-142, The Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, which would make available to the Trust Territory even more 104 monetary resources than had P.L. 93-380 and would also require a state (territorial) plan with additional assurances relating to the education of handicapped children. Thomas and Akapito developed such a plan and submitted it to the U.S. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. The plan under P.L. 94-142 contained all of the elements of the previously approved plan under P.L. 93-380, as well as some sig- nificant modifications. In the area of child-find assessment proce- dures, Thomas and Akapito indicated: It Shoudl [gig] be noted that child-find and educational assessment procedures are being applied to the outer islands on a very limited basis. The justifications for this are as fol- ows: l. Distances to the Outer Islands range from 60 to 500 miles away from the district centers. 2. The average population of the outer islands is approxi- mately 500 people. 3. Field trip schedules are very infrequent ranging from once a month to once in three (3) months. There is no air service to the outer islands. Field trip ships only spend a few hours at each island and this is not long enough for any of the teams to accomplish anything. 6. It is not cost-effective to send either the child-find or assessment teams to any of the outer islands and leave the team there for months to evaluate as few as twenty handi- capped children. An alternative to the above is to have each outer island identify its own child-find and educational assessment personnel who would be given training in the district centers and then return to their islands to conduct child-find and educational assessment activities. This alternative however, will require several years to develop because of the lack of funds and insuf- ficient number of people with sufficient skills in English to read instructions and write (TTPI, 1977a, p. 20). 01-5 This represented a shift from what had been a total commitment to full service under the P.L. 93-380 plan. This point was further elaborated in the following: 105 Full Services Dates The Trust Territory Department of Education, Special Educa- tion Section, in full c00peration with the District Departments of Education, had originally projected full services for all handicapped children to be achieved by 1981. However, in view of the major barriers which characterize our island environment, I would like to rescind the original projection in recognization of the realities of our Situation. Because of the fact that many of our inhabited islands are only reachable by very infrequent boat trips, our commitment to mainstreaming, the lack of suffi- cient number of trained personnel to be detailed to outer islands for months or years, and the unavailability of the millions of dollars with which to serve every single handicapped child, on every inhabited mound-of-sand and coral rock dotting the nearly three thousand miles of the length of the Trust Territory, we are convinced that we must re- -eva1uate the full services goal com- mitment made earlier. The new projection dates reflect an attempt on our part to differentiate our environment into District Centers and Outer Islands. In doing this we are attempting to look more realis- tically at what we can possibly do, and what we would like to do but may not be able to carry out, within the timeline we originally set up for us. The new dates are as follows: a. All District Centers 1981 b. All Outer Islands 1985 Presently we are expecting to meet our full services goal in the District Center by 1981. We do not expect too much diffi- culty with the District Centers since they are more accessible and, therefore, can utilize more service delivery models as com- pared to the outer islands. The new projected full services date for the outer islands will allow us to identify and train outer island residents so that they can go back and conduct special education programs. This strategy precludes the need for District Centers to relocate their personnel in the outer islands, a move which will cause financial and personal problems to the program and staff respec- tively (TTPI, 1977a, PP 36- 37). At this time the plans for Trust Territory Special Education under P.L. 93-380 and subsequently P.L. 94-142 have been approved by the U.S. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. For Fiscal Year 1977, some $578,813 have been released. This repre- sents an increase of more than $300,000 over FY 1976, or from a per- centage point of view, an increase in excess of 100 percent. It is 106 difficult to determine what overall effect this vastly increased funding will have. Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Develppment Activity The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 31, 1969 The first training activity relating to Special education in the Trust Territory was in conjunction with the hearing and vision survey conducted between August 1968 and August 1969. There is little indication of the exact nature of this training, but basically it seems to have consisted of training an individual in each of the dis- tricts to conduct simple vision and hearing screening. Other than the actual screening of children and some medical referrals to health services, there was no direct service within this early project. The second training activity was in conjunction with initia- tion of the Territory's first special education program. According to Jesus Concepcion (former Director of Education in the Northern Marianas), this was a program for deaf children, which began on Saipan in May 1969. At that time, according to Concepcion, Mrs. Kleist, the wife of another government employee, became interested in provid- ing education for some deaf children on Saipan. There is indication that she had had either training or experience in working with deaf children. Cecilia Camacho, a Micronesian, worked directly with Mrs. Kleist, thereby receiving on-the-job training in deaf education. She continued the program after Mrs. Kleist's departure. The project provided direct instructional service to 10 or 12 children. Materials 107 were limited and of a commercial variety from the U.S. mainland. As indicated earlier, funding was partially federal and partially local. During this period, the basic plan for a training program under Title III was developed. The program proposal was developed by Hill and Jan Walker, Department of Special Education, University of Oregon, and is of particular Significance for two reasons. First, it represented the initial establishment of a training relationship between Special education in the Trust Territory and the University of Oregon, a relationship that continued throughout the entire period of this study. Second, it detailed much of what later became Opera- tionally a Title III project for special education training and development of curriculum and materials. For these reasons, the proposal is presented here in detail. 6. Requirements for a Trust Territory Training Program in Special Education: A model for training Micronesian elementary teach- ers in Special Education techniques Should meet the following criteria: 1. It Should have as much generality and application for regular educational processes as possible. Special edu- cation techniques Should facilitate the learning of non- handicapped as well as handicapped children. 2. The model should not contain elements or Operations that militate against its use because of Micronesian and Ameri- can cultural differences. 3. The model should teach SkillS and techniques that are easily learned, internalized and used by teachers. 4. The Operations and elements of the program, when effec- tively used, should "make a difference" in the learning- teaching process and such changes should be obvious to the teacher. 5. The value and utility of the techniques in facilitating the learning process should be accepted by the teachers expected to use them. 7. The Training Model: The basic training will teach a strategy for delivery of services by the teacher to handicapped chil- dren in the classroom. The teacher will be trained in the processes of: #OON-d 108 identification and assessment of entering behavior. referral and prosthesis. intervention. performance assessment. Different training sequences, activities and experiences will be required to teach the respective components of the strategy. A sequential training program, built around a demonstrationcflassroom will be set up to: 1. 2. 3. acquaint students with the rationale for and techniques of Special Education. allow students to observe exemplary Special Education techniques in operation by a master, Micronesian teacher. allow students to interact with the techniques under con- trolled supervision by serving as teacher aides to the master teacher. provide an opportunity for students to apply the techniques in a student teaching Situation under supervision. During the 1970-73 period, the training model will produce, stimulate or be involved in the following activities: 1. DevelOpment of a resource services unit at MTEC [Micro- nesian Teacher Education Center; later became Community College of Micronesia] for support of the Special Education training program. Establishment of an experimental, demonstration classroom for purposes of demonstrating exemplary Special Education techniques. Identification and training of a Micronesian, master teacher for the demonstration classroom who, after a two- year period, could be considered as one candidate for the position of coordinator of the resource services unit at MTEC. Development of a sequential teacher training program in Special Education. Appointment Of a coordinator Of the Special Education training program at MTEC for a two-year period. Identification and training Of a Micronesian in Speech Correction and Special Education at a university to assume a staff position in the MTEC resource services unit. Training six Micronesian educators in Special Education to become coordinators of teacher training in their respective districts and to assume responsibility for Special Educa- tion programs as they emerge. Establishment of an IMC [Instructional Materials Center] and satellite centers in each of the other districts. Experimentation with an educational Modulation Center for programming use of instructional materials with academic- ally handicapped children. The EMC could be evaluated as to its adaptability to Micronesian education through the IMC Network. 109 MTEC students will be trained in a Special Education System called precision teaching. Precision teaching breaks the learning-teaching process down into four com onents: (1) Ante- cedents, (2) Movements, (3) Arrangements, (4) Subsequent Events. Antecedents refer to all those events that come before a response is made. Movements refer to the response or behavior that is required in the learning process. Arrangements refer to the actual relationship(s) between movements and those events that follow the behavior or response in question (sub- sequent events). A typical lesson can be broken down in the diagram aS follows: (Antecedent) (Movement) 1. Teacher assigns 10 math 1. Child works all 10 problems and says, "Get math problems. ready, begin." (Arrangement) (Subsequent Event) 1. 1 : l 1. Free time to work on a novel, educational game or puzzle. The child earns one minute of free time to work on an edu- cational game or puzzle for each correct math problem that he completes within an allotted time period. The system was designed for use with academically retarded or handicapped children. It allows the teacher to help the child increase his rate of learning. Precision teaching provides the classroom environment with a system for programming instruction for efficient learning. The principles upon which the system is based are equally applicable to the learning process of handicapped and non- handicapped children. Precision teaching accelerates the rate of learning and deaccelerates the rates of behavior that compete or interfere with the learning process. Antecedent events in the form of instructional programming and subsequent events, in the form of consequences natural to the classroom setting that accel- erate learning, are used to improve the learning and perform- ance of handicapped children. If a child is not learning as indicated by performance data, the teacher can experiment with different natural consequences or vary the instructional materials and requirements until performance data indicate the child ig learning. Precision teaching would provide Micronesian teachers with a set of skills for improving the teaching process and increas- ing the learning of students. The system is adaptable to any classroom and only requires graph paper for implementation. The principal investigators spent a major portion of their time in Ponape trying to determine if precision teaching meets the criteria for a training model set forth in item #6. As far 110 as we are able to determine, it does. However, the question of applicability is still an empirical one. Precision teach- ing will have to be tried, evaluated, and if necessary modi- fied in the MTEC setting before a decision can be reached on this issue. 8. Scope of Training and Development of an onigoing Special Edu- cation Program: The goal of this proposal is to establish a workable and realistic Special Education plan for Micronesia and to build a training program around it. An additional goal is to involve Micronesian educators in the initial develop- ment and operation of the Special Education program and to eventually assume responsibility for its Operation and main- tenance development of an exemplary Special Education program within a three year period would require the following: 1. Inclusion of the Trust Territory in the service area of the University of Oregon's Regional Instructional Mate- rials Center (IMC). 2. DevelOpment Of a Resourcé Services Unit for Special Edu- cation at MTEC. 3. Graduate training of Micronesian staff personnel. An effective teacher training program can be built around a resource services unit at MTEC. The unit would contain an IMC center that would coordinate satellite IMC centers through- out Micronesia. . . . It is the intent of the proposed training program that MTEC students, through their exposure to and use of Special Education techniques, will see the advantages of their continued use in teaching following MTEC graduation. However, it is extremely important that there be some super- vision in their respective districts and some structured liaison with the MTEC Special Education program. This type of support is important in the introduction and maintenance of any innovative educational program. A representative should be selected from each district and trained as a teacher train- ing coordinator and with responsibility for Special Education programs. Such a person would coordinate and supervise the activities of MTEC graduates, relative to Special Education and provide in-service training for teachers within the dis- trict. Each coordinator would have to be thoroughly trained in Special Education and Precision teaching techniques. Each district coordinator would also assume responsibility for the satellite IMC in his district (ESEA Title III Proposal for Special Education, 1969, pp. 3-7). The proposed project also outlined a short-term workshop and personnel recruitment activity. Because this component of the prOposal delineated what would be done during the next phase, it is also pre- sented here in detail. It stated (pp. 3-4): 111 9. Three Year Training Model and Development of a Special Educa- tion Program 1970-1971 1. Ohne l-June 12 a. A two-week workshop in precision teaching and instruc- tional techniques will be held at MTEC from June 1 to June 12. Trainees will include (tentatively) MTEC students, Pontec [Ponape Teacher Education Center] trainees; cooperating teachers portion of the work- shop will operate from 9 to 12 a.m. each day and the instructional techniques portion will run from 1 to 4 p.m. daily. Due to the large number of trainees involved, approximately 40 to 50, a team teaching approach will be used in the training sessions. Two staff members will be responsible for operating the Precision-teaching portion of the workshop in the a.m. Two additional staff members will have responsi- bility for the Instructional techniques portion in the p.m. The Instructional techniques staff will assist the Precision teaching staff in the morning sessions and vice versa in the afternoon sessions. Below are a description of each session's procedural activities and content followed by a list of terminal behaviors expected of trainees at the conclusion of each section of the workshop: 1. Precision Teaching--Conducted by Ralph Carlson and Diana Dean--University of Oregon 2. Instructional Techniques--Conducted by James McCleod and George Shepperd--University of Oregon 2. September 1, 1970-June l, 1971 a. Appointment of a coordinator of Special Education Pro- grams and training for a two-year period. Qualifica- tions would include: 1. A master's degree plus substantial post-master's graduate work completed. 2. Experienced and knowledgeable in (a) token economy systems, (b) Precision teaching, (c) teacher train- ing, (d) handicapping conditions. b. The coordinator would be expected to perform the fol- lowing functions: Establish and coordinate an experimental, demon- stration classroom for children with learning disabilities and deviant behavior. 2. Teach a class in the MTEC curriculum in Special Education for Handicapped Children. This proposal was approved by the Trust Territory Title III Advisory Council and, as indicated, became operational during the next phase to be described. 112 Period II: Planning and Initiating Trainipg and Service--January l, 1970, Through December 1972 According to Lehrman (1978), in early 1970 he, Ralph Carlson, and Jim McCleod conducted a workshop at the Micronesian Teacher Edu- cation Center. Subsequent to this workshop, Lehrman was hired as the first Trust Territory Headquarters Special Education Coordinator and Carlson was contracted to direct the Title III (15 percent Special education) project described in detail earlier. Each of these indi- viduals assumed his respective position in mid-1970. Responding to an inquiry about how the "mainstream" model of special education was adopted early in the program, Lehrman (1978) said: One, it was pragmatic, there weren't enough kids to have a segregated class in any one place, at any one time; it didn't make sense to segregate even if you could have done a better job instructing them. Well, it made sense in terms of our values that they should be able to get along with regular kids to have them in regular classrooms. Both Lehrman and Carlson indicated they were in full support of the strong behavioral approach contained in the Title III proposal pre- sented earlier. Carlson proceeded with the deve10pment of the curricular com- ponents and related training activities called for in the Title III project cited earlier. This project was integrated with an ongoing University of Hawaii contracted teacher training activity known as MTEC (Micronesian Teacher Education Center). In 1970, MTEC was officially renamed the Community College of Micronesia (CCM). At CCM, Carlson designed and taught a two-course sequence in special 113 education, which was required of all regular teachers. On visiting the training program in 1971, after it had been in existence for six or seven months, Barbara Bateman (1972) referred to the program as . . an "innovation" we would heartily recommend to our own teacher training school. The students appear to be extremely pleased with the Special education program. One student observed that the entire teacher training program should be conducted by the special education staff! Two outstanding strengths of the special education program are quite inclusive: (1) the content itself and (2) the inte- gration of the special education courses into the basic, regular teacher training program. The philOSOphy of the special educa- tion program recognizes realistically and appropriately that regular classroom teachers will, for some years to come, be largely responsible for implementing special education programs in Micronesia. If this focus can be maintained and extended it is possible that Special education in Micronesia may avoid many of the difficulties it currently faces in this country. The emphasis of the CCM Special Education program on the accountability of the teacher for student performance and on systematically teaching Skills which enable teachers to prevent disabling learning problems by early detection and individualized instruction is laudable and enviable. All children in the CCM teachers' classrooms will benefit from the teacher's training in Special education (p. 32). She went on to describe the program in further detail by stating that: The first semester course includes instruction in individual differences in learning andlaccountabilitnyr pupil performances, conceptualization of special education as special teaching prob- lems requiring precise analysis and careful intervention, use of an explicit language of instruction (especially important for CCM because of the lack of a common first language among students and between students and staff), and the use of a set of efficient teachers' routines for teaching new material and for insuring the worthwhileness of the educative process for the children to be taught. The second semester special education course is concurrent with the student teaching experience and provides a framework for assessing and evaluating original instruction in any content area, need for remediation or change in teaching tactics, and the effectiveness of remediation (pp. 32-33). 114 Thus there is indication that the Title III project, as proposed in 1969, was implemented through Carlson's activity. Lehrman, as overall Trust Territory Special Education Coor- dinator, was also developing supportive training. In conjunction with Carlson, he developed and submitted a proposal to the U.S. Office of Education under Preparation of Personnel in the Education of the Handicapped Act, Part D, for funding in the amount of $50,000 during the period 6/1/71 to 8/31/72. The proposal, which was subsequently funded, enabled the initiation of a special study institute to: . teach classroom teachers, teacher trainers, and school administrators a strategy for delivery of special education and related services to the following types of handicapped children: mentally retarded, speech and hearing impaired, visually handi- capped, seriously emotionally disturbed, crippled or other health impaired, learning disabilities, interrelated, and Special educa- tion administration. 0.2 Purpose of the Institute: To train professional educa- tion staff in a workable plan to deliver special educa- tion and related services to handicapped children in the regular elementary school classroom setting insofar as is possible. Specific objectives of the Special Study Institute include training 48 professional personnel in the processes of: 0.2.1 identification and assessment of entering behavior referral and amelioration educational intervention; solution of Special teaching problems presented by handicapped children performance assessment. ature of the Special Study Institute: A model for train- ing Micronesian elementary teachers in special education techniques should meet the following criteria: 0.3.1 it should have as much generality and application for regular educational processes as possible. Special education techniques should facilitate the learning of non-handicapped as well as handi- capped children. 0.3.2 the model should not contain elements or operations which mitigate [gig] against its use because of Micronesian and American cultural differences. 0.3.3 the techniques and skills transmitted by the pro- gram should be equally applicable to schools and classrooms. N mm b (JON D . D . D . N D.3 115 0.3.4 The model should teach skills and techniques that are easily learned, internalized and used by teachers. 0.3.5 The operations and elements of the program, when effectively used, should make a difference in the teaching-learning process and such changes should be observable by the teacher and others. 0.3.6 The values and utility of the techniques in facilitating the learning process should be accepted by the teachers expected to use them. E. Estimated number and types of participants: 18 classroom teachers who have handicapped children in their classrooms 18 principals of elementary schools where handicapped children are found in regular classrooms 6 district coordinators of teacher education or district teacher trainers 6 cooperating teachers F. Other pertinent information: This Special Study Institute is designed to complement the Title III E.S.E.A. Special education teacher training program conducted at the Community College of Micronesia, Ponape District. Because housing is not available, the Insti- tute is prOposed to be conducted at the University of Guam, where the facilities of the Men's and Women's Dormitories may be used. Guam is also conveniently located for transporta- tion from the Six districts of the Trust Territory. (State Education Agency Plan, 1971, pp. 8-9). The institute was conducted during the summer of 1971. The researcher had an opportunity to take part as both a trainee and an observer. The actual training provided in the institute was the Pre- cision Teaching Model discussed earlier. Although no formal evalua- tion of the special institute was made, the researcher as a partici- pant corresponded with Lehrman regarding the institute (workshop). The following excerpt from an August 24, 1971, letter to Lehrman gives some insight into the workshop's general operation and possible impact. With regard to actual Guam workshop, I guess I must say I came away with very mixed feelings, not because of the material of the workshop or the individuals involved; but I guess more 116 in the way of areas of concern relating to the total process. I'll try to outline these to you as best I can. 1. First off, I gather that at the district level the workshop was billed to potential participants as relating entirely to handicapped children that its participants expected to be dealing with each area of exception such as blind, deaf, mentally retarded, emotionally disturbed, etc. My impression was that many workshop participants expected to be trained to teach such children in an isolated setting (separate class- room). These expectations made it somewhat difficult for many to relate to the notion of serving handicapped children, by individualized approach in the regular classroom. Possibly somewhere early in the process this should have been clari- fied with workshop participants. The staff of the institute was excellent. My own feeling was that they knew their area and had some pretty good ideas about how to deliver it to their rather unique group of students. Their (the staff) enthusiasm about the workability of precision teaching gave them strengths without which they probably would not have survived. It was probably well that the size of the staff was expanded prior to the institute in a sense this may well have been the key to their being able to deliver. Dur- ing the time that I was there (last two weeks) it was apparent that one difficulty was communication--the model devised by the teaching staff for communication with students was to primarily use a district leader. I don't know how these were selected. Unfortunately, this model tended to break down. It would seem that future institutes of this nature should concentrate on good communication in the very early stages. A variety of problems seem to evolve from the choice of Guam as an institute site. To some extent there seemed to be a lack of support from the University in terms of the project. One almost gets the impression that they were not really too enthused about being involved. In general I would feel that the dorm and dorm life-style do not seem to be of the quality which might be desired. There is a tendency for the group to be swallowed by Sheer size of the dorm. This would suggest training at a more remote site, where greater group solidarity and individual interchange might be achieved. An additional problem relating to Guam as a site seemed to be the new and novel high pace of life there. For some students this was their first contact with this technologi— cal life style and there seemed to be a tendency for them to be swallowed up in behavior related to this, as opposed to the more academic pursuit of the workshop. I gather that the main goal of the institute is for the teach- ers involved to carry back and utilize the precision/ personalized teaching methodology, to the extent that this takes place may be one measure of the success of the institute. 117 My own feeling would be that this will vary considerably from district to district. I rather suspect that the range will be "0" to three or four of the eight in some districts. It might be well if some way could be found to examine this in say six months or so. One of the keys to such use will be the availability of the specialized supplies needed for the process. (Caldwell, 1971, unpaged). The writer participated in this workshop as a part of a special project entitled Program Proposal for Moderately Handicapped Children, which incorporated both service delivery and training com- ponents. The project was initiated in July 1971. The project nar- rative stated: The Project is based on the concept of employment of a trained and qualified Special education teacher-specialist (who at this point in time must of necessity be an expatriot [gig]) who will be contracted for two years, and who will be assigned two major responsibilities. Responsibility #1 is to organize and operate a dual program of Special education for moderately handicapped children in Palau District under the authority of the District Director of Education. This dual program consists of the Operation of a Special Educa- tion Resource Room in the morning and the conducting of an Itinerant Teacher Special Education Program in the afternoon of each school day. The Special Education Resource Room consists of a selected elementary school classroom into which are assigned (1) not more than ten selected moderately-handicapped children of compatible age and ability, (2) not more than ten non- -handicapped children, and (3) the trained and qualified contract special education teacher. The teacher's goal shall be to utilize special teaching methods, materials, and equipment as necessary to meet the teaching- learning problems of all children within the Resource Room. Materials and equipment— must be selected as practical for the present and future operation of the class as a model classroom which could be duplicated elsewhere in the Trust Territory and compatible with district curriculum and standards. The maximum number of children assigned to the Resource Room is set at twenty because of the concentration of handicapped children within the room. This program should operate during the morning portion of the school day. The same special education contract teacher shall also conduct an Itinerant Teacher Special Education Program during the afternoon portion of the school day. This program shall consist of visits 118 by the contract teacher to handicapped school children and their teachers in other elementary (and secondary, if desired) schools for the purposes of providing direct special education tutoring, referral for medical treatment, and other aids to handicapped children including the provision of curriculum and instructional materials, consulting assistance to the child's classroom teacher, and consulting and counseling with the child's parents, as required. These and related activities describe ggg of the igg_ major responsibilities of the special education contract teacher. Responsibility #2 shall be that of training two Micronesian special education teacher interns (one each year for two years) in all phases of the project by working closely with the Micro- nesian teacher intern from the very beginning of the project and in carrying out the Resource Room and Itinerant Teacher dimensions of the program. The Micronesian special education teacher intern Shall be assigned to work full time with the special education contract teacher for this purpose. For the first school year of the program (1971-72) Micronesian special education teacher "A" Shall be assigned to work with the contract teacher as described above. For the second school year of the program (1972-73) Microne- sian special education teacher intern "A" shall be expected to attend Community College of Micronesia for a full year of training in special education under Dr. Ralph Carlson. During this same year, Micronesian Special education teacher intern "B" shall be assigned to work full time in the program with the contract teacher. At the conclusion of the second school year (1972-73) the contract teacher's task is completed and this special education teacher ends his work in the program. For the following school year (1973-74) two major events occur. First, the original Micronesian Special education teacher "A" returns to Palau District and is assigned to full charge of the Operation of the special education program (Resource Room and Itinerant Teacher responsibilities). Second, Micronesian Special Education Teacher Intern "B" now is sent to attend the Community College of Micronesia for one full year of training in Special education. Thus, at the end of three years, this project is expected to have produced two trained and qualified Micronesian Special edu- cation teachers and to have provided a program of Special educa- tion for forty moderately handicapped children (approximately 10 in the Resource Room model and 30 in the Itinerant Teacher model) per year for each of three years. The Palau District would then have the capacity to operate two Special Education Resource Rooms and to conduct two Itinerant Teacher Special Education programs at the same time, or to adapt to any other program model which experience had indicated as being more suitable (Program Proposal for Moderately Handicapped Children, Palau District, 1971, p. 2). 119 The project was funded with EHA Title VI, Part B monies. In providing for one Palauan intern to train at CCM, it was possible for the institutional training to be connected with an actual in-the-field district project. Of particular significance was the fact that other than the Marianas deaf education project, which had begun in 1968, this was the only other district-level activity during this period. Lehrman planned two other deaf education projects before his departure from the territory in mid-1972. Each of these projects, one in the Yap district and one in the Marshalls, used EHA Part VI-B monies and Peace Corps volunteers in counterpart roles. Although these projects were planned during this phase, they did not really become operational until afterwards. Probably the activity that had the broadest effect on special education development in the territory as a whole was the Title III project directed by Carlson. This project had a direct impact on teachers through training at the pre—service level because . one aspect of the program is to integrate the procedures Of Special Education with the overall teacher education program offered by the College. Programs are also underway to train a variety of Special Education support personnel. Besides train- ing teachers and allied support personnel, the Special Education Department is responsible for the development and dissemination of materials and procedures for identifying children with special learning problems and in developing remedial techniques and mate- rials. In general, the Special education component of this teacher education program assumes the major responsibility for training personnel and developing materials to teach handicapped children throughout Micronesia. Within the past two years, much has been accomplished in establishing the program at CCM and delivering services to children throughout Micronesia. Special Education in the Trust Territory seeks to reach hard to teach children by pro- viding the classroom teacher with materials and professional support. 120 The concept of Special Education, which places the primary emphasis on the teacher, differs from traditional stateside models where the emphasis is on the category or handicapping condition. The apparent lack Of effectiveness associated with identifying handicapped children into categories accompanied with the lack of diagnostic personnel within the Trust Territory has made this Shift in emphasis necessary as well as educationally desirable (Community College of Micronesia, 1972, p. 53). AS a result of her on-site visit to CCM, Bateman concluded that the direction of the program is to teach handicapped children in normal settings with regular teachers to the greatest extent possible. Although not specifically described as providing special education services, such Special-education-trained regular teachers will in effect provide special education to handicapped children in the regular classroom. Of particular significance is the fact that: Within our working definition, these children [mildly handi- capped] can function adequately with the regular classroom set- ting ii the teacher can develop an individualized program of instruction. Children classified within the moderate range of disability (20%) will need additional support or special equip- ment and, in some cases, specialized learning centers, in order to learn adequately. Severely handicapped children will, for all intents and purposes, need a specially designed curriculum supported by highly trained teachers (Community College of Micronesia, 1972, p. 53). Thus the CCM training program strongly supported and was linked to the overall Trust Territory Special education philosophy cited earlier. The 1972 report pointed out that a CCM Special education staff- development program was underway. The program was designed to prepare a Micronesian takeover staff comprising the following individuals: a. Coordinator of Training Programs: This individual (presently in his second year of training) is engaged in a four-year training program which involved two years at CCM and two years at the University of Oregon. At the conclusion of this 121 training, the Special Education Training Coordinator will have completed a Master's Degree in the area of Special Education plus two years experience in the position for which he is being trained. b. Coordinator of the Learning Resources Center: This individual, who will be selected in 1972, will be trained in the develop— ment and procedures for special education. It is anticipated that he will also be trained over a four-year period leading ultimately to a Master's Degree. c. Teacher Trainer--Deaf: Plans are presently underway to send two students to a stateside university for training in deaf education. On returning to CCM, a program in deaf education will be initiated to prepare teachers for working with deaf and hard of hearing children. These individuals will also take prime responsibility for developing and testing materials for use in this area. d. Teacher Trainer--Blind: Two individuals will be enrolled in stateside universities beginning September, 1972. After com- pletion of a program in blind education, they will return to CCM and establish a program for preparing teachers to work with blind and partially sighted children. They will also be responsible for the development of instructional materials and procedures. e. Coordinator of Field Support Services: A person holding a Bachelor's Degree will be selected in 1972 to coordinate the Special education activities of the six district teacher edu- cation centers. His prime responsibilities will be dissemi- nating and training as well as overall special education program evaluation. f. District Special Education Trainer: Six individuals (one from each district) will be selected during 1972 and trained at CCM the following year. They will be Bachelor's Degree level persons and will assume the responsibility for special educa- tion training at the district level. They will remain a part of the CCM special education faculty and will return to CCM annually. . . . (Community College of Micronesia, 1972, p. 54). In terms of curriculum and materials, the Community College of Micronesia through its Title III project was showing itself capable of providing leadership: Provisions have been made to recycle all graduates of the Special training programs through a summer session on the CCM campus. This recycling will take place at least every three years for all graduates. All of the above programs are designed to operate until a point of saturation has been reached throughout the Trust Territory. 122 A second prime component of Special Education at the Commu- nity College of Micronesia is the establishment of a resource center. This resource center will provide back up support for the trained personnel in the form of materials, equipment, and procedures for working with all types of handicapped children. The center will also provide materials for teacher training and evaluation. Because of the cultural and language differences, the majority of available published materials are not appropriate for use in Micronesia. The resource center will develop, evaluate and package a wide range of materials designed for use in Micronesia. Equipment has already been procured for Short production runs and packaged in a variety of formats. The resource center will also assist the Training Program Coordinator in developing and packaging materials and procedures for instructing and evaluating the various special education training programs (Community College of Micronesia, 1972, p. 56). In addition to the general project effort of the CCM project under Carlson, one other component of the plan is of Significance during this period. AS part of a University of Oregon Masters in Special Education project, a graduate student, Sue Rice (Moses), developed Direct Instruction programming for three Micronesian 1anguages--Palauan, Ponapean, and Marshallese. This program develop- ment was representative of the strong efforts of the territory's special education program to develop curricular materials that were highly related to the needs of each of the many cultural and lin- guistic groups within the territory. Although the number of documentable children served by Special education during this period was limited to those within the Palau moderately handicapped project and the Marianas deaf project, there is reason to believe that the regular educators who received special education training, either as part of their regular teacher training at the Community College of Micronesia or within the special summer Title VI-D workshop held at the University of Guam, were able to 123 provide services to mildly handicapped children within regular educa- tion settings. Furthermore, providing Elsa Thomas with graduate training in special education administration at the University of Oregon proved to be of tremendous importance in terms of developing locally based leadership within the program. Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communica- tion, and External Technical Assistance-- January 1, 1973, Through December 31, 1974 In July 1972 Ralph Carlson, who had directed the Title III Special education training project at the Community College of Micro- nesia, left the Trust Territory. Subsequently Vicki Utter, an Oregon educator who had served as an instructor in the University-of-Guam- based Trust-Territory precision-teaching special education workshop, accepted an interim appointment as project director. At about the same time the researcher, who was involved in the earlier-described Palau special education project, accepted a position on Guam. Peggy Bennett, a former special education teacher and wife of an American contract teacher in Palau, assumed leadership of that project. As far as can be determined, projects for the hearing impaired in Yap and the Marshall Islands were in operation at the beginning of this period. As stated earlier, David Piercy assumed the role of Trust Territory Coordinator of Special Education in late December 1977. In an interview, Piercy (1977) stated: When I first came in, the largest program was the Marianas deaf program, which was the oldest program. The summer prior to that, the deaf-education program had started in the Marshalls 124 and Yap. There was no formal program in Truk or Ponape . . . although in Ponape they did have a couple itinerants working with the mildly handicapped . . . in Palau there were a couple of people working kind of independently; one direct-instruction person who was running a resource room type of situation and one itinerant. . . . I'm not really sure what he was doing. In response to a question regarding the status of the Commu- nity College of Micronesia Title III special education training pro- ject, Piercy (1977) stated: That would have been Vicky Utter. She was leaving just when I came in. There must have been a 3-4 or 5 month gap in hiring-- leaving of Vicky and hiring of Sue Rice aka Moses. We were able to carry the program on by some strange kinds of maneuverings. I think--I guess the first itinerant group from Truk was train- ing them. A couple of people had been in training for the Marshalls and Palau before that. . . . Ray Lehrman and Ralph Carlson and some others had worked out some ideas as to where they would like to see the program go and I think that had set the stage in terms of there being a behavioral approach, that there would be itinerant personnel, programs would be mainstreamed, not categorical in nature; one problem I had in the long-term plan- ning was the fact that programs pretty much emphasized the mildly handicapped, very little attempt to do any planning for other groups. I almost get the feeling that the deaf ed programs were because there was lots of pressure within that area, hearing impairments being rather large in number. But there was a bit of indication in planning, good planning. . . . I saw myself largely as a program coordinator . . . a program coordinator and getting into teacher training to some extent. In terms of mainland training, Piercy (1977) indicated: After doing some budgeting and other kinds of things, I found out we had three students on the mainland going to school [plans initiated by Lehrman and Carlson]. So, on a trip . . . I met Elsa Thomas and Sue Moses. Sue wrote at the time she was interested in the training coordinator's position at CCM. . . . I think I convinced Elsa that time that he should at least con- sider coming up to work with me and potentially take the posi- tion when my contract was over. . . . Sue was finally hired as the CCM special education training coordinator. In April 1973, Piercy reported: The second major source of funding, EHA-Part D, is earmarked for training of personnel. The following programs are presently being financed from Part D: 125 1. CCM program to train 60 second-year students in Special Education. 2. 3 students attending college in Oregon--one in Blind Educa- tion [Kangichy Welle], one in Deaf Education [William Eperiam], and one in Special Education Administration [Elsa Thomas]. 3. The itinerant teacher training program at CCM. (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). In discussing the ESEA Title III Project (15 percent--Special Education), Piercy stated: The project has been granted to CCM and will be implemented this coming year with modifications. The project is now designed to develop materials to help teachers diagnose and remediate prob- lems in the regular classroom. . . . The project has four phases: (1) assessment of needs; (2) diagnosis of specific problem areas and evaluation of diagnostic and remedial materials and procedure. . . Representatives from Ponape and Palau will come to CCM to help develop materials and procedures. . . . In addition, this summer it is hoped that 3 Graduate Interns, University of Oregon, can be procured to offer technical assistance in the development of diagnostic and remedial materials in the areas of reading, mathematics, and non-adaptive behavior (Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference, 1973, unpaged). This plan for materials deve10pment, which had been outlined in an earlier period, was seen as an ongoing part of the program's develOp- ment. The Review of Special Education Activities, June 15, 1973, contained the following items related to training: Peter Elechuus is just completing his training in Oregon, so that he can begin his work as the Coordinator of the Associate Special Education Instructional Materials Center (ASEIMC) in Palau. The cost of his training is being paid by the Northwest SEIMC [Special Education Instruction Materials Center] and the Northwest Regional Resource Center, both at the University of Oregon in Eugene. His training includes some of the following: teacher-made materials; the use of media and materials; basic terminology of special education; basic assessment instruments; and some practicum experiences. He has been there for about Six weeks. 126 The Special Education Itinerant Teachers Training Program at CCM is in its final week. Susan Moses arrived the first of April to replace Vicky Utter, and the "itinerants" arrived at CCM on April 30. Their course for the final phase of training empha- sized techniques of determining academic Skill weakness, plan- ning for remediation, developing materials, techniques for train- ing teachers in using the materials, evaluating student progress, and working with specific non-adaptive behavior problems. Five Students have been particlpgtlngi Mike Ngirairikl Palau District Nick Figar - Yap District Haruo Yeskei - Truk District Endy Mathew - Truk District Switer Eter - Truk District The itinerant program will be continued next fall at CCM. The specifics of that program will be coming to each District Direc- tor of Education very soon. Visitation of the Deaf Programs in nguro, Ebeye,_Yap and Saipan In February, Piercy started communicating with the Southwest Media Center for the Deaf, to discuss ways it might be useful to our deaf programs. As a result of those discussions, three rep- resentatives visited the programs. Marianas district and Head- quarters Education each paid for the travel and per diem of one person, while the Media Center, Northwest SEIMC, and the North- west Regional Resource Center, split the costs of the third. The consultants were Dr. Richard Petre, Dr. Jonathan Curtis, and Mrs. Dorothy McCarr. Areas discussed were planning and manage- ment needs, program needs, deaf curriculum identification, evalua- tion, and in-service education. We will be using the services of the Media Center in the future and, similarly to the Regional Resource Center, they have budgeted some funds for technical assistance and consultation to the Trust Territory. Summer In-Service Programs 1. Teacher Training--Deaf Education Arrangements are being made to hold an in-service training program in Saipan, from July 22 through August 10, for all the Teachers of the Deaf in the Trust Territory. Mr. and Mrs. McCarr will be conducting the training. Dorothy McCarr is a Curriculum Consultant for the Oregon School for the Deaf in Salem, Oregon, and next year will be on the Staff of the Southwest Media Center. Her husband is on the faculty of Lewis and Clark College in Portland, Oregon, and is a trainer of teachers of the Deaf. The current planning iS to follow this up with more training during the Christmas holidays and next summer. 127 2. Truk District AS part of the Truk District Summer program, Mr. William Sewell, Special Education Coordinator in Truk, has arranged for several courses in special education to be Offered to the teach- ers of the district. These courses will be taught by Bill Sewell, and Haruo Yeskei, Endy Mathew, and Switer Eter. The classes will deal with educational planning for the moderately and mildly handicapped in the regular classroom. 3. Marshalls District Aliksa Andrike, Special Education Itinerant Teacher in Majuro, will be teaching a course at MARTEC to regular teachers this summer. The title of the course will be Solving,Classroom Problems and will deal with academic and behavior problems. 4. Marianas District There is a possibility that Aliksa Andrike will be invited to Saipan to conduct an in-service program for some of the teach- ers of OLEAI School in San Jose. The course would be Similar to the one in the Marshalls. 5. Palau District Arrangements for an in-service session in Palau conducted by Kathleen Liberty of the Regional Resource Center are being com- pleted. The training would include one representative from each school, and last from July 12 through July 18. Content would include defining educational problems, developing remedial plans, data keeping and evaluation. Activities at CCM The first phase of the Title III Special Education Project at CCM will be underway, beginning June 24. Three Graduate Interns from the West Coast will be working this Summer, develop- ing diagnostic and remedial packets for field testing this fall in Palau and Ponape. As they are revised, they will be tested in additional districts. The interns are: 1. Marilyn Dapses--University of Oregon, who will be working in Non-adaptive Behavior 2. Marc Levitt--University of California, who will be working in Mathematics 3. Cindy Payton--Central Washington State College, who will be working in Reading Three students who have been studying Special Education in Oregon will be returning this Summer: 1. Elsa Thomas has been studying Special Education Adminis- tration at the University of Oregon and tentatively will be at Headquarters Education in September. 2. Kangichy Welle has been studying Blind Education at Oregon College of Education. 128 3. William Eperiam has also been at Oregon College of Edu- cation studying Deaf Education. in the fall. Both are slated to be at CCM (Review of Special Education Activities, June 1973, unpaged). The preceding quotation clearly illustrates a significant increase in training activity as well as in Special education manpower. The item relating to materials is indicative of efforts to provide Specialized materials relative to the needs of handicapped children in the Trust Territory. Summer 1973 represented an acceleration period in Special edu- cation training. The hearing impaired training program alluded to earlier became operational, as indicated by the following: James and DorothngcCarr arrived Saipan, July 19, and are organizing for the Deaf Education Workshop beginning July 23 and running through August 10. The participants in that workshop which probably is being offered through Community College of Micronesia Extension are as follows: Cecilia Camacho Faustina Ada Antonia Okawa Evans Imetengel Ignatia Guotinan Francesca Gurungin Ary Kumos Bob Coldeen Hilda Libokmeto Inez Joseph Teruo Kaminanga Assisting the McCarr's in College of Education in the fall. Marianas Marianas Marianas Palau Yap Yap Truk Truk, PCV Majuro, Marshalls Ebeye, Marshalls Marshalls the program will be Deliver Salle, a student who will be studying Special Education at the Oregon The training will emphasize techniques of teaching language to deaf children, individualiza- tion, and materials preparation (Review of Special Education Activities, July 1973, unpaged). The focus on deaf education was a major exception to training that otherwise generally related to mildly or moderately handicapped children. 129 Truk district, which until this period had had little or no development in special education, seemed to be moving ahead very rapidly, as indicated by the following account of training and staff- expansion activity: In Truk, the following two courses are being taught by Switer Eter, Endy Mathew, Haruo Yeskei, and Bill Sewell. 1. "Introduction to Special Education": It deals with the techniques of diagnosing and remediating classroom academic and behavioral problems. 2. "Children's Problem in Visual and Auditory Perception" dealing with reading readiness and the identification of children who have problems with either auditory or visual perception skills. PEACE CORPS IN TRUK Truk district has just received three Peace Corps volunteers who will be working in Special Education. They arrived in Truk on June 25 and will begin working with Special Education in August. Mike Holdwick, Mildly Handicapped Teacher Trainer Dan Nelson, Mildly Handicapped Teacher Trainer Bob Coldeen, Deaf Education Teacher Trainer All three will be working under Bill Sewell, also a Peace Corps volunteer, and Coordinator of Special Education for Truk District. Bob Coldeen will be attending the Workshop in Saipan for the deaf teachers (Review Of Special Education Activities, July 1973, unpaged). Yap district, which began a hearing impaired program with Peace Corps assistance in the last period, has now increased its special education services by adding another project, as well as by expanding the existing hearing impaired program. Of particular interest is the fact that this new Yap district project is the only documented instance within the Trust Territory of the use of tele- communications (ham radio) to provide special education services to a remote area. 130 SPECIAL EDUCATION IN YAP Each month a Special Education Project from one of the dis- tricts will be reviewed in this space. Yap has two projects which are summarized below: 1. Special Education and Individualization in an Outer Island School. The objectives of this project are to provide inte- grated Special Education tO learning-handicapped children in the normal classroom environment: to provide consistant [gig] consultation services to the two classroom teachers, one of whom has already received some advanced training in diagnosis and remediation (yf learning disabilities; to individualize the instruction of all students in an integrated classroom in all academic areas; (Because of the isolation of Fassarai School, this consultation will be carried out via written communication and Ham radio). A two-week training session will be conducted on Fassarai before the class begins in the Fall. On entering school, each child will be evaluated to establish specific areas of difficulties, then placed in individualized academic programs. Instruction will be individualized, activities being based on regular measurements of learning behaviors and adjusted according to need. Consultation with special education per- sonnel at the Community College of Micronesia and Head- quarters will be carried out via Ham radio. AS Specific areas of difficulty arise, the Special Education Teacher trained in educational diagnosis will do a more complete evaluation. Data will be recorded on each student which will Show student progress on a daily basis in all academic areas and in other areas of need. Pre-post criterion evaluations will be performed on each student. Areas and extent of handicap- ping conditions along with educational plans will be logged. A log of consultations will be kept indicating areas of con- cern and specific areas of consultation provided. Yap Deaf Project-~An integrated classroom. The Yap Deaf Project for Fiscal Year 1974 will be an effort to establish education for physically handicapped children as a task that can be accomplished as a part of our regular elementary program. Objectives will be to integrate a group of deaf children with a class of normal hearing children; to increase language skills of both deaf and normal children in Yapese and in oral and written English; to have both groups learn signing as a common means of communication; and to provide individualized academic programs for each child. Evaluations in increasinggsocial awareness: Narrative reports will'be kept by teachers throughout the school year describing student interaction. Evaluations in establishing Signing as a common means of communication: Individual tests will be given to students and parents and results recorded. 131 Activities in language usagg: Increase the reading vocabulary of each child by at least 20 words: provide con- centrated Speech lessons to increase the articulations of the children. Activities in increasing social awareness: Expose deaf children to normal children by integration; provide field trips to community locations; provide for group work and play activities. Activities to teach signing as a common means of communication: hold at least a weekly meeting with parents of deaf children; teach children at least 90 sign words and concepts. Evaluations in Language Usage: Standard reading tests used in the elementary program will be administered to students at the beginning and end of the program: speech progress of deaf children will be measured by accepted deaf- education instruments. (Special Education in Yap, 1973, unpaged). For school year 1973-74, the Marianas Department of Education continued to operate its deaf education program, which served approxi- mately 12 children with a staff composed of two locally based teach- ers and one locally based teacher aide. The Yap Department of Education continued its deaf education program, which had been initiated the previous year and staffed by a Peace Corps volunteer and a Micronesian counterpart. The Palau District Department of Education worked at developing two resource rooms, where children were able to attend a half day and receive help with specific learn- ing problems. In addition, the Palau program provided some consul- tative services to regular teachers, who in turn provided direct services to handicapped students, using reassignments and specialized help. The Truk District Department of Education used the services of a Peace Corps volunteer to develop district-level special educa- tion plans, which focused heavily on employing three returning Trukese itinerant Special education trainees who received training at the Community College of Micronesia. Ponape District Department of 132 Education focused much of its efforts on English and vernacular language program development for children showing academic and behav- ior problems. The Marshall Islands District Department of Education operated deaf education classrooms in Majuro and Ebeye. Additionally, Majuro employed an itinerant teacher (trained at CCM the preceding year) to serve as a resource to regular teachers in dealing with mildly and moderately handicapped children (TTPI, 1974c, p. 137). Data regarding the specific cost of each district-level pro- gram are unavailable. However, the total allocation of federal Part B monies for FY 1974 was $115,000; $35,000 of this was allocated to support the administration-coordination efforts of the Office of the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator. It is likely that the balance was used by district-level programs according to need. Under Public Law 93-380, Part 8, FY 1975 funding for the Trust Territory totaled $150,000. The allocations were as follows: Administration $ 15,966.00 Marianas 18,078.00 Hearing and Vision Consultation 19,000.00 Palau 28,545.00 Yap 12,828.00 Truk 14,699.00 Ponape 22,243.00 Marshalls 18,641.00 Total $150,000.00 Funding to the Marianas supported the ongoing hearing-impaired pro- gram. There iS indication of some focus on integrating children pre- viously taught in a self-contained room into regular classrooms. The Marianas also deve10ped a pilot project in relation to the provision of training for young developmentally disabled children (ages three 133 to five). The Yap District Department of Education continued its deaf education program, but began integration efforts by teaming a teacher of the hearing impaired with a regular teacher, then using both teachers in providing instructional services to an integrated group of hearing and partially hearing students. Palau District Department of Education continued expansion of resource rooms and itinerant teachers. During the year Palau became the "first district to routinely develop special education for referred children" (TTPI, 1975c, p. 76). During the year, Truk District Department of Education used its allocated resources in part to provide consultative/itinerant service to regular classroom teachers. An upper-elementary-level resource room was developed at a large main lagoon school. Attempts were made to establish services in outer island lagoon areas. Ponape District Department of Education continued already established ser- vices provided to low-performing intermediate students. Additionally, a program was initiated to provide special education services to a group of students who suffered vision impairment as the result of a hereditary disease found only in a particular group of islanders. During the year the Marshall Islands District Department of Education expanded its itinerant teacher service so that it was available to all schools on Majuro and Ebeye (TTPI, 1975c, pp. 76-77). According to best available data 361 children with varying handicaps received special education services during the 1973-74 academic year. . . . During the 1974-75 year 558 children will receive special education services either through work in inte- grated classrooms, placement in special classes, or through 134 itinerant services. This represents about 19 percent of the children of mandatory school age who should be eligible for services (TTPI, 1975c, p. 76). Training efforts during this period were of several types. As indicated earlier, some of the direct service activities involved Peace Corps volunteers, who trained Micronesian counterparts (Yap and Truk) or in one case the Headquarters contract person, who trained a Micronesian counterpart (Palau). In addition to these on-the-job training activities, the Title III regular educators' training took place at CCM at the beginning of this period (described earlier). A Title III materials-development project, which began in April 1973, was continued throughout this period. This project was operated in conjunction with efforts to establish the Associate Special Education Instructional Materials (district level) Services (ASIMCS) and was based at CCM. The project was designed as a three- year materials-development program. The following is a general des- cription of the project: The goal is to enable mildly and moderately handicapped children to optimize their learning and growth in elementary schools in academic and social learning. Mildly handicapped (Hard to Teach) and Moderately handicapped (Very Hard to Teach) handicapped children are defined in the Trust Territory as chil- dren who have marked difficulty in learning and/or behaving effectively in comparison with their age and grade mates as a result Of known or implicit handicapping condition. In order to optimize the learning of moderately and mildly handicapped children in the regular classroom, teaching mate- rials must be available that will enable the trained classroom teacher to identify, remediate, and evaluate progress in the academic and social behavior of the handicapped elementary school child. This program will be to develop, test, improve, produce, and obtain such teaching material. Teacher support packages will be developed in the areas of reading, math and social behavior. Also, in order to produce and disseminate these materials the ASEIMC at CCM will be reinitiated, and 135 the first steps in the development of centers in Palau and Majuro will begin. Necessarily the development of such materials will require several phases. The first phase would be largely in the develop- ment of materials and their field testing. The second would be in the larger use and the training of selected teachers. The final stage would be in the in-service training of teachers in each district (ESEA Title III, 1973, p. 6). There is no indication of any effort during this period to develop much in the way of specialized curriculum for the handicapped; efforts appeared to be aimed at providing the necessary remediation services to enable the handicapped to be educated in the regular cur- riculum in regular settings. Period IV: Micronesian Leadership-- January 1, 1975, Through December 31, 1977 When the first Micronesian coordinator (Thomas) assumed the position of Headquarters Coordinator of Special Education, service delivery programs for academic year 1974—75 were already operating. Thomas then focused on assisting districts to develop and implement plans for the 1975-76 school year and subsequently for the 1976-77 school year. Plans were developed and implemented in each of the districts. There is indication that these district plans, which became programs, were designed in a manner that would allow for expansion of services by Simply building upon models that had already been established within the districts, i.e., itinerant/consultant who provides services to mildly and moderately handicapped children in regular settings, resource rooms, etc. Although several districts began to initiate plans for services for the severely handicapped, except for a Title VI-C preschool program in Truk and the deaf 136 education program in the Northern Marianas, there is little indica- tion of actual delivery of service to the severely handicapped during this period. However, from a direct service point of view, the Truk severely handicapped early childhood project is particularly note- worthy. It was the first and to date the only Title VI-C preschool project funded in the Trust Territory. It was also the first project that was able to document parental involvement. Limited information indicates that it was particularly successful in eliciting such involvement. The parents of the children in the programs are impressed with the progress some children have made and they have shown a great deal of interest and involvement in project activities. At least one parent (or family member) accompanies the child to class every day. A workshop for the parents is conducted by the teachers every Friday and the parents are actively partici- patipg in it (Truk District Department of Education, 1976, AS indicated, the Truk project represented the first major attempt to provide services for severely handicapped children. Sig- nificantly, its federal funding base provided for two years Of operations; however, because of its successful Operation, in May 1977 the project was able to secure funds from other sources (Title I ESEA) and continue Operations. Public Law 93-380 and subsequently Public Law 94-142 also required the development of state (territorial) plans. Within these plans the territory's Department of Education pledged itself to prO- vide a free appropriate public education for all handicapped children. Subsequently, these plans were approved and, as pointed out earlier, $578,813 was allocated in FY 1977, an increase of nearly 300 percent 137 over what had been available the previous year. More than $750,000 was available for FY 1978. Directly related to service delivery in this period was Project SEARCH. This project was required by virtue of the federal guidelines established in Public Law 93-380, through which the state (territorial) plan received funding. During this reporting year a major project appropriately entitled Project SEARCH, was carried out to identify handi- capped children in order to plan programs of assistance for them. Unfortunately the degree of expertise of SEARCH field personnel limited their ability to identify with certain handi- capped children much below the age of six years. However, approximately 4,500 children were identified as having handi- capping disabilities, most of them Of mandatory school age (TTPI, 1976b, p. 104). In this regard, the Amended Annual Program Plan for Fiscal Year 1978 stated: The Trust Territory at this time is still trying to reach all the children identified in the SEARCH Project which was conducted in FY 1975 and FY 1976. Since the islands are very small, the Trust Territory is not planning on renewing its child find teams as there are no new areas to cover. Secondly, the Trust Territory does not see any logic in continuing child find when its waiting list is still considerably long (TTPI, 1977b, p. 46). The preceding statement clearly pointed out the Trust Terri- tory's recognition of an inability to provide full educational ser- vices to all handicapped children. Training activity during this period was centered at the Community College of Micronesia, primarily within two federally funded projects; one was entitled Special Education Manpower Development--Community College of Micronesia and the other Preparation of Regular Educators tO Work with the Handicapped in an Integrated 138 Classroom. Each of these projects was initially funded in the latter half of 1974 under Public Law 91—230, Title VI, Part 0 (as amended by P.L. 93-380, Education Amendments of 1974). Each was renewed for funding for an additional year. Preparation of Regular Educators to Work with the Handicapped in an Integrated Classroom received funding of $40,000 annually for two years. This project bore some similarity to the earlier edu- cation training component within the regular teacher training program at the Community College of Micronesia. However, this project was different in that it focused on providing in-service training to employed elementary teachers, during which they remained in their regular position. The following excerpt describes the project in detail. The Regular Educator's Project is designed to provide regu- lar teachers competencies essential for working with handicapped children in an integrated classroom. It is a two year project-- federally funded from the Office of Education Bureau of Handi- capped under Title VI, Part D. This project has two (2) main goals. The primary goal is to build up regular classroom teacher competencies for teaching handicapped children. The secondary goal is to train and cer- tify two (2) trainers from each district. The project was first implemented by a pair of travelling trainers and five (5) local district trainers. The pair of travelling trainers were moved from district to district for the entire training program to assist and supervise the district trainers during the district workshops. . . Every Regular Educator's workshop will cOme in two (2) parts. The first part is the lecture, in which the participants are required to attend the class for lecture. The second part is the practicum, where the participants will apply the skills acquired from the lecture to a target student or a group of tar- get students (Regular Educators Project--Facilitator Manual, 1976, p. 2 . A manual for participants was prepared. 139 AS can be seen from the following chapter titles, the strong behavioral focus of Trust Territory Special education clearly was apparent in this project. Chapter Title I. Overview 11. Profiles/Screening Referral of Exceptional Children III. Pinpointing Behavior IV. Monitoring Behavior V. Behavior Management Techniques VI. Classroom Management VII. Introduction to Task Analysis VIII. Academic Assessment/Task Analysis IX. Academic Assessment/Administration and Interpretation X. Behavior Objectives XI. Instruction XII. Evaluation During its two years of existence, this project brought district-level special education training to approximately 125 regular teachers in the various districts. The second major project funded under Public Law 91-230, Title VI, Part 0 (as amended by P.L. 93-380, Education Amendments of 1974), was Special Education Manpower Development-—Community College of Micronesia. This project initially was funded for one year, and subsequently was renewed for a second year. The funding level was approximately $30,000. Again this project bore a strong relation- ship to the earlier Title III training project, in that it tended to focus to some extent on preservice and/or Community College of Micronesia based training. It differed significantly from the earlier program in that it also had a small severely handicapped teacher training component, as well as expanded teacher training components relating to mildly and moderately handicapped children. This program, which 140 operated for two years, was designed to meet the following general objectives: 1. To train five (5) Special Education Itinerant Teachers to minimum or above competency in Skills to work directly with the moderately handicapped and in skills to provide training and consultation services to regular classroom teachers. To train three (3) Special Education Itinerant Teachers to minimum or above competency in Skills to work directly with the moderately handicapped and to teach cooperatively with one to three other teachers in a small island school setting. To train two (2) Special Education Itinerant Teachers to minimum or above competency in skills to work with severely handicapped and in skills to provide training and consulta- tion services to regular teachers. To train one (1) Special Skills Teacher to minimum or above competency in Skills to teach severely handicapped within an integrated situation. To provide pre-service trainin to 40 regular education trainees (CCM Graduating Class) so they are able to provide services to the mildly handicapped in the classroom. To implement a plan to complete the development Of a special education department that has the flexibility not only to provide the districts with Short term training needs but to also allow students to receive an AS degree in Elementary Education with a major in Special Education. (Report on Special Education Manpower Development, 1977, unpaged). 1976 a for FY (T The 19 Short-term workshops also took place during the period. The nnual report indicated the following Special education workshops 1976. Regular Educators Summer Workshop: 7/7-8/29 Visually Handicapped Workshop: 7/14-31 Deaf and Hard of Hearing Workshop: 7/21—31 Administrators Workshop: 8/25-9/5 Itinerant Teachers Workshop: 8/15-30 Regular Educators Workshops: 9/5-11/2; 11/5-12/20; 1/5-2/27 Management Input Meeting: 1/27-30 Administrators Conference: 3/1-4 Regular Educator Workshop: 4/3-5/7 Pan Pacific Conference: 4/29-5/2 TPI, 1976b, p. 258). 76 Annual Report to the United Nations also stated: 141 Every student graduating from the Community College of Micro- nesia with a degree in Elementary Education takes at least two courses in Special Education. During this reporting year, 17 Special Education Itinerant teachers completed training at CCM in diagnostic-remedial-evaluative techniques and teacher consul- tation skills and were placed in Special Education programs in their home districts (TTPI, 1976b, p. 105). The 1977 report indicated that: Another twenty Special Education Itinerant teachers com- pleted training at the Community College of Micronesia in diagnostic-remedial-eva1uative techniques and teacher consul- tation Skills, and were placed in Special Education programs in their home districts (TTPI, 1977c, p. 108). The impact of the ongoing teacher training activities at CCM was further enhanced by the establishment of an overall special educa- tion management system for which training was provided in 1977. A major accomplishment this year was the development of the Trust Territory Special Education management system. Operating procedures for all Special Education persons were specified and standardized. Forms were devised for evaluation, reporting, parental permission, referral. . . . A week-long workshop for fifty Special Education personnel in the proper use of these materials was held at the Community College of Micronesia's Special Education Department in August of this year (TTPI, 1977c, p. 108). Assistance in the training workshops, as well as in the actual development of the management system and its material components, was provided through federally funded technical assistance from the North- west Regional Resource Center at the University of Oregon. That Center provided additional training by contracting the researcher to conduct workshops on an orientation to Public Law 94-142 for Special educators and other related public agency personnel in Ponape, Truk, and the Marshalls districts. These workshops were conducted during the fall of 1977. 142 During this period, materials deve10pment was focused on the new Title III project, which had begun during the last period at the Community College of Micronesia. Technical assistance in the develop- ment of materials was also provided by the Northwest Regional Resource Center for Handicapped Children, as indicated in the following intro- duction to the Educational Needs Assessment--Administrator'S Manual (1976) developed during the period: This educational needs assessment was developed by the Northwest Regional Resource Center for Handicapped Children. The intent of this instrument is to pinpoint specific skills and skill levels in academic areas: reading, spelling, language, concepts, math, social skills, and self-help skills. . . . It is designed for use by any teacher or professional involved with the field of education. Administration of this tool should take approximately one hour (p. 2). In addition to actual direct assistance in developing materials for both assessment and related instruction, the Northwest Regional Resources Center conducted two learning resources conferences during this period for states and territories within the Center's service area. The first, conducted in December 1975, was entitled Full Edu- cational Services for Handicapped Children and Youth, and focused heavily on methods and materials relating to the severely handicapped. Nine special educators, including the Headquarters coordinator and the Community College of Micronesia training coordinator, attended the conference. The second conference was held in December 1976 and provided further in-depth focus on materials and service delivery for the severely handicapped. Nine special educators from the Trust Ter— ritory attended this conference. Involvement of Trust Territory special educators in these conferences quite likely added support to 143 territory plans for implementing educational services for the severely handicapped. Throughout this period, special education curriculum develop- ment continued to be a matter of simply adapting the already estab- lished academic curricula in the territory's public schools. The one possible exception was the efforts to provide services for the severely handicapped. In this relation, the Educational Needs Assessment-- Administrator's Manual (1976) evaluated nonacademic behavior as follows: Dressing, Eating, Toileting, Personal H iene, Money Skills, Living Skills, Social Interaction, and'Fine/ ross Motor Skills: With the exception of Social Interaction and Living Skills, these Skills are arranged in developmental order, making the instruc- tional level fairly easy to ascertain. The Administrator is to mark a "+" or a "-" to indicate attainment of various skills (p. 2). Thus it seems that as special education in the Trust Territory moved to initiate services for the severely handicapped, self-help Skills came to be viewed as part of the curriculum. Near the end of this period, the 30th Annual Report to the United Nations stated that "this brings to about ninety the number of Special Education teachers and specialists working in the field across the territory" (TTPI, 1977c, p. 108). Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Territorial Special Education Development The Initial Period: January 1, 1967, Through December 31, 1969 During this period, legislation was passed by the Congress of Micronesia and approved by the High Commissioner relative to the establishment of a system of education. 144 An act to establish a system of education in the Trust Ter- ritory and to repeal Chapter 9 (the earlier promulgated education code) of the Trust Territory Code relating to education and for other purposes.(Approved [High Commissioner] October 10, 1969, as Public Law 3C-36) (TTPI, 1970c, p. 177). Although the new code contained no special provisions relative to the education of handicapped children, its provisions established a gen- eral frame of reference for all of the Territory's educational activity. In relation to educational policy, the code stated: It is hereby declared and found to be the policy of the Trust Territory Government to provide for an educational system in Micronesia which shall enable the citizens of the Territory to participate fully in the progressive development of the islands as well as to become familiar with the Pacific community and the world. To this end the purpose of education in the Territory shall be to develop the human resources of Micronesia in order to prepare the people for self-government and participation in economic and social development, to function as a unifying agent and to bring to the people a knowledge of their islands, the economy, the government and the peOple who inhabit the Terri- tory; and to provide Micronesians with skills which will be required in the development of the Territory. (These skills include professional and vocational as well as social and politi- cal requirements) (TTPI, 1970a, p. 454). Although the statement did not specifically include the handi- capped, it did provide for citizens of the Territory and thus could be presumed to include the handicapped. However, as with similar statements found in other state laws, it did not support any area committees. Another section of the code related to attendance and stated that: Attendance at a public or nonpublic school shall be required of all children between the ages of six and fourteen inclusive, or until graduation from elementary school, unless excluded from school or excepted from attendance by the District Director of Education. For the purpose of beginning school, a child Shall be admitted at the beginning of a school year if he has attained the age of six on or before September thirtieth of the year involved (TTPI, 1970a, p. 462). 145 Whereas the code mandated universal elementary education, the exclusionary provision that stated "unless excluded from school or excepted from attendance by the District Director of Education" seemed to provide a basis for possible exclusion of handicapped indi- viduals. The code made no further reference to this provision, thereby in effect giving sole exclusionary power to the District Director of Education. Other provisions within the new code provided for the establishment of a territory-wide board of education, district- level boards, and an education budgetary process that would involve district legislatures as well as the Congress of Micronesia. Of particular importance was a section of the code relating to curriculum and materials, which stated that The Director of Education shall provide for the teaching of English language in all schools, and shall establish minimum standards for curriculum development and content of Territory- wide courses at appropriate levels to be used in the several districts to assure uniform levels of achievement. He shall encourage instruction in the child's own native language, cus- toms and culture at both the elementary and secondary level (TTPI, 1970a, p. 462). Although this section of the code seemed to establish a com- mon set of standards for the entire Territory, it also encouraged what were, in effect, localized programs relating to language and culture. It is within the general framework of this code that special education developed in the Trust Territory during the period under study. 146 Period II: Planning and Initiating Training and Service--January 1, 1979, Through December 31, 1972 During this period the researcher, while employed by the territorial government as a Special education specialist within the Palau special education project described earlier, was asked to advise the Palau District Director of Education about what was viewed as a Special education problem. The situation involved a high school student who had been convicted of a crime and was sentenced to the local jail for six months. The district judge, an American politi- cal appointee, had ordered that the student be allowed to leave the jail to attend classes at Palau High School. The District School Board advised the Director of Education to exclude the student because he was in jail; therefore it was obvious that his behavior was such that he should not be allowed to attend school. The Sheriff found it impossible to provide transportation for the prisoner/student; hence the court's order of school attendance was not obeyed. However, it was quite clear that the Palau District Board of Education tried to prevent the prisoner/student's attendance to the extent of request- ing the District Director of Education to exclude him from school, based on the Trust Territory Education Code. Subsequently, a Palauan Congressman introduced a bill into the Congress of Micronesia, which read as follows: No person convicted of a crime and serving a duly imposed prison sentence Shall attend any elementary or secondary school while at the same time serving his prison sentence, nor shall attendance at any elementary or secondary school be prescribed for an individual serving such prison sentence; . . . and pro- vided that this Section shall not apply to an individual serving 147 a prison sentence who is required to undergo or to participate in a program of rehabilitation as part of his prison sentence (Congress of Micronesia, Fourth, 1972, unpaged). Although the Congress of Micronesia did not approve this legislation, the situation that brought about its introduction into the Congress and the language of the bill itself forbidding schooling and yet allowing it for purposes of rehabilitation indicated the mixed feelings held by many in the territory toward those in need of special services. Period III: Expansion of Direct Service Through Increased Training, Communica- tion, and External Technical Assistance-- January l, 1973, Through December 31, 1974 During this period an initial effort was made to pass territory-wide special education legislation. This initial legisla- tion was introduced by members of Congress (Micronesia) at about the same time the Department of Education was encouraging the adminis- tration (Office of the High Commissioner) to introduce Special educa- tion legislation. The legislation introduced by Congressmen Borja, Pangelian, and Kendall attempted to define a "special child": A child between the ages of five and twenty-one who by reason of one or more of the following conditions is unable to receive reasonable benefit from regular education: long-term physical impairment or illness; significant limited intellec- tual capacity; significant identifiable emotional or communica- tive disorder; or speech disorder. The term also means those children between the ages of five and twenty-one whose presence in the educational program is or may be detrimental to the edu- cation of others, and must therefore receive modified or supple- mentary assistance and services in order to function and learn (Congress of Micronesia, Fifth, 1974, p. 2). The proposed legislation also contained provisions for an administrative function such as reporting to the Congress of 148 Micronesia, managing instructional materials and in-service training, and applying for, obtaining, and managing funds from the United States government. The Headquarters Coordinator of Special Education responded to the proposed law in a memorandum from the Director of Education to the Chairman of the Education and Social Affairs Committee. Part of that response was as follows: There are several concerns we have regarding its content, which does not allow us to support the bill in its entirety as it is currently written. We would like to express the fol- lowing concerns and recommendations. 1. No comprehensive search and identification of handicapped children has been accomplished in the Trust Territory and [it] is needed in order to establish need for and approp- riate planning of program. It is the plan of this depart- ment to conduct such a search during the 1974-75 school year. We recommend that a section be added to the Senate Bill that would require the Department to conduct such a search, reporting its interim reports to the Congress and High Com- missioner at the next regular session of Congress with final results in 1976. We see difficulty in the definition of "special child" as stated in Section 3(1). It is our belief that definitions Of handicapped children Should be in terms of functional des- criptions that lead to appropriate educational and medical programming, not in traditional categorical terms. Until we have the results of our identification procedure we cannot establish such definitions. We recommend that an interim definition of "handicapped" or "Special child" be adopted until 1977 when such defini- tions can be developed based on specific data about the functioning of handicapped children. That definition would read "a child (aged 0-21) who because of visual, auditory, language, behavioral, crippling, other health problems, and/ or any other condition as defined by the Department, cannot function in a normal school environment without assist- ance. . . ." The Department of Education has also been in the process of preparing Special Education Legislation. Attached is a copy of a proposal for legislation that has been sent to the High Comis- sioner with an endorsement by the Department of Health Services. The above statements have attempted to integrate Senate Bill #243 and the Proposed Administration Bill (Director of Education, 1974, unpaged). 149 Senate Bill #243, discussed in the aforementioned memorandum, was subsequently integrated into the proposed administration bill. The integrated bill was introduced into the Congress of Micronesia twice during this period; however, it failed on both occasions. In describing these two legislative attempts, it was stated in the Amended Annual Program Plan for Fiscal Year 1976 that: Legislation specifically designed for the needs of the han- dicapped has been introduced twice into the Congress of Micro- nesia but failed both times. Although both houses agreed with the content of the bill, passage is made difficult with legis- lativg [appropriation] required for implementation (TTPI, 1975a, p. 35 . With some modification, this twice-attempted legislation became law during the next period and is discussed in greater detail in the following section of this report. Period IV: Micronesian Leadership-- January 1, 1975, Through December 31, 1977 On April 12, 1977, J. Boyd Mackenzie, Acting High Commissioner of the TTPI, signed into law the Trust Territory Special Education Act of 1977. The Congress of Micronesia had passed this act in basically the same form as introduced by the administration. The act, which became Public Law 7-55, stated that: The Congress of Micronesia, recognizing the obligation of the Trust Territory Government under Section 9 of Title 1 of the Trust Territory Code that "free elementary education shall be provided throughout the Trust Territory" and further recog- nizing the Obligation of the Trust Territory Government to pro- vide educational Opportunities to all children which will enable them to lead fulfilling and productive lives, hereby declares that it is the policy of the Trust Territory Government and the purpose of this act to provide means for educating handicapped children and that insofar as is practicable, handicapped children 150 shall receive necessary supplementary services in regular class- rooms. To this end, the services of Special education personnel shall be utilized within the regular programs Offered by the Department of Education both in rendering services directly to children and in providing consultative services to regular class- room teachers (Congress of Micronesia, Seventh, 1977, p. 214). The law defined "handicapped children" as including: . . each person under the age of twenty-one years who, because of visual, auditory, language, behavioral, physical, or other health problems or any other conditions as determined by the Director of Education, upon consultation with the Director of Health Services and the Special Education Coordinator, cannot function in a normal school environment without assistance (Congress of Micronesia, Seventh, 1977, pp. 214-15). The law, by its statement of policy, clearly reflected the philOSOphy of providing services to handicapped children within as nearly normal an environment as possible. Furthermore, the definition of "handicapped children," contained within the law, did not focus on Specific disabling conditions; rather, it described the child in terms of inability to function without assistance in a normal school environment. This general[Nfilosophicposition was furthered by the law's definition of special education, which stated that special edu- cation "means instructional or other services necessary to assist the handicapped children in taking advantage of, or responding to educa- tional programs and opportunities" (Congress of Micronesia, Seventh, 1977, p. 215). Public Law 7-55 established the Office of Special Education within the Department of Education, and provided that that office should be headed by a Coordinator of Special Education. Furthermore, it gave the Director of Education the responsibility of using the office Of the Coordinator to establish a Territorial Special 151 Education Plan and to provide an annual report to the Congress on the status of services to handicapped children within the territory. The law also specified that "each district shall report to the Direc- tor of Education the extent to which it is providing the special education for handicapped children necessary to implement the act" (Congress of Micronesia, Seventh, 1977, p. 216). An additional provision of the law required that the Department of Education submit any application for federal special education funding in excess of $2,000 to the Congress of Micronesia for its review within a reason- able time before its transmittal to the federal agency or other fund- ing body. In regard to local funding, the law stated that "there is hereby authorized an annual apprOpriation from the General Fund of the Congress of Micronesia as may be necessary to carry out the prO- visions of this act" (Congress of Micronesia, Seventh, 1977, p. 217). At this time it is too early to determine what the exact effect of this law will be; however, its provisions not only establish a philo- sophical and Operational base for educational services to the handi- capped children of the territory, but they also make firm the commit- ment of providing and funding such services. On December 14-15, 1976, the Trust Territory Pre-White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals was held at the Saipan Beach Inter-Continental Hotel. Before the conference, local forums had been held in each of the six territory districts. Among the 117 delegates at the Saipan conference were representatives of Trust Territory gov- ernment departments responsible for providing various services directly or indirectly related to handicapped individuals, 30 parents 152 (or guardians) of handicapped individuals, and 20 handicapped indi- viduals. The following excerpt from the summary Of the conference proceedings was the delegates' major recommendation: Most of the conference delegates feel that most Of the requirements or regulations for the federal programs, in which Trust Territory participates, are irrelevant or do not apply to our situation. It was ointed out that these regulations are based on standard [gig] in the U.S. and the rigidity they establish Often curtailed progress and effectiveness of these programs in the Trust Territory. It was, therefore, recommended that the U.S. Congress makes special provision that would pro- vide a little leniency (in the legislations) to the Trust Ter- ritory. It is, further, recommended that there should be a waiver in the federal program regulations for the Trust Terri- tory. Such a waiver is necessary to accommodate the Trust Territory's uniquely different situation with all of its special problems and needs as a developing nation of many little scatter- ing [gig] islands (Trust Territory White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals, 1976, unpaged). In documenting this concern, the conference delegates (mostly Micronesians) were pointing out the fact that many Of the services provided for handicapped persons in the Territory had been developed to comply with United States federal laws, rather than being designed to meet the needs found in the Territory. In May 1977, a lO-person delegation (all Micronesian) from the Trust Territory took part in the White House Conference on the Handicapped in Washington, D.C. This delegation, consisting of two District Directors of Education, the Deputy Director of Education of the Trust Territory, the Assistant Special Education Coordinator of the Trust Territory, parents of handicapped individuals, and handi- capped individuals, with Some involvement of the Guam delegation, developed the following resolution: 153 RESOLUTION SUBMITTED BY THE DELEGATION OF THE TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS WHEREAS: The United Nations, through the trusteeship agreement, gave the United States the mandate to govern, and to promote the wel- fare of the peoples of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, otherwise known as Micronesia; WHEREAS: The Trust Territory Of the Pacific Islands (Micronesia) is very different culturally, geographically and linguistically from the rest Of the territories and the 50 states; WHEREAS: The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands is a developing area with many unique problems and needs; WHEREAS: The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands has a tremendous transportation problem due to the vast expanse of water over which its 2,100 islands and islets are Spread (over 3,000,000 square miles); WHEREAS: Stateside standards (technological or otherwise) are not comparable with those of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; WHEREAS: The federal funds given to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands are intended to help it, and in particular to help its handicapped and disadvantaged populations; WHEREAS: These helping funds are disbursed under strict blanket rules and regulations which Often do not apply to the local conditions in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands; WHEREAS: The rigidity and inapplicability of these rules and regula- tions frequently hinder the progress and success of these pro- grams in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, and; WHEREAS: The above conditions apply equally to the U.S. Territory of Guam; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED BY THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON HANDI- CAPPED INDIVIDUALS THAT: In recognition of these unique differences and needs, spe- cific provisions in new legislations and Special sections in new and proposed rules and regulations should be made for the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and other U.S. territories and; 154 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON HANDI- CAPPED INDIVIDUALS THAT: In order to maximize the worth of federal funds, some leni- ency in existing legislations and established rules and regula- tions should be given to the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and other U.S. territories. [Signed] [Signed] Luisa B. Untalan Agnes McPhitres [Chairperson, Guam [Chairperson, Trust Delegation] Territory Delegation] (White House Conference on the Handicapped, 1977, unpaged). The resolution was presented before the total assembly at the White House Conference on the Handicapped. However, Since the conference failed to pass any resolutions while in assembly, the exact fate of this resolution is unknown. CHAPTER IV AN ANALYSIS OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE UNITED STATES TRUST TERRITORY OF THE PACIFIC ISLANDS SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM In this chapter the development of Special education in the Trust Territory is analyzed in terms of the topical categories pre- sented in Chapter 111: Administration and Planning; Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Development Activity; and Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Special Education DevelOpment. The questions listed in Chapter I, relating to the general purpose of the study, served as a general framework for this analysis. Administration and Planning Before the first state (territorial) special education plan (November 7, 1967) was submitted to and subsequently approved by the U.S. Office of Education, special education services were provided within the territory. This initial plan placed administrative con- trol of special education development with the office of the terri- tory's Director of Education. The plan provided for a specialist for the education of the handicapped, who, under the supervision of the Director of Education, would plan, implement, and administer a territory-wide special education program. The plan made Special 155 156 education a function of the territory's central government. There is no indication that consideration was given to other potential alternatives such as organization and development of services directly within districts, involvement of missionary and other church-related groups in direct services, or provision of special education through traditional/indigenous clan systems. Nor is there any indication that the U.S. Office of Education questioned the centralized planning and implementing of Special education services. The highly centralized structure of the government-sponsored formal education system within the territory clearly influenced the development of the plan by placing special education within its admin- istrative structure. From an international perspective, the decision was indicative of the recommendations made by the Rehabilitation International Education Commission in both the 1969 and 1972 Guide- lines for the Future in Special Education, which stated: Therefore, governments must accept major responsibility for initiating Special programmes for handicapped children by making the Ministry of Education or its equivalent respon- sible for all educational programmes dealing with the handi- capped (Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, 1974, p. 268). In discussing a plan for a special education service delivery system for Alaska, an area with a widely scattered, multilingual/ cultural rural population similar to that of the Trust Territory, Smart (1970) stated: A strong, statewide, state-operated special education ser- vice district is recommended because Of the difficulties encountered by small Alaskan communities which attempt to develop special education programs, because the total school population in the state is smaller than the school population in many cities elsewhere. . . (p. 165). 157 Assuming that special education services could best be developed and administered through the formal government education system, the decision to place administrative and general respon- sibility for such service within the Headquarters Department of Edu- cation seemed justifiable. The centralization of planning and administration also pro- vided a mechanism for obtaining the resources necessary to implement special education program activity and at the same time provided a systematic means of allocating such resources. The centralized structure allowed for the modifications necessary for the territory to develop a revised Special education plan in compliance with Public Law 93-380 as well as its successor, Public Law 94-142. The revised territorial special education plans established under these laws provided that the territorial districts become local education agencies with a direct service function, and that the Headquarters Department of Education assume a broader technical assistance and general special education territory-wide monitoring role. In summary, the use of a centralized planning and adminis- trative model was somewhat effective, in that it brought about special education activity, and also showed the capability of being respon- sive to modifications in the federal Special education legislation affecting the territory. However, to a certain extent this effec- tiveness existed in terms of an imposed foreign model making the changes necessary to keep flowing the external resources necessary for its maintenance. Although support for the concept of central government responsibility for the development of special education 158 services is evidenced by the recommendations of an international body (Rehabilitation International), as well as a similar recommendation regarding special education service development in a state (Alaska) facing conditions similar to those in the Trust Territory, the actual long-term effect of centralized special education administration and planning will depend to a great extent on the permanent political structure the area assumes in the future. By relating special education solely to the formal education structure, initial planning failed to take into account the fact that a significant amount of education within the Trust Territory takes place through nonformal education structures. In discussing the nonfonmal aspects of Micronesian education, Ramarui (1976) pointed out that Before Spain, Germany, Japan, and the United States began their colonization, occupation, and administration of Micronesia, education in these islands was a family affair. It was carried on in the home, where the father taught his son all kinds of male activities and the mother taught her daughter the activities pertaining to the female role in the family. These were based on prescribed and well defined labor divisions. While there were specific trades which were exclusively transmitted from the father to the son as family trades, there were also communal activities that young men and women were taught in a wider con- text to instill in the youths the Spirit of communal cooperation. Education in this regard was, and to a greater extent in the various Micronesian cultures, is still a way of life as opposed to the formal or institutionalized education which aims to be preparation for adult life following formal schooling (p. 9). Of further significance in contemporary Micronesia is the fact that nonformal education, in conjunction with other cultural, economic, and geographic factors, has a Significant relationship to the present- day life style of handicapped individuals. The report of the Trust 159 Territory White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals (1976) stated that: The Trust Territory is not an urban area. Most adults outside of the district center farm their land. Since most handicapped persons in the Trust Territory live at home with extended families, there is almost always useful work for them to do, either in their homes or on their land. Since few milder and moderately handicapped Micronesians face unemployment prob- lems similar to those of handicapped persons living in industrial- ized societies with nuclear families, it might be said that the structures of the Micronesian economy and society in themselves provide at least a partial solution to the problems of the han- dicapped in the Trust Territory (p. 3). The preceding quotation describes a life style in which education outside the formal system has a strong direct bearing on the life style of many handicapped and nonhandicapped children within the ter- ritory. Since the initial state plan for Special education, as well as its subsequent amendments, did not recognize the possibilities of non- formal education, it eliminated a potentially wide range of cul- turally and environmentally important educational factors. The long-term effect of this oversight is unclear. Other elements of the initial state plan indicated the think- ing it represented in terms of special education development within the territory. Among these were the formation of a territory-wide Special education advisory committee composed entirely of headquarters- level administrative personnel (initially no Micronesian committee members), and adoption of special education activities that focused on screening and identifying handicapped children within the territory and on recruiting competent special education leadership. 160 The plan's creation of an advisory committee composed Of headquarters personnel (department of education program heads and the administrators of two other headquarters departments) seems administratively sound, because it seemingly establishes a powerful enough group to move things ahead. However, given the vast distances, communication difficulties, and cultural and linguistic differences in the area, the fact that the initial advisory committee included no district-level representation nor any Micronesians seems almost to stress nonlocal involvement in special education development. Noting a general lack of social involvement in many federal programs, Chutaro (1969) (a Micronesian), in a report relating to territory-wide mental health problems, commented: Many of the programs that have been done capitalized mostly on United States or other American territories' standards. I am aware of the fact that some of the programmers in the Trust Territory Government have not even set foot in the districts concerned (pp. 3-4). Thus the initially established special education planning and implementation process was apparently not unique within the territory in terms of its failure aS a new program to make provision for local (district-level) input or indigenous citizen involvement. The long- term effect of this factor on special education development has yet to be determined. The Trust Territory special education plan was deve10ped in relation to U.S. legislation and was a program like that described by Chutaro (1969)--having "capitalized on United States or other American territories' standards." In this sense, its basic structure used a foreign model (nonlocally developed). In discussing 161 administration in developing countries, Riggs (1974) commented on the use of foreign models: There are also many occasions when a foreign model which in its original setting was genuine policy and well adapted to the solution of indigenous problems, turns out in the new setting to be only a goal. The results of adopting the goal are rather different from those originally desired. Typically, in borrowing, one accepts an alien structure, but it serves a different function from its original one (p. 339). By virtue Of its inclusion in federal special education legis- lation, the Trust Territory was made the beneficiary of a program whose design and model of operation were not necessarily developed with the area's needs or conditions in mind. In this regard, Riggs (1964) stated: Second, alien models are deliberately and sometimes even vigorously thrust upon local policy-makers by foreign organi- zations. The United Nations and its Specialized agencies, as well as the United States, Colombo Plan and other bilateral aid programs, provide the funds and resources for such efforts. The possibility of obtaining foreign (with its three P's: par- ticipants, paraphernalia, and posts) readily tempts decision- makers, especially when they are not subject to strong domestic counter-pressures, to adopt the foreign models (p. 338). Concerns about implementation and ongoing development of Special education and other services for the handicapped in the Trust Territory under what is essentially an alien model have frequently been expressed by both Micronesians and expatriates involved in developing and providing these services. As reported earlier, such concerns were specifically recognized in the proceedings of the Trust Territory Pre-White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals. Furthermore, these same concerns reached the floor of the White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals in the form of a resolution (cited earlier) presented by the Trust Territory delegation to the 162 conference. The degree to which special education program develop- ment in the territory has been directed to meeting externally estab- lished federal goals at the expense of not becoming a viable long- term program for the territory will become clearer in the future. The portions of the state plan relating to implementation of a territory-wide survey to locate and identify handicapped children and the recruitment of the first professional to provide special education leadership were operationalized in the same functional activity. This was effected by the recruitment of an expatriate couple, who then conducted the territory-wide vision and hearing survey, described in Chapter III. The territory-wide handicapped child identification survey and related initial recruitment Of professional special education leadership did not provide for what some authorities in the field Of community development consider to be important principles. One such principle points out that it is important that "development agents [educational planners] have a thorough knowledge Of the main values and principal features of the client community's culture" (Goodenough, 1966, p. 22). A related principle indicates it is essential that educational technical aid, even though offered in a humanitarian spirit, be accompanied by a sensitivity to its impact on economic, social, and cultural conditions within the area (Foster, 1961). There is no indication that either of these two basic community development principles was considered in the initial planning and development of special education in the territory. 163 The effect on long-range program effectiveness of the apparent failure to note the continued existence and potential value of non- formal education activity within the territory, and the apparent dis- regard for basic community development principles, can not now be determined. However, these factors Should be considered by other develOping areas in planning Special education. The special education survey activity, an initial adminis- trative project discussed in Chapter III, brought about the first district-level awareness of special education. In doing so, it employed "Micronesian associates" in each district. This action in effect created within each district an ad hoc Special education rep- resentative. Significantly, two of the individuals who were involved in the 1968 survey maintained an interest in special education and are now employed in Special education in their respective districts (Palau and the Marianas). These individuals' early and continued involvement in special education served as an impetus to special education in their districts, which were the first to initiate district-level special education services. An initial Title III project proposal (1969) by Hill and Jan Walker of the University of Oregon provided both impetus and direction to the development of systematic planning for territory-wide special education service. Long-term planning for territory-wide special education development became a reality with the recruitment of the first Special Education Coordinator, Raymond Lehrman. He used plan- ning processes that not only helped generate a long-term, territory- wide special education plan, but also brought the concept of planning 164 and subsequent implementation to the district level. This use of detailed long- and Short-term planning as a model was important in making possible the systematic development of Special education ser- vices within the territory. The process provided a degree of con- tinuity to special education development and thereby overcame or at least partially compensated for economic, geographic, and sociologi- cal factors that otherwise might have hindered or even prevented Special education service development. Significantly, the Guidelines for the Future in Special Education stated that "governments must accept major responsibility for initiating special education pro- grammes for handicapped children by developing long range planning for Special education services. . ." (Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, 1974, p. 269). An important part of the planning process, deve10ped and implemented by Lehrman, was the establishment of district-level Special education planning committees. These committees provided much-needed local input to the planning process, and at the same time served as a locally based group with some knowledge of and con- cern for special education. In view of the total lack of any previous concept of Special education within the territory, the development and active involvement of these committees assisted in spreading knowledge of Special education at the district level, and also pro- vided the Headquarters Special Education Coordinator with the neces- sary information. The ongoing planning initiated by Lehrman came to rest on a strong base of district-level input. This practice was continued by the successive Headquarters Special Education Coordinators 165 and helped in developing coordinated district-level service delivery. Furthermore, the encouragement and recognition of local-level (district) input provided a basis for using the increased resources available from expanded federal legislation. Service Delivery, Training, Curriculum, and Materials-Development Activity Service Delivery A significant feature of the development of special education in the Trust Territory was an early and consistent commitment to pro- viding education services to handicapped children insofar as possible within the regular education setting. This model was first mentioned in the ESEA Title VI Report of 1969, which stated "the need for special education should be met within the regular classroom, with the empha- sis on training all teachers to meet the needs of these children in every classroom of Micronesia" (TTPI, Department of Education, 1969, p. 78). It was further emphasized in various service delivery and training activities throughout the entire period of the study. In the final year of the present study, this concept was incorporated in the territory's first special education law. This effort to pro- vide special education services within regular classrooms has been of particular importance to the Trust Territory, as well as to other developing areas. There may be several advantages to establishing regular education as the primary vehicle for providing services to the handicapped. First, training in the individualization of instruc- tion provides teachers with skills that can be used for all children. Second, there is reason to believe that as handicapped and normal 166 children are educated together, the SOcial stigma about labeling and segregation is lessened. An interesting point made by Lehrman (1978) is that the initial decision to develop this mainstreaming approach, although having a philosophical basis, was in reality a pragmatic one for the Trust Territory. That is, as he developed the initial long-range plans, he did not see resources becoming available to allow for anything but mainstreaming. The United States government added support to this service delivery concept in 1975 with the enactment of Public Law 94-142, which required states and territories to develop procedures and safe- guards to insure that handicapped children would, to the maximum extent appropriate, be educated with nonhandicapped children. The August 1977 rules relating to implementation Of Part B of the Educa- tion of the Handicapped Act stated: LEAST RESTRICTIVE ENVIRONMENT §121a.550 General. (a) Each State educational agency shall insure that each public agency establishes and implements procedures which meet the requirements of §§121a.550-121a.556. (b) Each public agency shall insure: (1) That to the maximum extent appropriate, handicapped children, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not handicapped, and (2) That special classes, separate schooling or other removal of handicapped children from the regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or severity of the handicap is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. (Federal Rggister, August 23, 1977). The international Guidelines for the Development of Special Education, adopted by the Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, suggested that "integration Of handicapped students into 167 regular classes should be seen as a process which is very dependent upon the flexibility of the educational system, the sizes of classes, the readiness of the individual student and the insights and under- standings of the regular teacher" (Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, 1974, p. 267). A major shortcoming of a main- streaming approach seems to be that initial special education services tend to flow to those more mildly handicapped individuals who are already in the education system. Thus, as in the case of the Trust Territory, there may be a significant time span between the time special education is initiated and the time services are considered for those who are not part of the formal education system. Federal regulations requiring the unserved (generally the severely handi- capped) to become a service priority (Public Law 94-142) required the development of instant plans for serving the unserved and the severely handicapped. Despite increased resources, this has created a serious problem for the TTPI's mainstream-focused delivery system. Also, the strongly emphasized mainstreaming approach caused identification efforts to focus on searching the school-attending population for handicapped individuals. Once such individuals were identified, it then became a matter of developing the means to teach them the academic skills of the formal education system. Thus ser- vice delivery to the mild and moderately handicapped could be achieved through an already existing system. On the other hand, the severely/ multiply handicapped were in most cases not part of the formal educa- tion system nor were they institutionalized (there are no institutions 168 for the handicapped in the territory); rather, they were provided for in some type of home environment. Possibly, if initial territorial efforts in special educa- tion development had given some consideration to gathering data on the relationships of handicapped individuals in the various Micro- nesian cultures to their respective cultures, information could have been obtained that might have proven helpful in developing ways to provide educational services to the territory's severely and multiply handicapped through existing nonformal education mechanisms. By limiting its focus to mainstreaming mildly and moderately handicapped individuals in the formal education system, the terri- torial special education program Showed little awareness Of the needs of severely and multiply handicapped individuals or of the nonformal system that provided such education as they received. Federal priori- ties in Public Law 94-142 (1975) made it necessary to establish a full-service goal with intermediate priorities focused on providing service to the severely and multiply handicapped, as well as others who were unserved. This factor, in combination with the remote and widely dispersed nature of the territory's handicapped population, may bring about an examination of alternate models (besides formal education) for delivery of services. The state (territorial) Public Law 94-142 plan stated that "the new projected full service data for outer islands will allow us to identify and train outer island residents SO that they can provide special education services" (TTPI, 1977a, p. 37). Although the nature of the training and services to be provided is unclear, the statement 169 indicated the potential for using locally based individuals in an educational mode that is not necessarily limited to the formal edu- cation system. It is not possible to determine the extent to which the inclusion of service to mildly and moderately handicapped children within the regular formal education setting will insure the continu- ance of special education services in the territory. The fact that the entire formal education system depends on external resources (U.S. funds) for its continuation, viewed in light of the indeter- minate future political status described in Chapter II, tends to cloud the future considerably. It is also difficult at this time to identify significant factors in the Trust Territory Special education delivery system that may apply to other developing areas. However, the process by which the territory's delivery system was instituted seems to evidence shortcomings that may be of importance to other developing areas. These are (1) a failure to develop the delivery system on a basis of culturally relevant information regarding the status and function of handicapped individuals within the area, (2) a failure to relate special education service delivery to nonformal educational processes existing in the area, and (3) a focus on delivery of special education to only those handicapped children in school, which resulted in little service to those children not within reach of the mainstream approach. 170 Training The general model adopted for training contained some rather distinct features. First, it related only to the formal education structure. Second, its foundation rested entirely on a behavioral philOSOphy, a factor discussed in detail later in this chapter. An overriding feature of the training activity was its strong relation- ship tO an external nation's institution of higher education-~the University of Oregon. As indicated earlier, that institution became involved with the Trust Territory through the early work of two faculty members (Hill and Jan Walker) from its Department Of Special Education, who developed a long-term Special education training plan for the territory. This plan was subsequently implemented with some modification by two University of Oregon special education doctoral program graduates (Lehrman and Carlson). The Bureau of Education for the Handicapped increased the University of Oregon's role in Trust Territory Special education development when it awarded the univer- sity a contract (RFP) for technical assistance to the Northwest Region (the Trust Territory was included in the region). As discussed earlier, a considerable amount of this technical assistance was in the form of training. Another important training feature related to the use of counterpart training. This began with the initial vision and hearing screening team, which provided training in screening processes and procedures to district-level Micronesian counterparts. It continued with Lehrman and Carlson, who, as territory-wide Special Education Coordinator and territory-wide Training Coordinator, established a 171 process of training Micronesian counterparts who would eventually assume these positions. Training was arranged for Carlson's counter- part (Thomas) at the University of Oregon. The counterpart training concept was also employed at the district level in Palau, where the researcher initiated a direct service project while directly provid- ing training to a Palauan counterpart; in Yap, where Peace Corps volunteers became involved in a deaf education project and provided training to Yapese counterparts; and in Truk, where three Peace Corps volunteers were placed in special education counterpart training roles with three Trukese. For the most part, those Micronesians who were involved in counterpart training are presently involved in spe- cial education leadership roles in the territory. This may indicate the potential usefulness of this model for other develOping areas. The early establishment of a special education training com- ponent within the Community College of Micronesia's teacher training program provided a central point for the deve10pment of training. Initially, this component focused on preservice Special education training and was required of all graduates of the regular two-year teacher training program. Since these graduates generally were placed in elementary teaching positions shortly after graduation, this pro- cess provided district-level educators whose training was designed to prepare them to teach mildly and moderately handicapped children in regular classrooms. Later, an educators' in-service training program was developed; it was conducted first by CCM staff within the districts and then by trained district-level in-service trainers. This training program was designed by a contracted consultant from the United States 172 mainland, who received technical assistance from the Northwest Regional Resource Center at the University of Oregon. AS a result of these training activities, Micronesians were able to assume all district, territorial, and training leadership positions by 1976--on1y a little more than eight years after the initial concept of special education had been introduced into the territory. The fact that special education leadership in both the administration and training was passed from expatriates to Micro- nesians who had been prepared to assume such roles is of merit. It could, in fact, be viewed as a necessary condition for continuation of Special education within the territory, although it provided no guarantee of continuation. However, it would seem that the training activities used by expatriate Special educators to develop Micronesian special education leadership could well serve as a model for other Trust Territory programs as well as those of other developing areas. Federally funded Special education programs Offering develop- mental assistance to states and territories, which make money avail- able for specialized special education training programs such as Title III and Title VI-D, and for technical assistance in training through regional resource centers, also may have applicability to other developing areas. Many of the elements from the Guidelines for the Future in Special Education relating to international COOperation in special education deve10pment exist in the relationship between the Trust Territory and the United States. For instance, the guidelines recommend assistance in Sharing professional information, providing 173 consultants for model programs, developing teacher education programs, and awarding scholarships in special education, organizing regional conferences and seminars, conducting evaluations and research, and exchanging qualified personnel (Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, 1974, p. 269). For the most part, these types of assistance have been present in Special education training implemented in the Trust Territory. Representative of this assistance is the involvement of U.S.-based special educators in the early stages of special educa- tion implementation in the territory. Another example is the involve- ment of Micronesians in advanced special education training in the United States. Particularly significant, although not clearly stated as a recommendation in the Guidelines for the Future in Special Edu- cation, is the ongoing technical and training assistance that the Northwest Regional Resource Center at the University of Oregon pro- vided to the Trust Territory. Curriculum and Materials Indications are that the emphasis in Trust Territory special education on mainstreaming handicapped children has resulted in little in the way of actual special education curriculum deve10pment. Instead, the Special education emphasis has been on develOping ways to use the established regular academic curriculum as the basis for Special education. Relatedly, an emphasis in Trust Territory special education has been upon developing the means of assessing handicapped children in relation to academic skill deficiencies and then develop- ing specialized remediation techniques to correct the deficiencies. 174 These academic assessment methods and the related teaching tech- niques and materials are placed in the hands Of regular educators, who then are expected to be able to use these methods to provide edu- cational services to handicapped children within the regular class— rooms. The overall result is not curriculum development per se, but rather curriculum adaptation. This leads to potential problems in terms of the appropriate- ness of such a strong academically oriented curriculum. Basically, this curriculum, as pointed out by Nevin (1977), is "an academic system, oriented more than ever to the quite invalid assumption of college as the student's future" (p. 129). After two visits to the Trust Territory special education program, Bateman (1972) observed: How appropriate is our [American] education system and con- tent to the Micronesian cultures? Our education structure stood out in stark relief against the background of a setting so dif- ferent. It was suddenly and shockingly clear that years of immersion in American education had so merged "figure and ground" here that we had lost (or never gained) perspective on what the American educational Skeleton is. . . . The only appar- ent need Micronesian children had for some of what was going on in clagsrooms was just that--it was going on in classrooms! p. 33 . Even more recently, Sanchez (1977), a vocational rehabilitation Specialist working in the Trust Territory, commented: Education that is relevant to Micronesian needs is neces- sary and seems to mean a system that provides a student with a skill useful in Micronesia, that encourages him to stay in his village, at ease with himself, utilizing his skills for the betterment of the community as well as himself and his fam- ily; that teaches him discipline and gives him a sense of respon- sibility; and that orients him to the larger world without robbing him of his culture and his sense of place. This concept of education is not available in Micronesia today (p. 4). 175 Unfortunately, special education for the most part has fol- lowed the path established by regular education, even though there were and continue to be questions about the appropriateness of the curriculum. One special education activity in the Trust Territory had some cultural relevance. As indicated earlier, a graduate student (Rice/Moses) from the University of Oregon used the direct instruc- tion approach in developing a program for several of the Micronesian languages. These programs were and are now being employed on a rather extensive basis by a number of teachers in several of the dis- tricts. A recently completed research report Stated that the "Direct Instruction Model (University of Oregon) was largely success- ful in assisting disadvantaged children. . . . This demonstration is the first to Show that compensatory education can work" (Becker & Engelmann, 1977, p. 1). Hence there is reason to believe that the materials developed along the lines of this model will be equally successful in providing local language instruction in Micronesia. As materials were developed, they were disseminated through preservice and in-service training. Also, with the assistance of the Northwest Regional Resource Center, materials centers were developed within the districts. These centers made materials some- what readily available to teachers in the districts. A behavioral approach was used in conducting territorial special education curriculum adaptation and materials-deve10pment activities. Carlson (1978), the director of the first Title III Special education training and materials-development project, stated, 176 "I suppose the nice thing about it [behavioral approach] was that it was philosophically clean, in other words, it didn't have values connected with it; a lot of other methodologies have a lot of value connected." In responding to this researcher's question about whether other philosophical approaches had been considered, Bateman (1978), Carlson's former doctoral advisor, stated: At least not as far as Ralph [Carlson] was concerned. He fully intended to utilize behaviorism before he came here, before he knew anything of the Micronesian culture or situa- tion at all. Ralph was a behaviorist and as far as I know, he did not consider any other approaches; and interestingly, hathe best of my knowledge, no one ever raised the appropriateness of some of the behavioral techniques. Thus it would appear that minimal, if any, consideration was given to using other approaches. In discussing the applicability of the behavioral approach, Bateman (1978) stated: I never even heard the question raised until this past month, when one of my present students who is from Micronesia, wrote a prOposal for a master's thesis in which She is going to examine some of the cross-cultural assumptions that have been made and see if in fact teachers will use verbal praise . . . and if they do, does it have a positive kind of effect on kids' behavior. . . . It really came as a Shock to me to realize how far the behavioral approach "has been laid on," without any of the apprOpriate cross-cultural considerations. Since nearly all Trust Territory special education program implementation related to curriculum and materials was integrated with the existing academically oriented regular curriculum, it hin- dered any extensive development by special educators of what might have been a more relevant curriculum for handicapped children. The early commitment of special education to a behavioral approach pre— cluded the consideration Of any other approaches. It is difficult to 177 determine the extent to which these features of the Trust Territory special education program pertain to special education deve10pment in like areas. However, they raise questions that other developing areas should consider in establishing special education services. Legislative, Judicial, and Other Activities Related to Special Education DevelOpment The passage of legislation by the Congress of Micronesia, which made attendance at elementary school mandatory, established a basis for the argument that such an education should also be provided to all handicapped children. Although this basic legislation did leave a means by which the handicapped might be excluded from educa- tion, there is no indication it was extensively used. Subsequent efforts at passing mandatory Special education legislation were suc- cessful. However, the actual legislation did not provide Specific fiscal resources Of a local nature, but rather focused on bringing about legislative involvement (Congress of Micronesia approval required) in obtaining the United States funds through Public Law 94-142. Given the ill-defined political future of the Trust Terri- tory, there is reason to believe that such funding may not always be available. The international Guidelines for the Future in Special Education suggest that "legislation should be enacted with the neces- sary fiscal support to protect the rights and provide programmes for all handicapped individuals" (Fifth International Seminar on Special Education, 1974, p. 268). The legislation enacted in the Trust Ter- ritory, although possibly of high quality in relation to its main- stream emphasis, seems not to provide sufficient territorial resources 178 or other mechanisms either to protect the rights of handicapped individuals or to provide for all the educational programs needed to meet their needs. From this point of view, the legislation does not provide a particularly good model to be emulated by other developing areas, but rather seems somewhat indicative of a tendency of the Trust Territory to rely heavily on the United States. The involvement of handicapped individuals, professionals, and others in examining the overall status of the handicapped within the society, as was done in the Trust Territory Pre-White House Con- ference on Handicapped Individuals and subsequently in the actual White House Conference on the Handicapped, seems worthy of replication on a worldwide basis. Based on the Trust Territory experience, this type Of activity may prove to be particularly useful in assisting an area to identify service delivery and resource allocation problems. CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Conclusions Special education development began in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands in 1967, as a result of the availability of federal funds under Public Law 89-10. Before that time, there is no indication Of any effort to provide for the educational needs of handicapped children. Furthermore, it was found that the legislation making special education funding available to the Trust Territory was in reality designed primarily for mainland states, which for the most part had a relatively long history of attempting to meet the needs of the handicapped. It was also found that the economic, geographic, political, and sociological characteristics of the Trust Territory at the time Special education was implemented were such that the terri- tory could be classified as a developing or third-world area. The findings Of the study showed that the University of Oregon has had a strong influence on special education deve10pment h1the'lrust Territory. This influence has come about through a variety of chan- nels. Initially, it was through the activities of individuals asso- ciated with the University's Department of Special Education; later it was through technical services contracted to the University by the Bureau of Education for the Handicapped for delivery to the Trust 179 180 Territory and other states and territories on a regional basis. However, probably the most profound effect came as a result of the efforts of two University of Oregon graduates (Lehrman and Carlson), who provided the program with its initial administration, planning, philosophical, and service delivery constructs. There is no indication that initial planning for Special education delivery included any consideration of the existence Of an extensive amount of nonformal education activities within the terri- tory. In addition, many of those involved in initiating the program apparently were unaware of the main values and principal features of the cultures of the area, and possibly were somewhat insensitive to the political, cultural, economic, and social consequences the program might have. It was not possible to determine the long-term effect of these oversights on territorial Special education development. The early adoption of a behavioristic special education philos- Ophy, coupled with a service delivery philosophy that mandated the provision of special education services within regular education set- tings, tended to give the program direction. The fact that these philosophies were adhered to, despite changes in administration, seems to support the possibility that, given the dollar resources available, they provided a viable means for continuity in program implementation. It was shown in the study that the original planning for special education, even though it relied heavily on an alien model and extraneous resources, bore some relation to the assumed somewhat low developmental level of the territory and to what were perceived as relatively limited resources. The activities of the first three 181 chronological periods (1967-1975) of special education development in the territory tend to support this assumption. Some of the constructs developed and used to further Special education within the territory are potentially applicable to other developing areas. A number of these constructs are included in the Guidelines for the Future in Special Education. Among these were central government responsibility for education programs dealing with handicapped, coordination of Special education programs throughout a country, improvement of regular schools so they can cope with atypi- cal students, development Of long-range planning for special education services, international assistance in developing teacher education programs, and use of consultants for model programs. The findings of the study indicated that the Trust Territory special education program had at least two areas of potential weak- ness. First, the Trust Territory educational system has adopted a curriculum that is strongly geared to academics, and in the opinion of many is not really oriented to the needs of the territory. In this connection, the special education program in the territory derives its curricular structure from the regular education curriculum. How- ever, in Special education, specialized methods and materials are used to reach adapted curricular objectives. Therefore, special education and regular education jointly may be viewed as providing a somewhat irrelevant curriculum. The second potential area of weakness relates to the special education legislation passed by the U.S. Congress in Public Law 94-142 and similar legislation passed by the Congress of Micronesia in 182 Public Law 7-55. The United States legislation (P.L. 94-142) has for the present extended its coverage to the Trust Territory; this means that whereas funds within the territory once tended to be some- what limited, they are now Six to seven times the amount they were during the first three developmental periods (1967 to 1975). Further- more, with the increased funding from the federal government has come a set of federally established priorities. Failure to comply with the law could result in a withdrawal of federal funding, a situation that at present would mean curtailment of the program. In addition, the priorities established by the federal regulations in many ways may not fit the actual special education needs of the Trust Territory. This relates again to the fact that the Trust Territory is in reality a developing or third-world area, and therefore has needs that are quite different from those of the United States. Of overriding Significance is the fact that the level of expenditure required to support such increased extensive programming as that contained in P.L. 94-142 is seemingly far in excess Of what could conceivably be supported by the area's economy in the fore- seeable future. The first three periods (1967-1975) of Trust Territory Special education development were supported by a level of federal funding that showed some potential for relating to the area's resources and therefore lent credence to the possibility of continuing Special education in a changed political environment. If there now comes a significant period of externally established special education priori- ties that do not fit the Trust Territory's needs,plus adisproportionate 183 input of resources, there is reason to believe the program's future will be adversely affected. Recommendations 1. The U.S. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, should seriously examine its position with regard to the service priorities it has established under Public Law 94-142, in terms of the effect on special education in the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. Such an examination Should take into account the area's current level of functioning in relation to special and regu— 1ar education as well as unique economic, geographic, political, and cultural factors. With the sudden increase in funds available to special education in the Trust Territory, ways should be found to use that money for the further development of training and service-delivery models, which could continue to fit the unique features of the area and at the same time serve as a special education survival mechanism in the event of political change in the territory. 2. ApprOpriate Officials of the U.S. Office of Education, Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, should provide encouragement and the means for Special educators in the Trust Territory to examine and have communication with Special education programs in other developing or third-world areas Similar to their own. The initiation of such covmiunication could be beneficial to the Trust Territory as well as to the other areas. 3. The Bureau of Education for the Handicapped should actively seek ways of becoming more involved in the development of 184 Special education at the international level. Such involvement would quite likely prove to be of benefit to handicapped individuals in the United States as well as those in other industrialized and third- world nations. 4. The government of the Trust Territory should critically examine the present regular education curriculum in terms of its rele- vancy to the actual life styles of handicapped and nonhandicapped students. An examination should be made of relevant learning that may be occurring outside the formal education system. 5. In considering a future political status that may receive less external funding for educational services, the Trust Territory government Should carefully examine the current special education program in relation to those existing or projected elements that seem essential. Consideration Should be given to establishing a local monetary resource base for these elements as soon as possible. 6. The Guidelines for the Future in Special Education, cir- culated by Rehabilitation International, Should be made readily avail- able to the governments of other developing areas. Furthermore, con- sideration Should be given to including in the guidelines recommenda- tions that would bring about an awareness of additional factors that became evident in this study of the development of special education in the Trust Territory. Such additional factors include considera- tion of existing nonformal education systems within the area, the importance of understanding cultural characteristics of the area that affect the functioning and life style of the area's handicapped 185 individuals, factors involved in importing foreign Special education models into a developing area, and the need to develop a special education service model that can be consistently supported by the resources available to the area. BIBLIOGRAPHY 186 BIBLIOGRAPHY Adams, 0., & Bjork, R. M. Education in DevelopinggAreas. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1969. An Analygis of Public Law 94-142. Washington, D.C.: National Asso- ciation of State Directors of Special Education, n.d. Anttila, E. K. "A History of the People of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands and Their Education." Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas, 1965. Bailey, 5. K., & Mosher, E. K. ESEA: The Office of Education Admin- isters a Law. New York: Syracuse University Press, 1968. Bateman, B. Interview, April 7, 1978. . "Special Education in Micronesia: A Letter." Division for Children With Learning Disabilities Newsletter 2 (1972): 31-33. Becker, W. C., a Engelmann, S. The Oregon Direct Instructional Model: Comparative Results in Project Follow Through--A Summary of Nine Years of Work. Eugene: University of Oregon, 1977. Bolick, N. Digest of State and Federal Laws: Education Of Handicapped Children. 3rd ed. Reston, Virginia: The Council for Excep- tional Children, 1974. Bonham, S. J. "Public Law 93-380: A Bill of Rights for the Handi- capped." Focus on Exceptional Children 7 (1975): 1-8. Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. 0. Educational Research: An Introduction. New York: David McKay Co., Inc., 1971. Caldwell, M. F. Letter to Ray Lehrman, August 24, 1971. . "Special Education Workshop, P.L. 94-142--Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975" held in Marshall Islands. Unpublished paper, 1977. . "Special Education WorkShOp, P.L. 94-142--Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975" held in Ponape. Unpublished paper, 1977. 187 188 . "Special Education Workshop, P.L. 94-142--Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975" held in Truk. Unpublished paper, 1977. Carlson, R. Interview, April 19, 1978. Chutaro, C. G. "General Discussion of the Social, Educational, Economic and Political Climate Within Which Mental Health Problems Are Beginning to Be Defined." Unpublished paper, 1969. Community College of Micronesia. Accreditation Report. Kolonia, Ponape: Unpublished report, 1972. Congress of Micronesia, Fifth. Second Regular Session. A Bill for an Act Providing for the Education of Special Children; Making an Appropriation Therefor and for Other Purposes-- Draft. Unpublished document, 1974. Congress of Micronesia, Fourth. House Bill NO. 150. Unpublished document, 1972. Congress of Micronesia, Seventh. Public Law No. 7-55 to Establish a Trust Territory Special Education Program, to Prescribe Its Goals and Policies, to Authorize the Appropriation of Funds Therefor and for Other Purposes. Unpublished document, 1977. Descriptions of Programs Tentatively to be Implemented in 1974-1975. Review of Special Education Activities, April 16, 1974. Director of Education. Memorandum to Chairman, Education & Social Affairs Committee, 2/12/74. Educational Needs Assessment--Administrator's Manual. Ponape: Community College of Micronesia, 1976. ESEA Title III Proposal for Special Education. Saipan: Trust Ter- ritory of the Pacific Islands, 1969. "ESEA'TitleIII Providing Diagnosis, Remediation, and Evaluation to Handicapped Children Through Development of Appropriate Instructional Materials, 4/1/73 to 3/31/76." Unpublished document, 1973. Federal Register. "Implementation of Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, August 23, 1977. Fifth International Seminar on Special Education. Educational Equality for the Handicapped. Australia: Australian Council for Rehabilitation of Disabled, 1974. 189 Fisher, J. L. ”Japanese Schools for the Natives of Truk, Caroline Islands." Human Organization 20 (1961): 83-88. Foster, G. M. Traditional Cultures and the Impact of Technological Change. New York: Harper & Row, 1962. Goodenough, W. H. Cooperation in Change. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1966. Goodman, E. M. U.S. Office of Education's Programs for Handicapped. Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, 1967. Gottschalk, L. Understanding History: A Primer of Historical Method. 2nd ed. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1969. Hallahan, D. P., & Kauffman, J. M. Excgptional Children. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1978. Headquarters Department of Education. "Headquarters Role." Unpub- lished paper, 1969. Heine, C. Micronesia at the Crossroads: A Reappraisal of the Micro- nesian Political Dilemma. Honolulu, Hawaii: The University Press of Hawaii, 1974. Hughes, 0. T., & Lingenfelter, G. S. Political Development in Micro- nesia. Columbus: Ohio State University Press, 1974. Implementing Special Education Services in Rural Remote Areas. Salt Lake City, Utah: Western States Topical Conference, 1975. Kay, A. "Population Growth in Micronesia." Micronesian Reporter 22 (1974): 13-22. Kruger, F. K. Government and Politics of the German Empire. Yonkers- on—Hudson, N.Y.: World Book Company, 1915. Lehrman, R. H. "Description of Projected Activities for Fiscal Year 1973 for the Education of Handicapped Children." Saipan, 1972. Interview, April 19, 1978. "Planning Special Education in the Pacific Islands." Honolulu, Hawaii: Pan Pacific Conference on the Education of Exceptional Children, 1971. Martin, E. Letter to Director of Education, Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, February 11, 1974. 190 Letter to R. Burl Yarberry, 1970. Mason, L. "Trusteeship in Micronesia." Far East Survey 17 (1948): 105-108. Murphy, S. Letter to Thomas Irvin, 1970. Nevin, D. The American Touch in Micronesia. New York: W. W. Norton, 1977. Northwest Regional Resource Center. Review Of Special Education Activities. April 16, 1974. Northwest Special Education Learning Resources System. Full Educa- tional Services for Handicapped Children and Youth: The Second Annual Northwest Learning Resources System Conference, Seattle, Washington, 1975. Oregon, 1975. Severely Handicapped: The Third Annual Northwest Learning Resources System Conference, Seattle, Washington, 1976. Oregon, 1976. Nufer, H. F. Micronesia Under American Rule: An Evaluation of the Strategic Trusteeship (1947-77). New York: Exposition Press, 1978. Oliver, 0. L. The Pacific Islands. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1951. Peace Corps Goes to Paradise. Washington, D.C.: Peace Corps, n.d. "Peace Corps in Truk." Review of Special Education Activities, June 23, 1973. Perdew, G. Interview, January 12, 1977. Piercy, 0. Interview, March 22, 1977. "Program Proposal for Moderately Handicapped Children, Palau District, 6/1/71 to 8/31/73." Unpublished document, 1971. Project VI. Saipan: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1969. Ramarui, 0. "Education in Micronesia: Its Past, Present, and Future." Micronesian Rgporter 24 (1976): 9-20. . "Report of Present Educational Programs in the Trust Ter- ritory of the Pacific Islands." Unpublished document, 1975. Regular Educator's Project--Facilitator Manual. Kolonia, Ponape: Community College of Micronesia, 1976. 191 Rehabilitation International, Twelfth World Congress. Proceedings Review. Australia: J. S. McMillan Pty., Ltd., 1972. "Report on Special Education Manpower Development." Grant NO. 451- AH-50683, FY 1977. Unpublished document. "Report on the First Annual Special Education Conference." Saipan, 1973. Review of Special Education Activities, June 15, 1973. Review of Special Education Activities, July 23, 1973. Review of Special Education Activities, April 16, 1974. Richard, D. United States Naval Administration of the Trust Terri- tory of the Pacific Islands. Washington, D.C.: Office of the Chief ofNavalOperations, 1957. Riggs, F. W. Administration in Developing Countries: The Theory of Prismatic Society. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1964. Sanchez, J. "Rehabilitation in Paradise: An Opinion." Unpublished paper, 1977. Shorett, A. Micronesian Backgrounds: Historical and Social Settings for Social Studies. Draft edition. Saipan: Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1970. Smart, A. B. C. "A Proposed Special Education Program for the State of Alaska with Emphasis on Rural Schools." Ph.D. disserta- tion, Michigan State University, 1970. Smith, D. F. "Education Of the Micronesian with Emphasis on the Historical Development." Ph.D. dissertation, The American University, 1968. University Microfilms No. 68-14, 968. Southwest Region Deaf/Blind Center. Review of Special Education Activities, April 16, 1974. Special Education Advisory Committee, Marshall Islands. Minutes, December 10, 1971. "Special Education in Yap." Review Of Special Education Activities, July 23, 1973. "State Education Agency Plan for Participation in the Program for Training Prefessional [gig] Personnel in the Education of Handicapped Children." Unpublished document, 1971. 192 Truk District Department of Education. Letter to prospective teachers. June 1966. (Mimeographed.) . "Truk Early Childhood Project Continuation Application, 7/1/76 to 6/30/77." Unpublished document, 1976. Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. "Amended Annual Program Plan FY 1976, Part B,Education of the Handicapped Act, as Amended by P.L. 93-380." Unpublished document, 1975a. "Amended Annual Program Plan for Fiscal Year 1977, Under Part 0, Education of the Handicapped Act, as Amended by Public Law 94—142." Unpublished document, 1977a. . "Amended Annual Program Plan for Fiscal Year 1978, for Part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act as Amended by Public Law 94-142." Unpublished document, 1977b. Annual Report of the High Commissioner of the Trust Terri- tory of the Pacific Islands to the Secretary of the Interior for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 1963. Saipan: Government of the United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1963. . Code. Honolulu: Government of the United States Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, 1952. . Code, Chapter 8--Education. Seattle, Washington: Book Publishing Company, 1970a. . "Fiscal l975--Special Education Program Objectives." Saipan, 1974a. . "Part 0 Application 6/1/71 to 8/31/72.“ Unpublished document, 1970b. . "Special Education Allocation Report, 1975." Unpublished document, 1975b. . "State Plan for Fiscal Year 1973 Under Part B, Education of the Handicapped Act (P.L. 9l-230).'l Unpublished document, 1972a. . "State Plan Amendment for Fiscal Year 1975 Under Part B, Education of the Handicapped Act, as Amended by Section 614 Of P.L. 93-380." Unpublished document, 1974b. . "A State Plan to Initiate, Expand, and Improve Programs and Projects for the Education of Handicapped Children, Under Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as Amended." Unpublished document, 1967. 193 29th Annual Report to the Secretary of the Interior, 1976. Saipan: Trust Territory Printing and Publication Division, 1976a. 23rd Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1970c. 25th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1972b. . 26th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1973. 27th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1974c. . 28th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1975c. 29th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Adminis- tration of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1976b. 30th Annual Report to the United Nations on the Common- wealth of the Pacific Islands (International Organization and Conference Series, Department of State Publication). Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1977c. , Department of Education. Annual Report of ESEA P.L. 98-10 Title VI, August, 1968-August, l969. Saipan, l969. Trust Territory White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals. Saipan, 1976. UNESCO. A Study of the Legislation Concerning the Special Education of Handicapped Children and Young People. Paris, France: UNESCO, 1969. 194 United Nations. "Assembly Acts on Disabled Persons, Narcotics, World Social Situation." UN Monthly Chronicle, January 1977, pp. 67-68. . "Declaration of the Rights of the Disabled." UN Monthly Chronicle, January 1976, pp. 89-90. U.S. Congress. House of Representatives. Committee on Appropriations. Hearings Before a Subcommittee: Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations for 1968. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1967. U.S. Congress, 91st. Public Law 91-230. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1970. U.S. Congress, 93rd. Public Law 93-380. Washington, D.C.: Govern- ment Printing Office, 1974. "Visits to All Districts." Review of Special Education Activities, April 16, 1974. White House Conference on the Handicapped. Washington, D.C., 1977. World Education Commission of Rehabilitation International. "Draft Resolution on UNESCO Action in the Field of Special Educa- tion." Unpublished paper, 1978. Yearbook of the United Nations, 1959. New York: Columbia University Press, 1960.