From the Desk of
Richard J. Robison, Executive Director

January 1998

Maximum Feasible Benefit:
What's All The Fuss?

In 1972 the Massachusetts Legislature passed Chapter 766, a comprehensive special education law that served as a model for the rest of the country. A true school reform law, Chapter 766 set high standards for schools requiring them to educate students with disabilities so that they could achieve their "maximum possible development." Today, 25 years later, the Massachusetts legislature is poised to undo the rigorous requirements of the law by repealing what is known as the "maximum feasible benefit" requirement.

"Maximum feasible benefit" is the standard that schools are called to provide for students who receive services under Chapter 766. It lays the foundation for equal educational opportunity. A student is entitled to "an education that assures the maximum possible development in the least restrictive environment." Framers of the law 25 years ago recognized that children with disabilities must be educated with high expectations and adequate support to help them meet the expectations. Over these twenty-five years, parents have relied on the standard to obtain education programs that recognize their children’s potential. The standard is essential, for it protects against lowered expectations for children with disabilities. In recent years, more parents have successfully argued that regular education classrooms provide the best environment for their children to achieve their maximum possible development. Hence the advent of the strong "inclusion" movement, and the desire of more and more parents of children with disabilities to be concerned advocates for improving all of education.

Rather than capitalize on the energy and commitment of parents of children with disabilities to improve education, some legislators argue that we should retreat from our promise made 25 years ago. It is argued that it is "unfair", because children with disabilities are receiving superior services compared to their non-disabled peers. What the current legislature fails to comprehend is an important lesson the legislature of 25 years ago learned very well: For children with disabilities, equal footing and the opportunity to become contributing adults in their own communities, requires the protection of laws which recognize the potential of students with disabilities. The "best" or "maximum feasible benefit" doesn’t provide "superior" services. Rather, the standard provides equity by requiring school systems to overcome lowered expectations about a disabled child’s potential to benefit from learning and instruction.

At this time, our nation is engaged in a tremendous effort to raise expectations for all schools and all learners. School reform is a priority; improving education is at the top of the nation’s agenda. Now is the time for the Massachusetts Legislature to once again set a model for the nation. Now is the time for the Massachusetts Legislature to reaffirm- not retreat- from it’s 25-year promise, and in so doing reaffirm Massachusetts legacy of leadership in education for the nation.

Dr. Richard J. Robison

became Executive Director of the Federation in April of 1997. Dr. Robison has over 20 years experience with the management of nonprofit volunteer organizations as well as six years experience in state government as a senior policy analyst to the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Mental Retardation. The parent of three children, two of whom have Down syndrome, he is knowledgeable in a broad range of relevant content areas. He was appointed to serve a second 3-year term on the State Advisory Council for special education required under IDEA, is an elected member of the Sudbury, Massachusetts, School Board, serves on the AAUAP Consumer Affairs Council, and in Spring 1997, he was appointed by Secretary of Education Richard Riley to serve on the Goals 2000 “America Goes Back to School” Steering Committee.