This study begins with a general categorization of the various positions which comprise the ‘Regular Education Initiative.’ The first of these three categories, entitled the \u27Little Change\u27 model, calls for the least number of changes within the current delivery system of special education services. The second, the \u27Extreme change\u27 model, calls for the total dismantling of the present \u27dual delivery\u27 system. The third general heading is that of the \u27Moderate change\u27 model. This position calls for a substantial reduction in the number of students being served by \u27pull out\u27 programs. These three positions were then analyzed in light of twenty four (24) Federal and State Court decisions which have either established legal precedents in the field of special education law, or have raised issues which educators must consider when proposing changes within an educational setting which is itself subject to numerous legal constraints. This study concludes that the \u27Little Change\u27 model complies with more of these standards (eg. due process, limited funding, equal access, duplication of services, and quality of education) than do either of its counterparts Of the two remaining positions, the \u27Extreme change\u27 model appears to be the least compliant
