What is Inclusion?Full or part-time placement of students with disabilities in the same school or classroom they would attend if they were not disabled

(Alper, 1997, p.6)

So…what’s “full inclusion”?

• Inclusion without exception

• The notion that LRE is always the mainstream classroom

• All supports and services must be taken to that child in the mainstream setting

• Extremely controversial topic (Evans, 2002, p. 1)

Full Inclusion or Total Delusion? (qtd. in Hornby,

1997, p. 68)

“The history of the twentieth century for disabled people has been one of exclusion. The twenty-first century will see the struggle of disabled people for inclusion go from strength to strength. In such a struggle, special, segregated education has no role to play”

-M. Oliver Understanding Disability (1996)

“…full inclusion can provide only an illusion of support for all students, an illusion that may trick many into jumping on the bandwagon…[S]pecial education is in danger of riding the bandwagon called ‘full inclusion’ to its own funeral.”

-J.M. Kauffman, The Illusion of Full Inclusion (1995)

Key Concepts of Inclusion

Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) Special Ed. provided at public expense in conformity with

the IEP Appropriate varies from student to student

Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) “To the maximum extent appropriate” SwD educated in

general education classrooms Restrictiveness a measure of “proximity to, and

communication with the ordinary flow of persons in society” (qtd. in Yell, 2006, p. 310)

FAPE vs. LRE...which wins? School’s primary obligation is to FAPE IEP team selects LRE most compatible with FAPE

Key Concepts of Inclusion (continued…)

Supplementary Aids and Services Modification of the GenEd classroom for the

inclusion of SwD Ensures accessibility of information and

equal participation for all Key to meeting LRE

Continuum of Service Continuum of alternative placements

available to students with disabilities Arranged from least to most restrictive

The Continuum of Services

GenEd

GenEdw/consultation

GenEd with part-time assistance

Part day in Special Ed classes

Full day in Special Ed classes

Special Ed School

Homebound Placement

Least Restrictive Environment

MainstreamingInclusion

LRE, Inclusion, and Mainstreaming…oh my!

SwD entitled to education with peers w/o disabilities “to the maximum extent appropriate” (IDEA)

Not a setting

Placement of SwD in general education setting with peers w/o disabilities

Somewhat dated, less comprehensive program than inclusion

Inclusion/mainstreaming sometimes LRE, but not always!

•Not IDEA

•Synonymous in court

•Narrower than LRE

History of Inclusion ParadigmHistory of Inclusion Paradigm Before 1960s Before 1960s

• SPED = SPED = segregationsegregation 1960s1960s

• Civil rights movement— integrationCivil rights movement— integration • 1968 L.M. Dunn article spearheads SPED 1968 L.M. Dunn article spearheads SPED integrationintegration

1970s1970s• EAHCA 1975 promises LREEAHCA 1975 promises LRE• Part-time inclusionPart-time inclusion prevails prevails

1980s1980s• REI movement – “Good teachers can teach to all REI movement – “Good teachers can teach to all

students”students”• Limited full-time inclusionLimited full-time inclusion of high-incidence of high-incidence

disabilities (LD, EBD, etc.)disabilities (LD, EBD, etc.) 1990s1990s

• FullFull inclusion movement—inclusion movement—full-time inclusionfull-time inclusion for allfor all

Hornby, 1997, p. 69; Kavale et al., 2000, p. 281Hornby, 1997, p. 69; Kavale et al., 2000, p. 281

Why Inclusion? Educational Beliefs

– All students can learn regardless of disability (diversity trumps difference)

– All students learn through participation with and modeling of competent peers

– All classrooms can be equipped to support all students

(Alper, 1995, p. 6-16; Taylor, 2006, p. 50; Hornby, 1997, p. 69)

Why Inclusion? Social Outcomes

– Improve self-esteem and social skills of students with disabilities

– Improve academic achievement of students with disabilities

– Challenge stereotypes of students without disabilities

– Reduce disproportionality in special education– Reduce stigma attached to special education– Promote greater individualization for all GenEd

students (UDL)

(Alper, 1995, p. 6-16; Taylor, 2006, p. 50; Hornby, 1997, p. 69)

Why Inclusion? Other Beliefs…

Cost effective

(Alper, 1995, p. 16; Hornby, 1997, p. 81)

$$$Or is it…?

Objections to Full Inclusion

Rhetoric over reason

Emotion over evidence

Advocacy for programs over advocacy for children

Savings over services

Hornby, 1997, p. 76-79; Kavale et al., 2000, 279-283

Obstacles to Full Inclusion in GenEd Classroom

Lack of teacher motivation (NIMBY) Lip-service to inclusion Reluctant practice (time and energy concerns)

Lack of teacher efficacy Failed differentiation (one-size fits all) Botched co-teaching

Lack of student awareness Social contact does not automatically improve social

consciousness Anxiety of students with disabilities over

mainstreamingKavale et al., 2000, 285-289

•OSSEOSSE– Issued a statewide inclusion policyIssued a statewide inclusion policy

• Particularly affects two parts of Section 612 (a)Particularly affects two parts of Section 612 (a)– Unless services cannot be achieved satisfactorily, Unless services cannot be achieved satisfactorily,

students with disabilities and students without students with disabilities and students without disabilities should be educated together.disabilities should be educated together.

– OSSE is responsible for ensuring that the mandate is metOSSE is responsible for ensuring that the mandate is met

• Non-compliance with SPED indicators ensuring:Non-compliance with SPED indicators ensuring:– FAPEFAPE– LRELRE

OSSE, 2008OSSE, 2008

Inclusion in Inclusion in DCDC

(Cont)(Cont)

Inclusion in DCInclusion in DC

Blackman-JonesBlackman-Jones•Two lawsuits filed in 1997 vs. DC Gov’t and Two lawsuits filed in 1997 vs. DC Gov’t and

DCPSDCPS– Blackman vs District of ColumbiaBlackman vs District of Columbia

Challenged school system’s failure to hold special Challenged school system’s failure to hold special education due process hearingseducation due process hearings

– Jones vs. District of ColumbiaJones vs. District of Columbia Charged system with delayed implementation of Charged system with delayed implementation of

SPED plans ordered by hearing officers or SPED plans ordered by hearing officers or negotiations made with parents or advocates.negotiations made with parents or advocates.

– Includes thousands of plaintiffsIncludes thousands of plaintiffs Make up a class and are called class membersMake up a class and are called class members

OSSE, 2008OSSE, 2008

Inclusion in DCInclusion in DC(Cont)(Cont)

Blackman-Jones (Cont)Blackman-Jones (Cont)• Class MembersClass Members

– Over 6500 membersOver 6500 members– Requested or received SPED services at a DC public school Requested or received SPED services at a DC public school

(DCPS or Charter) or attended private school funded by DC (DCPS or Charter) or attended private school funded by DC between Jan 1, 1995-March 1, 2008.between Jan 1, 1995-March 1, 2008.

– Experienced delays receiving services because of an untimely Experienced delays receiving services because of an untimely due process hearing or decision or school did not implement due process hearing or decision or school did not implement due process hearing decision or settlement agreement.due process hearing decision or settlement agreement.

– DC agreed to provide all members with an awardDC agreed to provide all members with an award– Blackman/Jones Compensatory EducationBlackman/Jones Compensatory Education

– Does not include all DC students identified with special needsDoes not include all DC students identified with special needs

Inclusion in DCInclusion in DC(Cont)(Cont)

• Full Service Schools (FSS)Full Service Schools (FSS)– ModelModel– In-school services not offered regularly in DC schoolsIn-school services not offered regularly in DC schools– Academic coaches Academic coaches – Behavioral and mental health professionalsBehavioral and mental health professionals

• Support for teachers in students to increase academic Support for teachers in students to increase academic achivement and social wellbeingachivement and social wellbeing

– Best practices, differentiated instruction, behavior managementBest practices, differentiated instruction, behavior management– Strong partnerships between families and schoolsStrong partnerships between families and schools– Currently only on a middle school level- looking to expandCurrently only on a middle school level- looking to expand

• 11 schools11 schools

DC Public Schools, 2009DC Public Schools, 2009

Inclusion in DCInclusion in DC(Cont)(Cont)

Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM)Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM)• Increases supports, services, and resources in Gen. Ed settings Increases supports, services, and resources in Gen. Ed settings

– Enhanced staffingEnhanced staffing– Intensive professional developmentIntensive professional development– Technical assistance on integrated servicesTechnical assistance on integrated services

• From isolated/separated support services to full integration of servicesFrom isolated/separated support services to full integration of services

• Response to an intervention modelResponse to an intervention model– Using indiv. Student achievement and behavior data to identify Using indiv. Student achievement and behavior data to identify

needsneeds

• Ongoing prof. development and technical assistanceOngoing prof. development and technical assistance– Coaches assigned to every schoolCoaches assigned to every school

• Currently in 15 Elementary schools- looking to expandCurrently in 15 Elementary schools- looking to expand

DC Public Schools, 2009DC Public Schools, 2009

Least Restrictive Least Restrictive Environment?Environment?

• Most students with special needs attendMost students with special needs attend

the majority of the classes with Gen Ed. the majority of the classes with Gen Ed.

studentsstudents

• Some classrooms use a co-teaching modelSome classrooms use a co-teaching model– One Gen Ed./ One SPEDOne Gen Ed./ One SPED

• SPED teachers work with both Gen Ed. And SPED students SPED teachers work with both Gen Ed. And SPED students in adhering to inclusive modelin adhering to inclusive model

• Students who cannot be accommodated have the option to Students who cannot be accommodated have the option to petition for placement petition for placement

Least Restrictive Least Restrictive Environment?Environment?

• Kingsbury Day SchoolKingsbury Day School– Private SchoolPrivate School– 90% of students come from DCPS90% of students come from DCPS– School for students with special School for students with special

needsneeds

•Still accomodations that DCPS Still accomodations that DCPS cannot meetcannot meet

– Puts LRE vs. InclusionPuts LRE vs. Inclusion

$$$$ RESOURCES! How $$$$ RESOURCES! How Many of Us Have Them? $$$Many of Us Have Them? $$$

$$• Teacher Lay-offsTeacher Lay-offs

– Approx. 229 teachersApprox. 229 teachers

• Budget DeficitBudget Deficit

• Many Schools still not in compliance re: Many Schools still not in compliance re: SPED staffingSPED staffing

• Not enough teachers with adequate SPED Not enough teachers with adequate SPED training to promote inclusive modeltraining to promote inclusive model– Cannot afford co-teachersCannot afford co-teachers

$$$$ RESOURCES! How $$$$ RESOURCES! How Many of Us Have Them? $$$Many of Us Have Them? $$$

$$(cont)(cont)• Do not have the resources we need to promote the Do not have the resources we need to promote the

inclusive model we advertise.inclusive model we advertise.– In promoting a model we do not have the resources In promoting a model we do not have the resources

to support or implement, it compromises the LRE of to support or implement, it compromises the LRE of all studentsall students

•Students with disabilities are not getting the Students with disabilities are not getting the differentiated instruction they are entitled todifferentiated instruction they are entitled to

•Gen Ed. Teachers= generally not equipped to Gen Ed. Teachers= generally not equipped to work with IEPs work with IEPs

– Little SPED training required to obtain Gen. Little SPED training required to obtain Gen. Ed. licensing Ed. licensing

RecommendationsRecommendations

• Implement incentives for Gen. Ed. teachers to Implement incentives for Gen. Ed. teachers to become SPED certifiedbecome SPED certified– Salary increasesSalary increases

• Currently, teachers only receive $1500 a year extra for dual-Currently, teachers only receive $1500 a year extra for dual-certificationcertification

• Make dual cert requirement for highly qualified statusMake dual cert requirement for highly qualified status– Offer discounted/accelerated cert. programsOffer discounted/accelerated cert. programs

Through local partnerships/grantsThrough local partnerships/grants Loan forgivenessLoan forgiveness

– Over a third of DC’s residents are recognized as Over a third of DC’s residents are recognized as functionally illiterate- literacy training emphasis in functionally illiterate- literacy training emphasis in several SPED programs in DCseveral SPED programs in DC

– More dual cert. teachers=less co-teachers= save $$$More dual cert. teachers=less co-teachers= save $$$– Team of paraprofessionals for extra presence in Team of paraprofessionals for extra presence in

classroomclassroom

BenefitsBenefits

• For Gen Ed. And SPED studentsFor Gen Ed. And SPED students– All students can benefit from teachers who have All students can benefit from teachers who have

specialized training in working with/differentiating specialized training in working with/differentiating instruction for a variety of learnersinstruction for a variety of learners

– Schools save money by eliminating co-teachersSchools save money by eliminating co-teachers• Can work on increasing the pay of dual cert. teachers Can work on increasing the pay of dual cert. teachers

– More staff to manage case loadsMore staff to manage case loads

•More people qualified to lead IEP meetings and More people qualified to lead IEP meetings and advocate for students with disabilities.advocate for students with disabilities.

– Single-certified SPED teachers can focus on Single-certified SPED teachers can focus on students who need accommodations that extend students who need accommodations that extend past an inclusive classroompast an inclusive classroom

ReferencesReferences

• Kavale, K. and Forness, S. (2000). History, Rhetoric, Kavale, K. and Forness, S. (2000). History, Rhetoric, and Reality: Analysis of the Inclusive Debate. and Reality: Analysis of the Inclusive Debate. Remedial and Special EducationRemedial and Special Education. . 22 22 (5), 279-296.(5), 279-296.

• Hornby, G., Atkinson, M., and Howard, J. (1997). Hornby, G., Atkinson, M., and Howard, J. (1997). Controversial Issues in Special EducationControversial Issues in Special Education. London: . London: David Fulton Publishers.David Fulton Publishers.

• Alper, S., Schloss, P., Etscheidt, S. and Macfarlane Alper, S., Schloss, P., Etscheidt, S. and Macfarlane C.A. (1995). C.A. (1995). Inclusion: Are We Abandoning or Inclusion: Are We Abandoning or Helping Our Students? Helping Our Students? Thousand Oaks, California: Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press, Inc.Corwin Press, Inc.

• Yell, M. (2006). Yell, M. (2006). The Law and Special Education (2The Law and Special Education (2ndnd ed.). ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: PearsonUpper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson