SPECIAL EDUCATION: FULL INCLUSION

SPECIAL EDUCATION: FULL INCLUSION

By: Faye Jones, PhD.

The field of education is moving towards full inclusion on both elementary and secondary levels.  The laws, Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), Section 504, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and Title II ensure that the educational system is obligated to protect students with disabilities at all costs.  But are we, as educators, prepared to make full inclusion successful?  Most importantly, are the parents and students with disabilities ready for the change?

Inclusive education means all students in a school, regardless of their academic performance in any area, become a part of the school community.

Federal law, the Individuals with IDEA, ensures “a free appropriate public education” (FAPE) for students with disabilities.  IDEA requires that public schools provide the necessary accommodations and modifications to students with disabilities. The law’s 1997 amendments clearly state that schools have a responsibility to educate children with disabilities in a general education setting.  According to FAPE, students with disabilities have the right to receive appropriate public preschool, elementary, and secondary education with related services, meeting state curriculum and standard requirements at no cost to parents or guardians.  Appropriateness is defined according to the student’s Individualized Education Plan (IEP). An IEP is developed by a team of specialists, which includes a special education teacher (if the student will receive special education services), a general education teacher, an administrator, testing specialists, parent, and student that collaborate to write goals and benchmarks for the individual student. It is designed to meet their needs in the most Least Restrictive Environment (LRE).  The LRE is the environment in which the student with disabilities can succeed. This refers to the physical location of the student’s learning and how the student will be taught. It is preferred that the student be included in general education activities as much as possible.

The general education setting consists of the first years of formal and structured education that occur during childhood through the upper teenage years. Primary students are usually placed in classes with one teacher who is responsible for their education for that school year. It was believed that having only one teacher and the opportunity to establish a class relationship with each student was the goal of the primary educational system. The major goal of primary and secondary education is to assist students in establishing a good foundation in reading, math, science, geography, history and other social sciences, and the basics of physical education.  Then mainstreaming began to work its’ way into the schools.

In the 1980′s, mainstreaming became very popular after a Least Restrictive Environment was required. Students with mild disabilities were integrated into the regular classroom for a few hours a day, while those students with moderate to severe disabilities remained in special education classes. Many educators and parents were in favor of this method. Others were not.  Studies indicated that mainstreaming has advantages and disadvantages. The advantages of those special education students who are mainstreamed have higher academic achievement, higher self-esteem, a higher likelihood of attending college, better physical health, and better opportunities in finding employment.  The disadvantages of mainstreaming, on the other hand, are students with disabilities may require more attention, which means more attention is taken away from the students in general education, general education teachers are not trained to accommodate the student with disabilities, parents often return their children to the special education classroom because they are not being accommodated in the general education setting, parents fear their child’s safety, and most importantly, the general education standards may be lowered.

It has been noted that most special educators are in favor to some degree of mainstreaming if four basic strategies are utilized.  They include pre-referral teams (PRTs), collaborative consultation, cooperative teaching and other team arrangements, and curricula and instructional strategies.  PRTs work with general education teachers to recommend various strategies for working with children who exhibit academic and/or behavioral deficits.  In collaborative consultation, the special education teacher provides advice to the general education teacher.  In cooperative teaching, general and special educators teach together in the same general education classroom composed of general education students and students with disabilities.  Curricula and instructional strategies are materials designed to educate general education students about students with disabilities.

According to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), discrimination is prohibited based on a disability in state and local government services. This includes public school systems. Mostly all public schools systems receive federal funds and public education, which is a government service, must abide by these laws that protect students with disabilities.

Under Section 504 and Title II of the ADA, it is illegal for schools to deny a student to participate in a service, provide a service that is not as effective as provided by others, and provide lower quality services.  Also, students with disabilities, like other children in the general education setting, must be provided with courses and instruction that teach the curriculum.

To ensure that school reform initiatives are delivering quality education, assessment (often know as “large-scale assessments”) is used to gather information to determine whether schools are successfully teaching students the standard. The information obtained is used to identify weaknesses in schools and to make the necessary improvements. Before, students with disabilities had been excluded from these assessments. Under Section 504 & ADA, students with disabilities are required to take part in these assessments and must receive accommodations to participate (e.g., extra time).  Now, inclusion has reared its head.

The road to inclusion provides an opportunity for diversity in the classroom, it gives students a sense of belonging, shows that everyone has unique characteristics and abilities, shows that all students have strengths, also teachers can collaborate, and most importantly, ensures the civil rights of all individuals.

To prepare for inclusion, professionals and parents should understand the origin of the disability, diagnose needs for remediation (e.g., physical, intellectual, social, and communication) recognize strengths, appropriate placement, the IEP development, and life long support and services.  The inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education class must be well planned, carefully conducted, the continuum of services and program options must be maintained, and the placement decisions must be based on the student’s individual education needs.  Today, educators must be prepared and willing to address the needs of both general and special education students simultaneously.

Often parents of students with

disabilities are the force behind inclusive education. Parental education is important to help those who question the validity of inclusion.  Professionals should help parents to understand the goal of inclusion so that they may become comfortable with the inclusive setting.  Administrators should provide the necessary support (e.g., teacher training, continuing education) to make inclusive education successful. With positive administrators, professionals, staff, and parents, the vision of achieving this goal can be fulfilled.

Advocates for full inclusion base their position on four premises,

1 labeling an individual is harmful,

2 special education pull-out programs have been ineffective,

3 individuals with disabilities should be viewed as a minority group, and

4 standards should take precedence over experiments.

On the other hand, those who oppose full inclusion argue

1 general educators, special educators and parents are largely satisfied with the current continuum of placements,

2 general educators are unwilling and unable to cope with all students with disabilities,

3 justifying that individuals with disabilities are a minority is flawed,

4 evidence does not support full inclusion, and

5 special educators must preserve the continuum of placements.