Inclusion is on the rise. Spurred by changing public attitudes, court cases, and the work of advocates, inclusion of children with disabilities in regular classrooms is becoming increasingly common in schools across North America. Yet experts differ on whether inclusion is proceeding in ways that best meet children's varied needs.
All agree, however, that more and more children with a wide array of physical and mental disabilities—such as autism, Down's syndrome, mental retardation, blindness, and learning disabilities—are taking part in regular classroom life with their nondisabled peers. "The momentum has picked up dramatically," says Richard Villa, an inclusion consultant from Colchester, Vt. (Villa is co-editor of the ASCD book Creating an Inclusive School, which was mailed to comprehensive and premium members last month.)
The movement to place children with disabilities in regular classrooms is "a national trend," affirms Virginia Roach, deputy executive director of the National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE). Inclusion efforts are under way in virtually every state, she says.
In New York State, for example, inclusion is making rapid headway. According to Philip Ellis of the New York State United Teachers union, an annual survey of union local presidents shows a steady increase in inclusion activities. In 1993, 60 percent of survey respondents reported inclusion activities in their districts. In 1994, that figure had climbed to 75 percent. By 1995, it had reached 83 percent.
Inclusion "has just exploded across the country," says Beth Bader of the American Federation of Teachers. At first, inclusion was "pushed" by the disability community, she says—but now it is also being promoted by school administrators who want to check the mounting costs of special education.
In this rapid change, some experts see reasons to celebrate; others find cause for concern. Advocates of inclusion point to benefits for disabled children—higher expectations, better socialization—and for nondisabled children, who learn to accept human differences. Critics of inclusion efforts, however, say both teachers and students are being hurt in the rush to embrace inclusion. Teachers complain that they are given inadequate resources and excluded from planning, Bader says. In some cases, teachers have been given sole responsibility for a class of 30 children, more than 10 of whom have disabilities. Such circumstances are "a recipe for disaster," she warns.
Ideally, when children with disabilities move to regular classrooms, their teachers receive support in the form of training, help from a special education teacher (consulting services or coteaching), instructional aides, and so on. Of prime importance is collaboration with specialists. Inclusion is forging "a very different relationship" between regular education teachers and special education teachers, who now often work in teams, says Douglas Biklen of Syracuse University, author of Schooling Without Labels.
Inclusion works well when there is "true collaboration" between general education and special education teachers, says Theresa Rebhorn of the Parent Educational Advocacy Training Center in Fairfax, Va. When these teachers have "a full and equal partnership" and plan lessons together, that's "an excellent scenario" for inclusion, she says.
Rebhorn's own son, who has a learning disability, is in a class of 29 students, 13 of whom have learning disabilities. This statistic initially caused Rebhorn some apprehension. But the general education and special education teachers team teach, and "it works beautifully," she reports. The teachers' efforts to individualize instruction are "a really, really collaborative endeavor."
Many experts and teachers are protesting, however, that teachers are not getting the support for inclusion they need. In New York State, for example, "the overwhelming majority of school districts don't provide staff development prior to placing children with disabilities in general education classrooms," says Ellis, basing this conclusion on the union's survey of local presidents. And in 1995, only one-third of respondents who said that training was provided deemed the training adequate.
Moreover, teachers are sometimes not even informed of students' disabilities, Ellis says. Although teachers need to see children's IEPs to modify instruction and testing, IEPs may be withheld from them. "Teachers are operating in the dark."
In many cases, children with disabilities are moved from resource and self-contained classrooms into regular classrooms, and the necessary supports do not follow the children, says Doug Fuchs, a professor of special education at Vanderbilt University. Regular education teachers are "left holding the bag," he says. "What's happening is not what any advocate had in mind."
Maintaining needed supports for disabled children in the regular classroom is "an enormous task," Fuchs says—one that requires a degree of commitment, communication, and skill that he doesn't see in many schools. Both teachers and children are losers, he believes.
Special education teachers suffer, Fuchs says, when their 18 or 19 students are dispersed among 10 classrooms. How can a special education teacher check on his or her charges and collaborate with all of their teachers? he wonders. Such a feat would be nearly impossible, even for "a bright, energetic one on roller skates."
Inclusion is "happening nicely" in wealthier suburban and rural districts, where there are fewer children with disabilities and educators are "really trying" to make it work, Bader says. But where budget cuts are driving inclusion, "awful things are happening." Some districts are "dumping" disabled children "wholesale" into regular classrooms, she claims. This practice aggravates discipline problems, when children with behavior disorders are returned to regular classrooms. "A backlash is building up among parents of nondisabled children," who feel that their children's education is being compromised, Bader says.
Some experts even question "successful" instances of inclusion. When people say inclusion efforts are "successful," they seldom mean that students with disabilities are making gains in academic achievement, says Jo Webber of Southwest Texas State University. Usually, "success" means that disabled students have been placed in regular classrooms, their behavior is not unduly disruptive, and teachers are not unhappy. Webber is concerned at the lack of documentation for improved academic achievement—or even gains in social skills.
"I do not see evidence of inclusion programs strengthening [students'] academic achievement," agrees Fuchs—although he concedes that the same could be said of many special education programs. Inclusion advocates are savoring placements in general education classrooms as a "victory," Ellis says. Few are asking—yet—what kind of education disabled children will receive there.
Success Stories
Some experts believe concerns about inclusion are overblown. The attitudes of teachers and administrators who have experienced inclusion are "overwhelmingly positive," Villa asserts.
Inclusion has been most successful where it has been part of broad reform of general education, Villa says. In many schools, the presence of children with disabilities has sparked other reform initiatives, such as team teaching, peer teaching, cooperative learning, authentic assessment, and thematic, interdisciplinary instruction. Inclusion works best in certain school environments, Roach adds. It tends to thrive where there are strong lines of communication and a culture of innovation and reform. "School reform and inclusion are synonymous," she believes.
Inclusion "changes the business of how we do school," Villa says. "If you can send children who challenge the status quo somewhere else, you don't have to change." Through inclusion, teachers are collaborating and gaining new skills—and the benefits are accruing to all children.
Despite the controversy, Villa expects inclusion to become even more widespread. "I don't think there's any going back," he says. "The rationale for it is so compelling." Rebhorn agrees. "There are too many success stories, too many parents who want this for their kids, too many educators who believe in it—I don't think we'll go back to segregation."
"As a parent, I feel a sense of urgency and `just-do-it,'" she adds. Children with disabilities "do not have a day to waste."
An ASCD Resource
An ASCD Resource
Inclusion, a videotape series, explains the principles of inclusion and shows how teachers, administrators, and parents can join forces to make it work. The series includes three videotapes and a facilitator's guide. Price to ASCD members is $680. A preview tape is available for $20. Stock no. 495044. For more information, contact ASCD's Call Service Center at (703)549-9110.
This article is the first in a two-part series. Next month: how educators can address the challenges posed by inclusion.