Inclusion in the context of education is the practice, in which students with special educational needs spend most or all of their time with non-disabled students. Implementation of this practice varies; schools can use it for selected students with mild to severe special needs.[1][2]


Description

Inclusive education differs from previously held notions of ‘integration’ and ‘mainstreaming’, which tended to be concerned principally with disability and ‘special educational needs’ and implied learners changing or becoming ‘ready for’ accommodation by the mainstream. By contrast, inclusion is about the child’s right to participate and the school’s duty to accept the child. Inclusion rejects the use of special schools or classrooms to separate students with disabilities from students without disabilities. A premium is placed upon full participation by students with disabilities and upon respect for their social, civil, and educational rights.

Inclusive schools no longer distinguish between "general education" and "special education" programs; instead, the school is restructured so that all students learn together.[3]

Proponents want to maximize the participation of all learners in the community schools of their choice, make learning more meaningful and relevant for all, particularly those learners most vulnerable to exclusionary pressures, and to rethink and restructure policies, curricula, cultures and practices in schools and learning environments so that diverse learning needs can be met, whatever the origin or nature of those needs.[4]

  • All students can learn and benefit from education.
  • Schools adapt to the needs of students, rather than students adapting to the needs of the school.
  • Individual differences between students are a source of richness and diversity, and not a problem.
  • The diversity of needs and pace of development of students are addressed through a wide and flexible range of responses (so long as those responses do not include removing a student with a disability from a general education classroom).

Inclusive education is a process of removing barriers and enabling all students, including previously excluded groups, to learn and participate effectively within general school systems.

Classification

Inclusion has two sub-types:[5]: the first is sometimes called regular inclusion or partial inclusion, and the other is full inclusion.[6]

In a "regular inclusion" setting, students with special needs are educated in regular classes for nearly all of the day, or at least for more than half of the day.[6] Whenever possible, the students receive any additional help or special instruction in the general classroom. Most specialized services are provided outside a regular classroom, particularly if these services require special equipment or might be disruptive to the rest of the class (such as speech therapy), and students are pulled out for these services. In this case, the student occasionally leaves the regular classroom to attend smaller, more intensive instructional sessions in a resource room, or to receive other related services, such as speech and language therapy, occupational and/or physical therapy, and social work.[6] This approach can be very similar to many mainstreaming practices.[6]

Hands On Learning Australia takes disengaged students, as well as some students with special needs, out of class one day per week and put into an alternative cross-age peer group to develop strong relationships and enable them to better cope with general education classes. This is an example of a "regular" inclusion model.

Under full inclusion, by contrast, students classified as disabled remain in general classrooms virtually all the time.[6] Related services are provided via "push in," meaning that professionals enter the classroom and deliver assistance there.[6]

Full inclusion is the complete integration of the student with a special need into the general education classroom. The student receives all special services in the same general education classroom as all other students. This is very common with students whose needs are easily met in a classroom, such as a modification that allows the student more time to complete written assignments.

Schools that practice full inclusion for all students have no separate special education classes. However, full inclusion of all students, regardless of their particular needs, is a controversial practice, and it is not widely applied.[7][8][9] It is more common for local educational agencies to provide a variety of settings, from special classrooms to mainstreaming to inclusion, and to assign students to the system that seems most likely to help the student achieve his or her individual educational goals.

Alternatives

Students with disabilities who are not included are typically either mainstreamed or segregated.

A mainstreamed student attends some general education classes, typically for less than half the day, and often for less rigorous classes. For example, a young student with significant intellectual disabilities might be mainstreamed for physical education classes, art classes and storybook time, but spend reading and mathematics classes with other students that have similar disabilities.

A segregated student attends no classes with non-disabled students. He or she might attend a special school that only enrolls other students with disabilities, or might be placed in a dedicated, self-contained classroom in a school that also enrolls general education students. Some students may be confined to a hospital due to a medical condition and are thus eligible for tutoring services provided by a school district.[10]

Less common alternatives include homeschooling[11] and, particularly in developing countries, exclusion from education.

Legal issues

The new anti-discriminatory climate has provided the basis for much change in policy and statute, nationally and internationally. Inclusion has been enshrined at the same time that segregation and discrimination have been rejected. Articulations of the new developments in ways of thinking, in policy and in law include:

  • The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) which sets out children’s rights in respect of freedom from discrimination and in respect of the representation of their wishes and views.
  • The UNESCO Salamanca Statement (1994) which calls on all governments to give the highest priority to inclusive education.

For schools in the United States, the federal requirement that students be educated in the least restrictive environment that is reasonable encourages the implementation of inclusion for some students.

Frequency of use

The proportion of students with disabilities who are included varies by place and by type of disability, but it is relatively common for students with milder disabilities and less common with certain kinds of severe disabilities. In Denmark, 99% of students with learning disabilities are placed in general education classrooms full-time.[12] In the United States, three out of five students with learning disabilities spend the overwhelming majority of their time in the general education classroom.[13]

Necessary resources

Although once hailed as a way to increase achievement while decreasing costs, full inclusion does not save money, reduce students' needs, or improve academic outcomes; in most cases, it merely moves the special education professionals out of their own classrooms and into a corner of the general classroom. To avoid harm to the academic education of students with disabilities, a full panoply of services and resources is required, including:[14]

  • Adequate supports and services for the student
  • Well-designed individualized education programs
  • Professional development for all teachers involved, general and special educators alike
  • Time for teachers to plan, meet, create, and evaluate the students together
  • Reduced class size based on the severity of the student needs
  • Professional skill development in the areas of cooperative learning, peer tutoring, adaptve curriculum
  • Collaboration between parents, teachers and administrators
  • Sufficient funding so that schools will be able to develop programs for students based on student need instead of the availability of funding.

In principle, several factors can determine the success of inclusive classrooms:

  • Family-school partnerships
  • Collaboration between general and special educators
  • Well-constructed plans that identify specific accommodations, modifications, and goals for each student
  • Coordinated planning and communication between "general" and "special needs" staff
  • Integrated service delivery
  • Ongoing training and staff development

Common practices

Students in an inclusive classroom are generally placed with their chronological age-mates, regardless of whether the students are working above or below the typical academic level for their age. Also, to encourage a sense of belonging, emphasis is placed on the value of friendships. Teachers often nurture a relationship between a student with special needs and a same-age student without a special educational need. Another common practice is the assignment of a buddy to accompany a student with special needs at all times (for example in the cafeteria, on the playground, on the bus and so on). This is used to show students that a diverse group of people make up a community, that no one type of student is better than another, and to remove any barriers to a friendship that may occur if a student is viewed as "helpless." Such practices reduce the chance for elitism among students in later grades and encourage cooperation among groups.[15]

Teachers use a number of techniques to help build classroom communities:

  • Games designed to build community
  • Involving students in solving problems
  • Songs and books that teach community
  • Openly dealing with individual differences by discussion
  • Assigning classroom jobs that build community
  • Teaching students to look for ways to help each other
  • Utilizing physical therapy equipment such as standing frames, so students who typically use wheelchairs can stand when the other students are standing and more actively participate in activities
  • Encouraging students to take the role of teacher and deliver instruction (e.g. read a portion of a book to a student with severe disabilities)
  • Focus on the strength of a student with special needs

Selection of students for inclusion

Educators generally say that some students with special needs are not good candidates for inclusion.[16] Many schools expect a fully included student to be working at or near grade level, but more fundamental requirements exist: First, being included requires that the student is able to attend school. Students that are entirely excluded from school (for example, due to long-term hospitalization), or who are educated outside of schools (for example, due to enrollment in a distance education program) cannot attempt inclusion.

Additionally, some students with special needs are poor candidates for inclusion because of their effect on other students. For example, students with severe behavioral problems, such that they represent a serious physical danger to others, are poor candidates for inclusion, because the school has a duty to provide a safe environment to all students and staff.

Finally, some students are not good candidates for inclusion because the normal activities in a general education classroom will prevent them from learning.[6] For example, a student with severe attention difficulties or extreme sensory processing disorders might be highly distracted or distressed by the presence of other students working at their desks. Inclusion needs to be appropriate to the child's unique needs.

Most students with special needs do not fall into these extreme categories, as most students do attend school, are not violent, do not have severe sensory processing disorders, etc.

The students that are most commonly included are those with physical disabilities that have no or little effect on their academic work (diabetes mellitus, epilepsy, food allergies, paralysis), students with all types of mild disabilities, and students whose disabilities require relatively few specialized services.

Bowe says that regular inclusion, but not full inclusion, is a reasonable approach for a significant majority of students with special needs.[6] He also says that for some students, notably those with severe autism spectrum disorders or mental retardation, as well as many who are deaf or have multiple disabilities, even regular inclusion may not offer an appropriate education.[6]

Relationship to progressive education

Some advocates of inclusion promote the adoption of progressive education practices. In the progressive education or inclusive classroom, everyone is exposed to a "rich set of activities," and each student does what he or she can do, or what he or she wishes to do and learns whatever comes from that experience. Maria Montessori's schools sometimes named as an example of inclusive education.

Inclusion requires some changes in how teachers teach, as well as changes in how students with and without special needs interact with and relate to one another. Inclusive education practices frequently rely on active learning, authentic assessment practices, applied curriculum, multi-level instructional approaches, and increased attention to diverse student needs and individualization.

Arguments for full inclusion

Advocates say that even partial non-inclusion is morally unacceptable.[17] Proponents believe that non-inclusion reduces the disabled students' social importance and that maintaining their social visibility is more important than their academic achievement. Proponents say that society accords disabled people less human dignity when they are less visible in general education classrooms. Advocates say that even if typical students are harmed academically by the full inclusion of certain special needs students, that the non-inclusion of these students would still be morally unacceptable, as advocates believe that the harm to typical students' education is always less important than the social harm caused by making people with disabilities less visible in society.[17]

A second key argument is that everybody benefits from inclusion. Advocates say that there are many children and young people who don't fit in (or feel as though they don't), and that a school that fully includes all disabled students feels welcoming to all. Moreover, at least one author has studied the impact a diversified student body has on the general education population and has concluded that students with mental retardation who spend time among their peers show an increase in social skills and academic profeciency.[18]

Advocates for inclusion say that the long-term effects of typical students who are included with special needs students at a very young age have a heightened sensitivity to the challenges that others face, increased empathy and compassion, and improved leadership skills, which benefits all of society.[19]

A combination of inclusion and pull-out (partial inclusion) services has been shown to be beneficial to students with learning disabilities in the area of reading comprehension, and preferential for the special education teachers delivering the services.[20]


Inclusive education can be beneficial to all students in a class, not just students with special needs. Some research show that inclusion helps students understand the importance of working together, and fosters a sense of tolerance and empathy among the student body.[21]

Criticism

Critics of full and partial inclusion include both educators, administrators and parents. Full and partial inclusion approaches neglect to acknowledge the fact most students with significant special needs require individualized instruction or highly controlled environments. Thus, general education classroom teachers often are teaching a curriculum while the special education teacher is remediating instruction at the same time. Similarly, a child with serious inattention problems may be unable to focus in a classroom that contains twenty or more active children. Although with the increase of incidence of disabilities in the student population, this is a circumstance all teachers must contend with, and is not a direct result of inclusion as a concept.[22]

Full inclusion may in fact be a way for schools to placate parents and the general public, using the word as a phrase to garner attention for what are in fact illusive efforts to education students with special needs in the general education envronment.[23]

At least one study examined the lack of individualized services provided for students with IEPs when placed in an inclusive rather than mainstreamed environment.[24]

Some researchers have maintained school districts neglect to prepare general education staff for students with special needs, thus preventing any achievement. Moreover, school districts often expound an inclusive philosphy for political reasons, and do away with any valuable pull-out services, all on behalf of the students who have no so say in the matter.[25]

Inclusion is viewed by some as a practice philosophically attractive yet impractical, and studies have not corroborated the proposed advantages of full or partial inclusion. Moreover, "push in" servicing does not allow students with moderate to severe disabilities individualized instruction in a resource room, from which many show considerable benefit in both learning and emotional development.[26]

Parents of disabled students may be cautious about placing their children in an inclusion program because of fears that the children will be ridiculed by other students, or be unable to develop regular life skills in an academic classroom.[27]

Some argue that inclusive schools are not a cost-effective response when compared to cheaper or more effective interventions, such as special education. They argue that special education helps "fix" the special needs students by providing individualized and personalized instruction to meet their unique needs. This is to help students with special needs adjust as quickly as possible to the mainstream of the school and community. Proponents counter that students with special needs are not fully into the mainstream of student life because they are secluded to special education. Some argue that isolating students with special needs may lower their self-esteem and may reduce their ability to deal with other people. In keeping these students in separate classrooms they aren't going to see the struggles and achievements that they can make together. However, at least one study indicated mainstreaming in education has long-term benefits for students as indicated by increased test scores,[28] where the benefit of inclusion has not yet been proved.