Jennifer Armenia

EDUL 6023

Assignment 1

 

1. The three models of special education are mainstreaming, inclusion and full inclusion. 

 

Mainstreaming involves a child spending the day in a special education classroom where he or she receives special education services and being placed in a “regular” education classroom for subjects in which the child can achieve at the same levels as the students in the regular education classroom and does not require special education services.  With this model when the special education student is in the regular classroom he or she is expected to complete the same assignments as the other students complete without modifications.

 

Inclusion involves a child being in a regular education class as much as possible and support services for that child will be brought to the classroom rather than the child being removed from a the regular classroom and moving to a special education classroom.  The students in this model are not required to keep up with the other students in the classroom and his or her assignments are modified so he is able to be successful.

 

Full Inclusion involves a child being in a regular education all day no matter what the disability is.  All special education services the child receives is brought to him or her in the regular classroom.

 

2. The federal laws that relate to inclusive practices in regular education are IDEA and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.  IDEA states that a child with disabilities is to be educated in the “least restrictive environment” (regular classroom) to the maximum extent possible.  Children with disabilities are required to have an IEP.  While the child’s IEP is being developed the child is to be placed in a regular education classroom to begin with and then if it is determined that the “least restrictive environment” is not the regular education classroom the IEP team must include an explanation why the regular classroom is not appropriate.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 requires that a school that receives federal funds provide education for qualified handicapped person with people who are not handicapped to the highest extent appropriate to meet the needs of the handicapped person.  This means that a handicapped child is to be placed in a regular education classroom unless it is shown that an education in a regular education classroom cannot be achieved with the use of extra services and aides.

 

3. The four implications across the case law actions described in the article are:
1. All options must be considered before removing a child from the regular classroom.
2. Regular education placement is appropriate for a disables child is he or she can receive a satisfactory education even if it is not the best academic setting for the child and non-academic benefits must be considered when making this decision.
3. If a child cannot receive a satisfactory education in a regular classroom schools must include the child in all school programs to the maximum extent that is appropriate for the child.
4. Residential placement can be enforced if the current district adequately explores the effectiveness of the regular education placement with special aides and services.  If the benefits of regular education are minimal and a child’s educational needs can only be met by placing him or her in a residential placement.

 

4. The findings of research related to including students with disabilities in regular education settings are that students placed in self-contained classrooms are detrimental to students and that students with mild handicapping conditions receive a small to moderate effect on academic and social outcome of special needs students when placed in an inclusion setting.  The results from the Success For All program concluded that with early and continuing intervention, almost all children can be successful in reading.  It was also found that special needs students who graduate from a segregated program had an employment rate of 53% and special needs students who gradate from an inclusive program graduate with an employment rate of 73%.  It was also found that the cost for education students in an integrated program was half the cost of educating students in a segregated program. 
5. From my observations as a teacher at my school the 5 recommendatiosn I feel that would most benefit the students in my school are:
1. Top-down mandated full inclusion is inappropriate.
2. The building staff must agree on a philosophy of education.  Teachers and support staff must be involved in the decision making process for students and building wide programs.
3. Extensive staff development must be made available for every teacher and paraprofessional.
4. Developing programs which consider multiple teaching/learning approaches such as co-teaching, peer partners, cooperative learning, heterogeneous grouping, etc.
5. Appeal process must be developed that allow teachers to challenge the implementation of IEP’s and placements that they determine to be inappropriate for a child.