Instructional Tactics That Facilitate Inclusion: Are We Doing Successful Inclusion in Secondary Classrooms?.

While inclusive educational placements have become the bedrock of national policy, there are questions concerning support for inclusion among both general and special educators. Further little is known concerning what instructional tactics teachers are actually using in their classes to facilitate inclusion. Ninety-one teachers from grades kindergarten through high school, teaching in either general or special education positions, completed three questionnaires; a) a demographics measure, b) a questionnaire on their use of effective instructional strategies that facilitate inclusion, and c) an attitude scale. Results suggest that attitudes toward inclusion among both general and special educators are less than positive, indicating that special educators may not be strong advocates of inclusive class practices. However, more positive attitudes toward inclusion among middle school teachers were related to increased use of instructional tactics much less frequently than elementary school teachers, suggesting that additional professional development on effective inclusion tactics may be necessary for teachers in the higher grade levels in order to facilitate effective inclusion. Instructional Tactics That Facilitate Inclusion Within the last 5 years, there have been further calls for increased education of students with mild or moderate disabilities in inclusive classes (Commission, 2002). As inclusion placements grow around the country, it becomes increasingly important to expand our understanding of how teachers feel about inclusion as well as how frequently teachers are using strategies that facilitate effective instruction for students with disabilities in the inclusive classroom. For example, with inclusion mandates firmly embedded within various national policy initiatives (Commission, 2002), one may well expect that special education teachers are advocating for inclusive instruction. However, little extant research has Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals 6 Instructional Tactics That Facilitate Inclusion | AASEP investigated special education teachers’ attitudes toward inclusive education, and research has not documented that special educators are serving as an advocacy group for effective inclusion. Further, some research has raised questions concerning the efficacy of inclusive classroom practices for enhancing the academic achievement of students with mild disabilities (Blankenship, Boon Fore III, Hagan-Burke, 2007; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994; Sowers & Powers, 1995; Vaughn, Schumn, & Klingner, 1995). While these studies have raised questions on the overall efficacy of inclusion, only a few studies have addressed the factors that may impact the efficacy of inclusive classroom instruction (Austin, 2001; Bender, Vail, & Scott, 1995; Blankenship, fore III, & Boon, 2005; Fore III, Hagan-Burke, Burke, Boon, & Smith, 2007; Katz, Mirenda, & Auerbach, 2002; Minke & Bear, 1996), and none of these efforts has been comprehensive. Thus, we do not know all of the particulars that impact successful inclusion. There has been limited research during the last decade on certain isolated variables that impact the implementation of inclusive education. For example, several researchers have investigated the attitudes of general education teachers toward inclusion (Daam, Beirne-Smith, & Latham, 2001; Minke & Bear, 1996; Shade & Steward, 2001). Other researchers have described the instructional strategies that teachers have employed in inclusive classes (Bender, Vail, & Scott, 1995; DeBettencourt, 1999). Unfortunately, many of these studies involve small numbers of teachers and are limited in the grade levels described. For example, the evidence on instructional strategies utilized by general education teachers in secondary grades is quite limited (DeBettencourt, 1999). Nevertheless, these studies do provide a basis for continued investigations of attitudes and instructional practices in the inclusive classroom. Attitudes of General Educators Toward Inclusion It has been fairly well established that general education teachers at some grade levels may exhibit less than positive attitudes towards inclusive instruction (Daam, Beirne-Smith, &Latham, 2001; Katz, Mirenda, & Auerbach, 2002; Shade & Steward, 2001). Consequently, researchers have focused more explicitly on this issue of teacher attitudes (Bender, Vail, & Scott, 1995; Chalmers, 1997). For example, Chalmers (1997) conducted a guided interview study in order to identify attitudes of regular education teachers who were perceived as effective instructors in the inclusive setting. To select the participants, the researchers polled both special education teachers and administrators. In order to be included in the subject sample, the teachers had to be nominated for participation by both the special education teacher and the principal. Thus, this design highlights attitudes toward inclusion held by a group of highly effective regular education teachers in the inclusive classroom. Once selected the participants took part in an open-ended one-hour guided interview based on 12 specific questions. Ten regular education teachers were selected; these teachers averaged 12.6 years in their current teaching position, and included 5 secondary teachers and 5 elementary teachers. These secondary teachers worked with students with mild mental disabilities, learning disabilities, or behavioral problems. The elementary teachers were serving a wider range of students with disabilities in terms of type and severity. All of these teachers were receiving consultative services for the students with disabilities in their classroom. Researchers transcribed all interviews and sent follow up questionnaires. The results indicated that teachers who have been identified as excellent inclusive teachers, share common positive beliefs about inclusion, as well as similar instructional skills. For example, these teachers shared the belief that individualized expectations were one requisite modification for effective inclusion services. Further, these teachers perceived that they were responsible for the academic success of all the students in their classes. Next, these teachers evidenced attitudes favoring Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals AASEP | Instructional Tactics That Facilitate Inclusion 7 interpersonal warmth and acceptance in interactions with students. The data showed that these general education teachers strived to maintain a positive working relationship with the special education teacher. However, the Chalmers (1997) study did indicate some differences between elementary and secondary teachers. Specifically, teachers in lower grades believed that they needed to provide environments fostering students’ development, whereas secondary teachers did not indicate this as imperative. This difference suggests that teachers at different grade levels may value inclusion differently at different grade levels, and future research should incorporate this grade level factor into the research design. Daam, Beirne-Smith, and Latham (2001) compared attitudes towards inclusion between several groups of educators. These researchers investigated the perceptions of elementary teachers, both general educators and special educators, as well as building administrators toward inclusive education. The subjects were 324 elementary general educators, 42 special educators, and 15 building administrators. A 24-item survey was designed by the researchers using a Likert-type scale. In addition, semistructured interviews were conducted with 12 participants, four persons from each group. This design allowed the researchers to compare attitudes towards inclusion among these different groups of educators. Surprisingly, the attitudes of both special education teachers and general education teachers towards inclusion were less than positive, and these groups were not significantly different in their attitudes. Both groups of teachers believed that pull-out programs were more likely to be an effective instructional setting for many students with special needs. This is an important finding, since special educators have historically served as advocates for individuals with disabilities. If inclusive instruction is going to be successfully implemented, at a minimum one would assume that the special educators involved should be supporting and advocating for inclusion. In contrast, a study by Minke & Bear (1996) seemed to demonstrate positive attitudes towards inclusive instruction among general and special educators. These researchers focused on teachers’ perceptions relating to special education services. Four hundred and ninety three teachers were asked to complete a 5-page questionnaire that was developed to examine teacher attitudes toward inclusion. These questionnaires were returned by 320 elementary school teachers. Regular education teachers’ return rate was 59% as compared to 90% return rate for special education teachers. These results suggested that both special education and regular education teachers report positive views of inclusion education. Finally, some research has suggested that attitudes towards inclusion may be somewhat malleable. For example, Shade and Steward (2001) conducted a study to assess the attitudes general education and special education pre-service teachers have towards inclusion of students with disabilities before and after they have completed an introductory course in special education. The subjects were 122 general education students enrolled in a required special education course in college, as well as 72 undergraduate special education majors. The first day of each course, subjects were administered a 48item inclusion inventory. Upon completion of the course, the subjects completed the same instrument as a posttest measure. The results of this study suggest that a single course can significantly change preservice teacher attitudes toward incl