----

##  Inclusion in Middle Schools. ERIC Digest.                                    

Current legislation supports the concept of including students with             disabilities in the general education classroom but leaves many                 wondering, "Is this approach working?" Determining the effectiveness            of this practice is a task not easily accomplished. The term                    itself-inclusion-is not found in any law and is used inconsistently             in the educational community. Inclusive programs differ greatly from            district to district, both in definition and implementation.                    Variables such as amount and nature of support provided to the                  regular classroom teacher differ dramatically from district to                  district, sometimes from school to school and child to child, and               are not easily controlled for research purposes. This Digest                    discusses the rationale for inclusion of students with mild to                  moderate disabilities in middle schools, explores recent research on            inclusion, and discusses barriers to                                            implementation. OVERVIEWThe rationale for inclusion has never             rested on research findings, but on principle. Proponents insist                that the integration of students with disabilities is inherently                right, compared often to the same right to racial integration. The              generally accepted concept of inclusion is that students with                   disabilities attend classes with their general education peers with             direct support from special educators. 
According to Halvorsen and             Neary (2001), inclusion differs from mainstreaming in that students             are members of only the general education class and do not belong to            any other specialized environment based on their disability. This               notion is supported by middle schools using the true middle school              model. In these schools, students with disabilities are members of              the classroom as their first association, not members of a special              education population. Middle schools also lend themselves to                    inclusive practices because the co-teaching model (common in middle             schools) is more successfully implemented where interdisciplinary               teaching teams share planning. 
The Twenty-First Annual Report to              Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities             Education                                                                       Act (http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/Research/OSEP99AnlRpt/)               reports that the number of students with disabilities served under              IDEA continues to increase at a rate higher than the general                    population. With this growing number of students served and specific            provisions in the amendments calling for more access to the general             curriculum for these students, examining the research on inclusion              is imperative to understand its effects and barriers to                         overcome. RESEARCH ON INCLUSIONKochhar, West, and                         Taymans (2000) draw from the research to conclude that the benefits             of inclusion across grade levels far outweigh the difficulties                  inclusion presents. For example, they believe that for students with            disabilities, inclusion: 
* facilitates more appropriate social                behavior because of higher expectations in the general education                classroom; 
* promotes levels of achievement higher or at least as             high as those achieved in self-contained classrooms; 
* offers a               wide circle of support, including social support from classmates                without disabilities; and 
* improves the ability of students and              teachers to adapt to different teaching and learning styles. 
The              authors further contend that general education students also benefit            from inclusion. For these students, inclusion: 
* offers the                   advantage of having an extra teacher or aide to help them with the              development of their own skills; 
* leads to greater acceptance of             students with disabilities; 
* facilitates understanding that                  students with disabilities are not always easily identified; and 
*            promotes better understanding of the similarities among students                with and without disabilities. 
Research appears to support many of            these claims. Walther-Thomas et al. (1996) found benefits for both              special and general education students in a three-year study of                 elementary inclusive settings where co-teaching was practiced.                  Improvements in social skills for special education and                         low-achieving students were found, and all students were reported to            have developed a new appreciation of their own skills and                       accomplishments. In addition, all learned to value themselves and               others as unique individuals. In a review of research on inclusion              at both the elementary and secondary levels, Salend and                         Duhaney (1999) also report that academic performance is equal to or             better in inclusive settings for general education students,                    including high achievers. Social performance also appears to be                 enhanced because students have a better understanding of and more               tolerance for student differences. 
Hunt (2000) similarly reports              positive effects for both general and special education students at             the elementary level. Academic benefits for general education                   students include having additional special education staff in the               classroom, providing small-group, individualized instruction, and               assisting in the development of academic adaptations for all                    students who need them. The author also reports that students have a            better understanding of individual differences through learning in              inclusive settings. In a meta-analysis of the effects of inclusion              on students with special needs, Baker and Zigmond (1995) found a                small to moderate positive effect of inclusive practices on the                 academic and social outcomes of pupils in elementary schools.                   Academic benefits were measured through standard achievement tasks,             while self, peer, teacher, and observer ratings were used to                    evaluate social effects. Another study reporting perceptions of                 middle school students, their parents, and teachers indicated a                 shared belief that middle level students with mild disabilities                 included in the general classroom experienced (1) increased                     self-confidence, (2) camaraderie, (3) support of the teachers,                  and (4) higher expectations. The study also indicated that these                students avoided low self-esteem that can result from placement in a            special education setting (Ritter, Michel, & Irby, 1999). 
Specific            results for students with disabilities, however, are inconclusive.              Salend (2001), like most who examine research on the effectiveness              of inclusion, reports mixed results. While some studies show                    increased academic performance of students with disabilities in                 inclusive settings, others question inclusion's effectiveness.                  Likewise, some studies report positive social gains for students                with disabilities in the regular classroom, while others report that            students included have experienced isolation and                                frustration. 
Tiner (1995) surveyed 120 teachers from six middle               schools in one Colorado school district and found that teachers were            most concerned with ensuring that all students have an opportunity              to learn. Participants in the study voiced a concern that too much              time was spent on special students and resulted in time taken away              from others in the classroom. These findings have been echoed in the            literature, but are these concerns valid? 
Staub and Peck (1995)               examined studies using control groups to compare progress of                    children who are not disabled in classrooms said to be inclusive                with those in classrooms that do not include students with                      disabilities. No significant differences were found between the two             groups of students. In addition, the presence of children with                  disabilities had no effect on either the time allocated to                      instruction or the levels of interruption. Other studies have                   obtained similar results. Hines and Johnston (1997) report results              of a study of 25 general education middle school teachers whose                 schedule included "regular," co-taught (inclusive), and mainstream              settings. Instructional interactions across the three settings were             analyzed, and results indicated that there was no significant                   statistical difference in instructional time across the three                   settings, "but significantly more time was spent in managerial                  interactions in mainstream classrooms than in regular or co-taught              settings" (Hines & Johnston, 1997, p. 113). The co-taught classes               had the fewest incidences of correcting student behavior by the                 general education teacher. On a corresponding survey, however, these            same teachers perceived that they had less instructional time when              special students were present. BARRIERS TO INCLUSIONThe                   current barriers to inclusion generally fall into three categories:             organizational, attitudinal, and knowledge barriers (Kochhar,                   West, & Taymans, 2000). Organizational barriers are related to the              differences in ways schools and classes are taught, staffed, and                managed. The National Education Association recommends that                     inclusive class size be no higher than 28, and that in classes                  including students with learning disabilities, this population                  should make up no more than 25% of the class. This arrangement could            mean extra faculty in schools using co-teachers. Scheduling the                 amount of time needed for collaborative planning, especially at the             middle and secondary levels where a co-teacher may be working with              as many as six different teachers during the course of the school               day, is another difficulty. 
Attitudinal barriers, especially among            teachers, have been explored as inclusive practices are implemented.            The primary findings are that teachers agree in principle with the              goals of inclusion, but many do not feel prepared to work in                    inclusive settings (Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2000; Hines & Johnston,              1997). In addition, collaboration calls for a shift in control and              the sharing of a learning environment rather than having individual             space, both concepts foreign to the traditionally trained teacher.              Also, accepting new ideas about teaching, learning, and learning                styles is called for and not always embraced by teachers. 
Both                general and special educators feel that knowledge barriers also                 exist in inclusive classrooms. In many cases, general educators do              not feel that they have received the necessary training for working             with students with special needs. Conversely, special educators may             be at a disadvantage in middle level classes if they are not content            experts and may thus be placed in more of a consultant's                        role. SUMMARYBoth opponents and proponents of inclusion can               find scattered research to support their respective views, although             current research is inconclusive. Opponents point to research                   showing negative effects of inclusion, often citing low self-esteem             of students with disabilities in the general education setting and              poor academic grades. For those supporting inclusion, research                  exists that shows positive results for both special and general                 education students, including academic and social benefits.                     Currently, the "issue" of inclusion appears to be moot. With                    legislation supporting the practice, schools continue to look for               ways to include special needs students as outlined in the                       IDEA. FOR MORE INFORMATIONBaker, J. M., & Zigmond, N. (1995).             The meaning and practice of inclusion for students with learning                disabilities: Themes and implications from the five case studies.               JOURNAL OF SPECIAL EDUCATION, 29(2), 163-180. EJ 509                            951. 
Halvorsen, A. T., & Neary, T. (2001). BUILDING INCLUSIVE                 SCHOOLS: TOOLS AND STRATEGIES FOR SUCCESS. Needham Heights, MA:                 Allyn & Bacon. 
Hines, R. A., & Johnston, J. H. (1997). Inclusion.             In J. L. Irvin (Ed.), WHAT CURRENT RESEARCH SAYS TO THE MIDDLE LEVEL            PRACTITIONER (pp. 109-120). Columbus, OH: NMSA. ED 427 847. 
Hunt,             P. (2000). 'Community' is what I think everyone is talking about.               REMEDIAL & SPECIAL EDUCATION, 21(5), 305. 
Kochhar, C. A., West, L.            L., & Taymans, J. M. (2000). SUCCESSFUL INCLUSION: PRACTICAL                    STRATEGIES FOR A SHARED RESPONSIBILITY. Upper Saddle River, NJ:                 Prentice-Hall. 
Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2000). THE               INCLUSIVE CLASSROOM: STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTION. Upper                Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
Ritter, C. L., Michel, C. S., &              Irby, B. (1999). Concerning inclusion: Perceptions of middle school             students, their parents, and teachers. RURAL SPECIAL EDUCATION                  QUARTERLY, 18(2), 10-17. EJ 607 015. 
Salend, S. J. (2001).                    CREATING INCLUSIVE CLASSROOMS: EFFECTIVE AND REFLECTIVE PRACTICES.              Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
Salend, S. J., & Duhaney,              L. G. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without              disabilities and their educators. REMEDIAL & SPECIAL EDUCATION,                 20(2), 114-127. EJ 585 702. 
Staub, D., & Peck, C. A. (1995). What             are the outcomes for nondisabled students? EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP,              52(4), 36-40. EJ 496 166. 
Tiner, Kathy A. (1995). Conditions                  conducive to special learners in the general classroom: Inclusion in            the 1990s. DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS INTERNATIONAL, 55(08),                        2348A. 
Walther-Thomas, C. S., Bryant, M., & Land, S. (1996).                  Planning for effective co-teaching: The key to successful inclusion.            REMEDIAL AND SPECIAL EDUCATION, 17(4), 255-264. EJ 527                          660. 
----- 
References identified with an ED (ERIC document),                EJ (ERIC journal), or PS number are cited in the ERIC database. Most            documents are available in ERIC microfiche collections at more than             900 locations worldwide, and can be ordered through EDRS: (800)                 443-ERIC. Journal articles are available from the original journal,             interlibrary loan services, or article reproduction clearinghouses              such as Ingenta (800-296-2221). 
ERIC Digests are in the public                domain and may be freely reproduced. 
This project has been funded             at least in part with Federal funds from the U.S. Department of                 Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, under                contract no. ED-99-CO-0020. The content of this publication does not            necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of             Education, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or             organizations imply endorsement by the U.S. Government. 
ABOUT                 ERIC/EECE DIGESTS... 
ERIC/EECE Digests are short reports on topics            of current interest in education. Digests are targeted to teachers,             administrators, parents, policy makers, and other practitioners.                They are designed to provide an overview of information on a given              topic and references to items that provide more detailed                        information. Reviewed by subject experts who are content specialists            in the field, the digests are funded by the Office of Educational               Research and Improvement (OERI) of the U.S. Department of                       Education. 
All ERIC/EECE Digests are available free in original               printed form directly from the clearinghouse. For additional                    information on this topic, please contact ERIC/EECE directly at                 [email protected] or 1-800-583-4135.                                         **Title:** Inclusion in Middle Schools. ERIC Digest.                                    **Document Type:** Information Analyses---ERIC Information Analysis Products (IAPs) (071); Information Analyses---ERIC Digests (Selected) in Full Text (073); **Available From:** ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education,                 Children's Research Center, University of Illinois, 51 Gerty Dr.,               Champaign, IL 61820-7469. Tel: 800-583-4135 (Toll Free); Tel:                   217-333-1386; Fax: 217-333-3767; Web site: http://ericeece.org;                 e-mail: [email protected]. For full text:                                       http://ericeece.org/pubs/digests.html.                                       **Descriptors:**  Disabilities, Educational Cooperation,  Inclusive Schools,                     Mainstreaming,  Middle School Students, Middle Schools,  Regular and            Special Education Relationship, Special Education,  Special Needs               Students, Student Needs, Teacher Collaboration                               **Identifiers:** ERIC Digests                                                                 
###
[Return to ERIC Digest Search Page]