Academic achievement and class placement in high school: Do students with learning disabilities achieve more in one class placement than another?

Abstract The purpose of this study was to examine classroom placement, inclusive versus non-inclusive, relative to the academic performance of students with specific learning disabilities in secondary content area classrooms. Fifty-seven high school students with learning disabilities were assessed using the Grade Level Short Form of the Multilevel Academic Survey Test (MAST). Their reading and math scores were examined relative to each student's grade level, number of general and special education classes attended, and types of placement (i.e., inclusive or non-inclusive setting). The results revealed no statistically significant evidence to indicate that students' academic achievement varied based on inclusive versus non-inclusive placement. The only statistically significant differences observed regarded participants enrolled in a general education literature class compared to those participants placed in a special education setting for literature. Implications for practice, limitations of the study, and considerations for future research are discussed. ********** Recent trends reveal that students with specific learning disabilities (SLD) are increasingly educated in general education classrooms, while the number receiving instruction in resource rooms or separate classes has decreased substantially (Holloway, 2001). Despite the increase in students with disabilities placed in general education settings there is limited research, particularly at the secondary level, to suggest where students with SLD achieve more academically. Of the many issues related to the integration or inclusion of students with disabilities into general education classrooms, there is none more important than the effects of placement on students' learning and social relations with classmates (Baker, Wang, & Walberg, 1995). The research literature reviewed for this study was mixed regarding whether academic outcomes for students with disabilities are improved in inclusive classroom settings. Previous research suggested that students with SLD in elementary schools achieve more academically in inclusive programs versus non-inclusive programs (Banerji & Dailey, 1995; Waldron & McLeskey, 1998). Other studies suggested that middle school students achieve more academically in inclusive programs (Rea, McLaughlin, & Walther-Thomas, 2002). For example, Rea et al. (2002) reported that students with disabilities had higher grades, fewer behavioral infractions, and attended school more often than students educated in non-inclusive programs. In contrast, a number of other studies concluded that students with disabilities achieved more in inclusive classroom settings (Baker, et al., 1995; Madden & Slavin, 1983; Carlberg & Kavale, 1980). The only certainty regarding the effects of class placement is that there is no consensus. Researchers have drawn vastly different conclusions (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980) such as: (a) Students with severe learning disabilities and emotional and behavioral disorders may achieve more in special classrooms (Carlberg & Kavale, 1980); (b) Students with disabilities may achieve more academically in programs that combine the inclusive model with the resource model as opposed to either model on its own (Holloway, 2001); and (c) Inclusive versus non-inclusive placements produce no differences in the academic achievement of students with disabilities (Affleck, Madge, Adams, & Lavenbraun, 1988; Manset & Semmel, 1997; Waldron & McLeskey, 1998). Another perspective voiced is that the frequently posed question of class placement is the wrong question to consider (Leinhardt & Palloy, 1982; Zigmond, 2003; Hocutt, 1996). Researchers taking this position point out that the evidence is inconclusive on whether students with disabilities achieve more in one instructional setting as opposed to another, and contend that questions regarding class placement for students with disabilities are at odds with a focus on individualized educational planning. …