Search results

The purpose of this chapter is to share the experience and discuss issues that support and hinder inclusive practices in Taiwan. In this chapter, inclusion-related culture and policies are described in the context of Taiwan, followed by the challenges and lessons learned from promoting inclusive education for students with disabilities from the perspectives of general and special education teachers. Some promising strategies applied by teachers are also discussed in this chapter based on the findings of the research literature in Taiwan. Implications for practice and research about inclusion are addressed at the end of this chapter.

During the last decade, school districts throughout the United States have implemented inclusion programs utilizing a variety of models. A growing number of school districts are including all students with disabilities, even those with severe disabilities, into general education classrooms (Thousand & Villa, 1990). Although the term inclusion has no legal definition, and has been interpreted by educational professionals in a variety of ways, the concept has been in existence under the least restrictive environment (LRE) provision of PL 94-142, The Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975, PL 101-476, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990 and most recently within PL 105-17, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments (IDEA) of 1997. According to IDEA (1997), public education agencies are required to ensure that: to the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and that special classes, separate schooling or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily [Authority 20 U.S.C. 1412 (a) (5)].The concept of inclusion has been defined in various ways within the literature. Catlett and Osher (1994) reviewed policy statements of professional organizations and found at least seven different definitions for inclusion. Currently, in education, inclusion is the term used when students with disabilities are placed in general education classrooms for a portion of the school day (Falvey et al., 1995b). The term inclusion is differentiated from mainstreaming. Mainstreaming refers to the placement of students with disabilities in general education classrooms with appropriate instructional support (Meyen, 1990). When students are mainstreamed, they are usually prepared prior to placement into general education and are expected to “keep up” with the general classroom expectations (Rogers, 1993). Students with disabilities who are mainstreamed receive the same or nearly the same curriculum as general education students and are expected to “fit” into the general curriculum and classroom. On the other hand, within inclusive programs, the general education teacher is expected to make adaptations to provide a suitable environment for students with disabilities. Within the literature on inclusion, there are a variety of interpretations of the definition of inclusion (e.g. Gartner & Lipsky, 1987; Rogers, 1993; Stainback & Stainback, 1984). For the purposes of this chapter, inclusion is defined as programs in which students with disabilities (with the exception of gifted) are eligible for special education, have an individualized education program (IEP), and receive their education in general education classrooms using different, modified, and/or additional curricula from students without disabilities. This definition of inclusion is similar to “selective inclusion” as described by Zionts (1997). Selective inclusion refers to partial general education class placement of students with disabilities (Zionts). The assumption that this definition is based on is that general education is not always appropriate for every student; some students may benefit by receiving individualized services in addition to general education.

Thirty-two qualitative research reports on co-teaching in inclusive classrooms, identified through a comprehensive literature search, are reviewed. Studies have included significant diversity in grade level, geographical location, setting, and took place in three different countries. Overall, teachers and administrators reported a high degree of satisfaction with co-teaching. However, a number of needs were also addressed, including administrative support, appropriate caseloads, planning time, student skill level, and co-teacher compatibility. Implications for research and practice are discussed.

What does special education mean for general education teachers of students with disabilities? In this chapter, we share our approach to advancing values in the classroom placement of special education students in the general education setting. We will take the reader on a journey through time with “Jessie,” a special education student, as we examine the historical exclusion of students with disabilities to their inclusion in general education schools, environments and finally, general education classrooms. In doing so, we will examine the evolution of the general education teacher's role and how the historical perspective impacts current practices. Then, we will elucidate the benefits of inclusion, not only for the special education student but for the nondisabled peers as well. We will recommend values that should be maintained and practices that should be examined. This chapter will conclude with a connection between the values and recommendations of best practices for inclusive instruction.

The purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of the literature related to homework. First, information on the search procedures is provided, including the criteria for inclusion in this review. Second, a historical overview of homework in the United States is provided, including definitions and major changes in public opinion over time. The third section addresses the difficulties experienced by students with emotional disabilities in regard to homework. The fourth section reviews the homework policies presently in place at local school districts across the U.S. The fifth section discusses the effects of homework when basic classroom strategies, cooperative homework teams, self-management and goal setting, and assignment completion strategies are used. The sixth section describes the homework practices used, as reported by teachers and students. The seventh section describes the problems experienced by students with disabilities, from the perspective of teachers, parents, and students. A final section describes the kinds of problems associated with home-school communication.

This chapter examines best practice and burgeoning needs within general and special education teacher preparation programs as identified within the literature and as evidenced in recent research (Cavendish, Harry, Menda, Espinosa, & Mahotiere, 2012) that examined the beliefs and practices of current educators teaching within schools utilizing a response to intervention (RtI) model. Specifically, our discussion of the emerging needs in teacher preparation programs that prepare both general and special education teachers for assessment, instructional delivery, and progress monitoring within an RtI framework is informed by a 3-year research project of the initial implementation of an RtI model in a diverse, urban school district. Implications for practice include the need to: (a) address deficit perspectives of culturally and linguistically diverse (CLD) students and youth with disabilities, (b) address changing perceptions of the function of special education, and (c) communicate the need for greater collaboration across silos within teacher preparation programs.

This chapter is a presentation of Mexico’s efforts in advancing inclusive education as a vehicle to provide children with special needs a quality and equitable education. It provides a detailed description of the development, realignment of educational practices, and polices necessary to allow inclusive education to succeed. The chapter begins with the origins of special education in Mexico via four stages. Next, the chapter provides a comprehensive classification of disability and the prevalence rates in Mexico. Then, the chapter delineates legislation and public policy that are essential components in providing a quality and equitable special education system. Next, a comprehensive description of special education intervention models follows along with how these models are incorporated in current teacher preparation endeavors. The chapter concludes with a summary of the progress that Mexico has attained in moving toward inclusive education as well as challenges to inclusive education.

In this chapter, we take up the distinction between applied and general fields of study in order to consider how patterns of gender stratification between them may differ. Purporting to offer industry- and firm-specific skills, applied fields of study are often differentiated from general education pathways that are offered within the university sector. However, as our research demonstrates, there is considerable interplay between these two forms of education when higher education engagement over the life course is examined. Using sequence and cluster analysis, we illustrate five ideal-typical higher education pathways in a sample of males and females over a 22-year period in the Canadian province of British Columbia. The gendered patterns of how individuals choose and move between general and applied fields of study offer a deeper account of stratification within general and applied skill acquisition and provide nuance concerning how vocational education can be conceptualised in relation to the actual higher education pathways students undertake. In Canada, where a high percentage of students gain university-level credentials, vertical and horizontal gender stratification within applied and general fields of study is distinctive and highlights system-specific engagement.

The current trends in teacher preparation for educators who will instruct students with learning disabilities reflect larger trends that are influencing teacher preparation in general. Some trends impact the ways in which educators and the public view aptitude and learning, such as the concept of multiple intelligences and the emerging discoveries of the workings of the brain. Some general trends include pre-service teacher testing and screening and specific standards for teacher training programs in efforts to increase educator accountability and classroom performance. Other trends emerge from philosophical and political positions regarding the rights of persons with disabilities to be educated in the least restrictive environment – the general education classroom.

Concern about special education's future is widespread. Now there are calls for special education's abandonment or its nonexistence in any environment other than general education (i.e., for full inclusion or some form of general education only). Some advocates for reform consider special education obsolete, to be rejected in favor of newer ideas known as inclusionary education, and they advocate abandoning special education.

Now may be the time for a second revolution in thinking about what special education is and does so that it evolves into a service that more consistently realizes its promise. Special education is likely to become extinct if its devolution continues. Its collapse would hasten the abandonment of public education. Alternatively, it could evolve to become a viable part of public education, a distinct entity, a clearly identifiable and viable part of educating all children appropriately in public schools.

Among the many causes of special education's devolution, some stand out prominently: (1) confusing must and may; (2) accepting illogic and imprecision of language; (3) responding to all diversities in the same way; (4) spurning science; (5) confusing attribute and person; (6) putting the worst possible face on special education; and (7) misconstruing least restrictive environment.

Better thinking and clearer communication are required to achieve special education's revitalization. These include calling things what they are and relying on new, younger leaders. Clear and wide understanding – consensus – about what special education is and does and acceptance of the idea that we must have it as a separate and distinct part of universal public education would be revolutionary.