Is Inclusion the Best Practice for Students With Disabilities?

By
Paula M Geimer

EDUC 6327: Research Plan

Dr. L Spencer
University of St Thomas

Is Inclusion the Best Practice for All Students With Disabilities?

2
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the Least
Restrictive Environment is best for all students with disabilities, but exactly what does this
mean? The Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) is the least segregating classroom in which the
goals and objectives, detailed in the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) of a student with a
disability can be met. (US Legal Inc. , 2015) The IEP may contain one type or an array of goals
and objectives; learning, functioning, behavioral, and therapeutic, but Inclusion is not simply
placing students with disabilities in a mainstream; or general education classroom. Inclusion is
about developing an atmosphere where all learners, with and without disabilities prosper. The
positive learning environment is created when; instruction is differentiated to meet the needs of
all students, students have equal access to the entire curriculum, behavioral supports are in place
to maintain a positive learning environment, students embrace and are supported by their campus
and community, and campus resources are used in the most effective means to benefit the growth
and development of all students, staff, teachers, and administration. (Stetson and Associates, Inc.,
2014) Recent studies, conducted by the University of Alabama and John Hopkins, indicate that
students with autism are no more likely to complete high school, attend college, or improve
cognitive functioning whether instructed in mainstream or specialized classrooms (Diament,
2012), but inclusion is necessary to manage the strengths and weaknesses of students with a
disability and to assist these students in developing their potential in identified areas. Since
students with Autism Spectrum Disorder are almost always identified as having underdeveloped
social skills, the general education classroom is the ideal environment for these students to
cultivate appropriateness. (Daily, 2005)
Teachers are not expected to deliver water downed curriculum or develop an individualized
education plan for each student with a varying degree of understanding; however, differentiated

3
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

instruction occurs so that all students, regardless of capability, with or without a disability, are
able to understand and make a meaningful connection to the curriculum. Expecting all students
to grasp new concepts, as presented, despite varying levels of academic ability is unrealistic;
therefore, teachers differentiate instruction to meet the needs of students in the general education
classroom daily. If differentiated instruction is habitual in the general education classroom, what
precludes the participation of students with disability? Parents are cautiously concerned that
students with more severe disabilities will be excluded from or lack the ability to develop
appropriate life skills, but the real world is not a twofold system, divided into general or
special. According to Ringer and Kerr, students with disabilities, including severe, can be
educated amongst their peers in the general education classroom. (Ringer & Kerr, 1988).
Furthermore, studies indicate that students with disabilities tend to have an increase in social
skills, language development, and self-esteem, essential life skills. When students are serviced
through pull-out programs, they generally experience a labeling effect, and the label adversely
results in lower expectations and decreased self-esteem (Will, 1986). Students without
disabilities are also provided a valuable life skill experience when students with disabilities are
integrated in the general education environment; they develop a deeper, meaningful
understanding of relationships, accepting, understanding, and increased tolerance of differences
(Staub & Peck, 1995).
Standardized testing and academic achievement measures consistently increase the roles
and responsibilities of the general education teacher, further complicating the adaptability of the
general education classroom to service students with disabilities holistically, but the attitude of
administrators, educators, and parents towards including students in the general education
classroom is sufficient. The resources are limiting. Co-teaching, providing individualized

4
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

instruction in the general education classroom, allows special needs students to forgo pull out
programs which assist in decreasing stigmatization and reestablishes a feeling of belonging in the
community. In order to establish co-teaching practices, campuses will be required to utilize their
current staff more efficiently or acquire additional staff to meet the needs of the campus. (Stetson
and Associates, Inc., 2014) Parents have also expressed concern over the lack of expertise of
general educators in assisting students with disabilities in the general education classroom.
Although collaboration between the General Education and Special Education teacher occurs,
most do not feel that collaboration is sufficient and call for increased professional development
or hiring of teachers with higher degree of expertise. These issues are problematic for
administrators, as it is difficult to meet such increasing demands on account of decreasing
budgets. This lack of adaptability to provide adequate resources most likely will lead to a
rediscovering the need for a separate system in the future. (Skrtic, 1991)
Acknowledging IDEA and the wantonness of students with disabilities to be educated to
the maximum extent appropriate, in the general education classroom unless the nature or
severity of the disability is suchthat the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be
achieved satisfactorily, is easily implied, but problematically implemented. All students, with
and without a disability, have the potential to benefit from inclusive practices. Therefore, a
genuine attempt to provide a participatory educational environment is mandatory. In my opinion,
an inclusive model should be initiated with a meaningful purpose of including all students, with
and without disabilities, and any plan of instruction should take in account all the possible
scenarios of instruction and the student is to be serviced accordingly, in the least restrictive
environment, despite the perception or availability of resources. Consequently, with the
increasing demand of legislatures demand for increased academic performance and no child left

5
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

behind, legislation should mandate appropriate funding to provide much needed professional
development, instructional resources, assistive technology, and adequate staffing to meet the
needs of students with disabilities. I propose that increased professional development in
specified areas; differentiating instruction, assistive technology, characteristics of disabilities,
inclusive practices, IEP content and development, and utilization of resources, to include
educational para educators and co-teaching practices would improve the overall experience of
students with disabilities in an inclusive environment, particularly for educators that lack a preservice experience and/or minimal inclusive experience. Consequentially, an increase in state
administrated testing and meeting IEP objectives will improve.
The purpose of the Increasing the Teaching Effectiveness of a Beginning Special
Education Teacher Using Differentiated Instruction Case study was to evaluate the outcome of a
package of differentiated instructional strategies systematically chosen, implemented, and
evaluated. This particular study explores the effectiveness of using a pre-assessment, selfassessment, and on-going assessment model to implement and adapt differentiated instruction to
increase the probability of success for students with disabilities. Differentiated Instruction consist
of four major content areas; content, process, product, and learning environment, and teachers,
by collecting and evaluating data, are capable of determining the level of effectiveness and
making necessary adjustment by examining the data and characteristics of individualized
students. The study reveals the need to restructure coursework to include a concentration on
utilizing evidence based practices to improve the outcome for student; as teachers require the
ability to change strategies based on the revolving needs of the individual student.
While the intent is to differentiate instruction, systematically choosing, implementing,
and evaluating the effectiveness, for a student with a disability; the implementation and

6
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

presentation of lessons, on-level for special needs students, are beneficial for all students. The
challenge is that interventions are generally structured, lacking individualistic consideration.
Teachers should be encouraged to access and apply any of the four components of differentiated
instruction to set individualized goals; the content of the lesson, the instructional process, the
student product, and the learning environment. The limitations of the study consist of the
potential of bias in the narrative scripts and interpretation of data, the generalization based on a
single candidate, and the limited time frame of the study, 5 weeks, and the possibility that neither
special education nor general education teachers accepted differentiated instruction as a process.
The authors acknowledge that further studies are needed, with a larger sample of teacher, given
the increasing global interest in inclusive practices and the universal design component.
Golmic and Hansen (2012) were interested in determining whether a pre-service
INCLUDED experience would affect the attitude, sentiment, and concerns of teachers toward
working with students having disabilities or exceptional needs. The authors initially acquired 92
participants, and the sample consisted of 85 secondary educational majors. The participants were
questioned about their level of interaction with students with disabilities prior to the
INCLUSIVE experience; half reported having a significant interaction with students with a
disability. A quarter of the participants expressed having confidence, nearly half expressed
having mediocre ability, and less than 20% having below average ability to instruct students with
disabilities prior to their Inclusive student teaching experience. The study consisted of an eight
step performance based study, allowing student teachers to reflect on their initial experience of
teaching students with disabilities after completing an INCLUDED experience, teaching students
with a disability in a general education classroom. The Sentiments, Attitudes, and Concerns
about Inclusive Education scale was used to collect data before and after the experience

7
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

occurred. The results indicated that the students' pre-service sentiments and attitudes were either
similar or more positive, and resulted in less concerns about working with students with
disabilities or exceptional needs in an inclusive environment.
The study specifically examined the effect of change in a teacher's sentiment, attitude, and
concerns when provided an opportunity to experience an INCLUDED experience, as a student
teacher, prior to instructing students with disabilities. The sample consisted of 85 secondary
educational majors. A limitation of the study is that it only included a specific sample of
secondary teachers; further studies should examine the sentiments, attitudes, and concerns of
elementary teachers and core subject secondary teachers. This study is significant because it
shows that pre-service teachers became more comfortable and confident in their ability to
instruct students with disabilities after their inclusive experience, and that a restructuring of the
student teaching experience could produce a profound difference in the way students with
disabilities are integrated into the general education classroom.
The Relationship of IEP Quality to Curricular Access and Academic Achievement for
Students with Disabilities, conducted by La Salle investigates the relationship between the
quality of academic goals of the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) and the results of academic
achievement on state standardized test and the level of access to state mandated curriculum. A
Curriculum Indicator Survey was provided to 130 teachers statewide, urban, suburban, and rural,
who were asked to indicate their expectation for one student's performance and skill level. An
additional survey requested background information pertaining to the teacher's personal level of
professional development, classroom characteristics, instructional resources, methods of
assessment, and instructional influence. The IEP goals were evaluated based on their alignment
to the state standard; data presented in the level of performances, a student's identified

8
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

educational needs, and documented progress monitoring. Analysis indicated a higher mean, or
positive relationship exist between the academic-focused IEP goals in relation to curricular
access and progress monitoring; however, a lower mean, existed in regards to present levels of
performance and educational needs. The study also presented a significant difference existed
between the level of progress monitoring of elementary students versus middle school students,
and that middle school students spend more time in general education classrooms compared to
elementary students. The results indicate that a very limited relationship exist between students'
test performance and the quality of IEP goals.
Individuals with Disability Education Act and the No Child Left Behind mandates
promote an increased access to curriculum and improved academic performance for students
with disabilities, and the educational system allocates generous resources to provide staff
development geared toward improving the quality of IEPs. This study is significant because it
exemplifies the disconnect that exist in legislature and national policies that promote standard
based IEPs as a means to regulating curriculum access and improved scores on state standardized
test. The authors advocate for further testing; the teachers were not sampled randomly, the survey
was conducted in one state versus nationwide, and the IEP samples were students identified as
low-achieving, or receiving a modified achievement test. Although the intent is to provide
students with disabilities an increased access to curriculum, the research indicates that IEP
practices do not affect the access to curriculum or overall involvement; however, it was
indicative of a need to increase Staff Development aimed to improve the implementation and
monitoring of goals and services. If standardized testing scores and individual student growth
(academic achievement) are to be instruments used to evaluate teachers professionally, teachers

9
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

have every right to demand to be properly trained to provide instruction to students with
disabilities in an inclusive general education environment.
The purpose of the study was to evaluate the outcome of a package of differentiated
instructional strategies systematically chosen, implemented, and evaluated. This particular study
explores the effectiveness of using a pre-assessment, self-assessment, and on-going assessment
model to implement and adapt differentiated instruction to increase the probability of success for
students with disabilities. Differentiated Instruction consist of four major content areas; content,
process, product, and learning environment, and teachers, by collecting and evaluating data, are
capable of determining the level of effectiveness and making necessary adjustment by examining
the data and characteristics of individualized students. The study reveals the need to restructure
coursework to include a concentration on utilizing evidence based practices to improve the
outcome for student; as teachers require the ability to change strategies based on the revolving
needs of the individual student.
While the intent is to differentiate instruction, systematically choosing, implementing,
and evaluating the effectiveness, for a student with a disability; the implementation and
presentation of lessons, on-level for special needs students, are beneficial for all students. The
challenge is that interventions are generally structured, lacking individualistic consideration.
Teachers should be encouraged to access and apply any of the four components of differentiated
instruction to set individualized goals; the content of the lesson, the instructional process, the
student product, and the learning environment. The limitations of the study consist of the
potential of bias in the narrative scripts and interpretation of data, the generalization based on a
single candidate, and the limited time frame of the study, 5 weeks, and the possibility that neither
special education nor general education teachers accepted differentiated instruction as a process.

10
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

The authors acknowledge that further studies are needed, with a larger sample of teacher, given
the increasing global interest in inclusive practices and the universal design component.
David and Kyinis (2012) study, Social Inclusion: Teachers as Facilitators in Peer
Acceptance of Students with Disabilities in Regular Education Classrooms in Tamil Nadu, India
examines the impact of a teacher's attitude towards inclusive education, teacher's self -efficacy,
and a teacher's classroom on facilitating and fostering social acceptance of students with
disabilities. The study aimed to detail whether classroom practices of a teacher influenced
positive interaction amongst students with and without disabilities. Traditionally, a disability
would be considered a 'curse' or consequence in India, but more modern ideology has taken root
following the establishment of The Indian Equal Opportunity and Rights of Persons Disabilities
Act, 1995. The authors study used all ports Theory of Intergroup Contact as the basis of the
study, predicting that the social acceptance, or rejection, of students with disabilities is dependent
on the teacher factors. A sample of 93 primary teachers and 923 students participated in the
study, and the attitude towards students with disabilities, self-efficacy, and classroom practices.
The participants were attendees of eight classroom from five various schools in Tamil Nadu,
India. The authors used a variety of methods; questionnaires, interviews, and classroom
observations. The classrooms consisted of traditional teaching methods in which teachers
permitted students to socially advocate for themselves, and other classroom practices consisted
of non-traditional or deliberate facilitation, in which teachers purposefully created awareness,
interaction, and learning opportunities amongst the with and without disabilities. Research
suggest that a relationship exist between a teacher's attitude towards inclusive practice and
classroom practices, and this study revealed that the teacher's classroom practices, facilitating
contact, are most conducive to fostering and establishing social acceptance. A teacher's practices

11
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

were more influential that his or her attitude toward inclusive education or self-efficacy.
Inclusive training was not a major determiner, as all teachers had received professional
development pertaining to inclusive education. The results revealed that the teacher's classroom
practices were more effective and influential when one student with a disability was present, but
dropped significantly when more than 3 students were present in the class.
The study specifically examined the effect teachers have in establishing and maintaining social
acceptance of students with disabilities when engaged in inclusive education. A limitation of the
study is that it only included a specific sample of teachers and students in Tamil Nadu, India, and
was not inclusive of other regions in India or other countries. A second limitation pertains to the
student's level of academic deficiency, the study included students that were less than one year
behind his or her peers, or used Braille rather than print in the general education classroom.
Further studies should examine the sentiments, attitudes, and concerns of secondary educators,
examine regions outside of Tamil Nadu, and should examine classrooms containing more severe
disabilities. This study suggest that a limitation be placed on how many students with disabilities
should be placed in an individual classroom in order for to foster social acceptance and maintain
a positive learning environment for all students. In agreement with the Intergroup Contact
Theory, a student with disabilities in a regular education classroom is contingent on a teacher's
practices, a greater predictive power, rather than an attitude toward inclusion or self-efficacy. The
necessities required to properly adhere to IEP goals and objectives, to properly differentiate
instruction, and to foster social interaction may be cumbersome when an excessive number of
students with disabilities are housed in one general education classroom. The ability to maintain
a positive disposition, self-efficacy, and engage in best classroom practices is more likely to be
adversely effected.

12
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer
Participant Population
Students

The participants will consist of the students with disabilities, serviced via inclusion in the
general education setting for an academic year. The students would be active participants in state
administrative testing which is conducted annually.
Educators

Survey participants will be limited to elementary leveled personnel; administrators,

teachers, and para educators, guardians of students with disabilities, and Special Education
District Personnel.
Study

A quantitative research study would be conducted to answer the inquiries. The

experimental part of the research would consist of providing teacher, new and experienced with
inclusive related intervention. Professional Development would be provided for differentiating
instruction, understanding the characteristics of disabilities, and assistive technology.
Procedure

The study will examine the qualifications and credential of educators and the impact on
success of students with disabilities in an inclusive environment. A survey would be
administered to collect data pertaining to professional development participation, certification,
and teacher perception in relation to instructing students with disabilities in an inclusive setting
and the resources provided to support inclusive practices in the general education classroom. The
study would consist of elementary personnel and guardians of students with disabilities. A
collection of the students test score for the previous years will be collected for reference. A direct
manipulation of the instructional environment will not take place; pre-service data collection,
surveying, and professional development will be conducted in a neutral environment prior to the

13
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

onset of instruction for the academic year. The remaining data and post instructional survey will
occur following the administration of state academic testing, and following the conclusion of a
students (with disability) annual Admission, Review, and Dismissal (ARD) review.
Measures
The quantitative study would be conducted to answer to the following inquiries;

Does a pre-service experience/level of professional development adversely or

positively affect teachers ability to provide quality inclusive instruction?

Are students with disabilities more likely to meet state standards when the
general education teacher is certified in special education?

To what extent does a teachers perception have on the outcome of state

standardized scores for a student with disabilities?

Does the teachers level of experience, working in an inclusive environment,

affect the outcome of scores of students with disability on state standardized
test?

Does the teachers level of experience, working in an inclusive environment,

affect the outcome of students with disabilities meeting IEP goals and
objectives during the academic year?

Is there correlation between the teachers perceived ability and the parental
affirmation of inclusive practices?

Data analysis

The initial survey that I conducted in relation to the research plan measured educator
perspectives on inclusive practices; pre-service opportunities, attitudes, and professional
development. An actual research plan would consist of a greater participating population,
although it would aim to address many of the same topics discussed. Analyzing the
demographics of the participants; age, gender, experience, and credentials, would one of the first
steps, as this date could be used both qualitatively and quantitatively. Qualitatively, a
researchers notations might reveal a significance amongst the lesser and more experienced
teachers and their current credentials. Quantitatively, the outcome of the state standardized
testing, T-test of pre and post scores, might be a focal point in examining the teachers

14
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer

effectiveness when comparing held credentials and years of experience as a variables. A T-test
could also be conducted to analyze and compare the data received from the pre-service and postservice surveys, the outcomes could differ as a result of the highly sought after professional
development and specialized instruction that many educators feel is necessary to deliver impact.
A non-equivalent evaluation could be done to compare teachers that do and do not receive the
additional instruction and whether the instruction results in a significant impact on students
achievement.
Inclusion practices have been embraced globally, and the intent is to establish inclusive
classrooms that provide positive learning environments to all students; full curricular access, in
the least restrictive environment, with increased social acceptance of students with disabilities;
however, prior research indicates that teacher pre-service preparation, attitude toward working
with disabled students, ability to differentiate instruction and foster acceptance are all crucial to
the overall academics success and the quality of education, enhanced or diminished, experienced
by the student with a disability. Although most teachers are a bit apprehensive about working
with students with disabilities, inclusive practices have been shown to provide a positive
educational experience for both the student with a disability and their non-disabled peers, and
they indicate a need to overhaul teacher preparation; providing an included experience during
student teaching, increasing professional development in the areas of differentiating instruction
and IEP quality, and to initiate deliberate practices to facilitate peer interaction.

References

15
EDUC 6327 Research Plan PMGeimer
Daily, M. (2005 September ). Inclusion of Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders.
From John Hopkins School of Education:
http://education.jhu.edu/PD/newhorizons/Exceptional
%20Learners/Autism/Articles/Inclusion%20of%20Students%20with%20Autism
%20Spectrum%20Disorders/
Diament, M. (2012 1-November). Study: Inclusion May Not Be Best After All.
From Disability Scoop: http://www.disabilityscoop.com/2012/11/01/study-inclusionmay-not-best/16777/
Ernest, J. M., Heckaman, K. A., Thompson, S. E., Hull, K. M., & Carter, S. W. (2011).
Increasing the Teaching Effectiveness of A Beginning Special Education Teacher
Using Differentiated Instruction: A Case Study. International Journal of Special
Education, 191-201.
Golmic, B. A. (2012). Attitudes, Sentiments, and Concerns of Pre-Service Teachers
after Their Included Experience. International Journal of Special Education, 27-36.
LaSalle, T. P. (2013). The Relationship of IEP Quality to Curricular Access and
Academic Achievement for Students with Disabilities. International Journal of
Special Education, 135-144.
Ruffina, D., & Kuyini, A. B. (2012). Social Inclusion: Teachers as Facilitators in Peer
Acceptance of Students with Disabilities in Regular Education Classrooms in Tamil
Nadu, India. International Journal of Special Education, 157-168.
Stetson and Associates, Inc. (2014). Together We Learn Better. From Inclusive
Schools Network: ttp://inclusiveschools.org
US Legal Inc. . (2015). Least Restrictive Environment Law adn Legal Definition. From
USLegal.com: http://definitions.uslegal.com/l/least-restrictive-environment-lre/