Running Head: INCLUSION IN AN URBAN CLASSROOM

Conversations of Cognitive Acceptance: Encompassing Successful Implication of Inclusion in an Urban Classroom Kevin J. Walsh, Ed. D. William Paterson University Sheila R. Thompson Educational Research: Qualitative and Quantitative Designs EDLP 603 October 1 , 2011

Table of Contents Introduction .......................................................................................................................................2 Key Terms .......................................................................................................................................5 Literature Review ............................................................................................................................6 The importance of collaboration of all stakeholders .....................................................................6 The roles of all stakeholders ...........................................................................................................6 Training of the paraprofessional and the general education teacher .............................................9 Focus Statement and Action Research Questions ........................................................................11 Factors of successful inclusion pie chart ....................................................................................13 Graphic organizer of implication of inclusion in an urban classroom .......................................14 Design and Method .........................................................................................................................15 Triangulation matrix ...................................................................................................................16 Timeline ......................................................................................................................................17 Family Feedback What Did the Surveys Uncover Likert-Type Scale.20 Open-ended Survey..22 Concerns and Solutions ...24 Action Plan..25 Planning Phase 26 Identify teachers to provide inclusive supports........26 References.. .....................................................................................................................................30

Introduction At start of the school year, the researcher found herself assigned to a classroom quite different from any classroom she has ever taught in before. This classroom was filled with eager, high spirited, and emotional charged students, some of whom are students with special needs. A class filled with twenty fourth grade students, who were divided by IEPs, behavior disorders, resource modifications and standardized test scores. These students, who are disadvantaged in areas far beyond that of instruction, rely on the knowledge and organization of all stakeholders involved in an inclusive program. This type of move toward educating students with special needs left the researcher with many questions, many of which remain unanswered. Over the next several months the researcher herself interacted with students who were classified with a variety of disabilities. Disabilities which ranged from that of a mild instructional need to those classed as intermediate behavioral disordered students. Inclusive education has many faces and in the researchers class she detained ideas which explored the rights of these students as well as those of the general education students, which are part of the integration and mainstreaming event. The participation and acceptance of students with special needs in a general education setting is a key factor for the social, civil, and educational development for the student. Inclusion is the childs right to participate in a general education population. It is an opportunity for the student of special needs to interact and learn within a general setting. Armed with this information the researcher explored the factors which encompassed success within a diverse classroom setting. The need for such a classroom environment is evident in the transition of the growing number of special needs students migrating to general education classrooms. Through the alliance of the administrators, consultant teacher, general education teacher, and parents came fourth an avenue by which student achievement could be achieved by the special needs student. This avenue

of learning took its strength from the general curriculum as deemed suitable for the students level of learning (Burns.2004.P.248). The researcher understood that such an alliance is pertinent in the success of an inclusion program in the urban setting. She has not only explored the roles of the above stakeholders, but also the complex relationship which was interwoven between them. Over the past several months the researcher has matured into an understanding of what inclusion looks like and felt the need to explore its many avenues for continue growth. As she reflected back to that very first day of school she wishes she had some sort of training prior to stepping into an inclusion classroom. The daily organization of the classroom was one challenge. Grouping students as regards to their IEPs, yet maintaining the sense of inclusion during instruction and activities was another. The modification of lesson plans outside the traditional differentiation of instruction was another obstacle the researcher had to encounter. The alternation of duties between the consultant teacher and general education teacher also presented its own special challenges (Suruggo, Mastropieri, Mcduffie, 2007) Medication and resource pullouts were all part of a normal day in an urban inclusion classroom. Armed only with the knowledge that, students with special needs must be educated with general education students to their maximum their abilities, the researcher realized the short comings of her professional knowledge, as it related to inclusion. Studies showed that the reality of inclusion is embedded in the fact that there are many hurdles to overcome in order for success to materialize. For the purpose of this study the researcher referred to these hurdles as factors. According to Beth Kirker-Stewart, PhD the following list includes a few of those factors: No universally accepted definition, Emotions run high Civil rights are central to the issue

The Paraprofessional Role Challenging to accomplish Success is teacher-dependent Impacts every aspect of the school experience Requires role redefinition Not every parent wants an inclusive program Time to collaborate is at a premium Attitude is the most significant variable (Beth Kirker-Stewart, PhD.1997)

KEY TERMS: Inclusion is the state of educating students with special educational needs by mainstreaming them into with non-disabled students. Social Cognition in scientific terms is "the process of thought" to knowing, encoding, storage, retrieval, and processing in the brain. Collaboration is a recursive process where two or more people or organizations work together in an intersection of common goals. Implementation is the process of moving an idea from concept to reality

Literature Review The Importance of Collaboration of All Stakeholders When certain factors of inclusion in an urban classroom were examined an oblique perceptiveness of the collaboration surfaced. It is important that all stakeholders take ownership of their part in the inclusion program. Smith and Leonard states that, collaboration as a cornerstone of effective school inclusion is an idea that has high theoretical currency among many scholars in the area of special education and educational leadership (p. 269). This is evident in the makeup of a true inclusive program. Testimonies have indicated when there is collaborative interaction supported by administration, educational outcomes improve for students with special needs (Carter, Prater, Jackson, & Marchant, 2009, p. 60). Within a co-teaching classroom the individual students needs are addressed thereby giving the student a better chance at greater achievement (Burns, 2004, p. 153). Without the joint effect of the special needs and general education teachers, the individual child is liable to be left behind. The Roles of All Stakeholders The paraprofessionals role had a great importance on the structure of the inclusion team within the urban classroom. A unification of whole class, small group instruction, peer teaching, and small cooperative learning groups had some level of complexity without the present of the paraprofessional working one-on-one with a special needs student. The paraprofessionals role was defined as, an assistant to the teacher who is able to lead small group instruction designed by the teacher, gather materials, assist in personal care and other physical needs, facilitates interactions between students, adapts lessons under the teachers guidance and often execute other, unseen, but very important tasks for the classroom community (McVay, 2000, p.4). Paraprofessionals, according to IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), were considered to be a

supplemental aid. Activities presented through the paraprofessional within the general education curriculum resulted in the achievement for students of special needs. Therefore the level of training was considered during the paring of student with the paraprofessional. They must be not only appropriately trained but also supervised (Burns, 2004, p.174). Special needs students enter the general education classroom with IEPs that is accessible not only to the licensed teachers but to the paraprofessional as well, whose responsibilities included the implementation of instructional assignments (Burns, 2004, p. 271). The role of the paraprofessional in the inclusion classroom is imperative to the success of the student, yet the tasks can be difficult to administer and carry through with a level of proficiency. Laws that preside over special education are more demanding, exigent, and challenging for all involved. Under todays laws and amendments special needs students are not only expected to integrate within the general population, but they are expected to advance educationally, alongside students of general education. The special education teachers role is to provide assistances to the general education teacher. He or she aids in the adjustment of the learning environment and/or modifies instructional methods to meet the individual needs of the special needs student. Implementing special education teacher services has a profound effect on how special and general educators work together to support students learning. Educators armed with a range of options for service delivery will tend to serve these students in a more precise, intense manner than those lacking alternatives (Spruill, 2002, p. 436). The special education teachers responsibilities may also include but may not be limited to the supervision of the paraprofessional, training and professional development, overseeing assistive technology needs, IEP monitoring, and evaluating progress. They may also be responsible for some direct teaching, as well as assisting the general education teacher in making curricular

adaptations and planning with them cooperatively (Suruggo, et.al, 2007, p. 406). Declassification is another area of duty for the special education teacher. Through this task the special education teacher declassifies a special needs student when IDEA services are no longer needed. Students that were identified as special needs requiring special education services at one time can be granted a slot in the general education population, without the support of an aide after an evaluation of proficiency has been rendered. As part of any re-evaluation, a group that includes the (Committee on Special Education) CSE and other qualified professionals, as appropriate, shall review existing evaluation data on the student including evaluations and information provided by the parents of the student, current classroom-based assessments and observations by teachers and related service providers (20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1400-1485). The role of the special education teacher is less defined than other professionals within the setting, yet the commitment of time in areas of indirect services are extensive. This brings the researcher to defining the role of the general education teacher. They are responsible for designing adaptation for the classroom environment including creating separate lesson plans, redefining schedules, responsible for the merging of social relationships of all students, prompting a hospitable environment for special education teacher and paraprofessional within the classroom. Studies report that the role of the general education teacher is that of the leader, assuming control of all classroom activities majority of the time (Suruggo, et.al, 2007, p.407). The general education teacher is responsible for creating adaptations within their inclusive classroom (Fritz and Miller, 1995, p. 10). They must take care in implementing instructional adaptations that they perceive to be preferential to special needs students and therefore unfair to other students in class (Berry, 2006, p. 496). In as such that the general needs teacher is the

cohesive component of an inclusive classroom, their view must be looked upon as a process, and not an event. If this is achieved the researcher trusts, that social inclusion and a potential increase of proficiency is well within the reach of the special needs students. The inclusion component outside of the classroom but within the walls of the school takes on the form as administration, and child study team. Their role is mainly one of support advocate, advisor, and official spokesperson. Abundant reach has shown that administrative support is a critical factor in successful implementation efforts (Walther-Thomas, 1997, p. 404). To support inclusion the administration should not only support teachers in making sure they have planning time, they should also provide direction for promoting specific models (Cater, Prater, Jackson & Marchant, 2009, p. 69). In effect, teamwork, mutual goals, teacher empowerment, and principal as facilitator emerged as highly significant for successful school inclusion (Smith and Leonard. 2005. P. 269). Therefore, concluding that the administrations role is a vital role in the inclusion plan.

Training of the Paraprofessional and the General Education Teacher Studies indicate when teachers share the same classrooms or have intense collaborative relationships training is a must. There must be a level of cohesiveness on a variety of classroom issues for inclusion to be successfully implemented: student assessment, classroom resource management, curriculum design and implementation, integration opportunities, social problem solving curriculum, behavior management, working with parents, and managing education support staff. Special needs students provide a wealth of different experiences and expect the teacher and paraprofessional to come equipped with a variety of skills. In-service training is absolutely essential especially since the general education teacher has the central role in an inclusion

10

classroom. The teacher was involved, not just informed. This way the teacher was prepared for inclusion, the administration secured commitment, share vision, trained teachers with skills needed to implement change, and supported teachers as they collaborately adjusted classroom practice (Carter, et. al. 2009, p. 60). Studies have also found that teachers attitudes toward the inclusion of children with special needs may be related to the experience of teaching in inclusive settings, the level and type of preparation the teacher engages in, the childs type of disability, the teachers access to instructional supports, the gender of the teacher, and the grade level taught (Ernst, and Rogers, 2009, p. 206). General and special education teachers shared their resources, knowledge, and personnel in order to have a successful inclusive system (Cameron, 1994, p. 12). Serious conflict can result from ignoring the general education teacher. Mutual respect, communication, and equal footing are essential. Effective teams recognize the central role of the classroom teacher as well as that of the paraprofessional.

11

Focus Statement and Action Research Questions Under the umbrella of inclusion, resourceful collaborative effects the instruction of the special needs student. Instructional adaptation presents the student with a chance to progress academically. The benefits are great within an inclusion classroom, in such a way that both the special needs student as well as the general education student has an opportunity to be recipients of the two knowledgeable teachers. In this study, there was a successful inclusion program with a cohesive effective collaboration among all stakeholders. The educational advancement of the student with special needs depended on it significantly. Successful collaboration of co-teaching experiences included a positive attitude of the general education teacher, who developed cognitive learning strategies, mutual respect, administration supported efforts, adequate planning time scheduled, and shared a philosophy of instructional and behavior management was evident. Benefits, as the researcher stated are rewarding academically for students, and as experiences and research have offered itself as a unique experience for professional growth. The collaboration of the adaptation of lessons for each inclusion student and compatibility between teachers creates positive effects and a safe haven for social stimulation for all students. Supporting special needs students who require extra consideration was challenging. The demand today is greater than ever before, due to large amounts of children born with drug dependencies (website, Causton-Theoharis, Julie, 2009). The entire structure of the classroom changes new found problems presented itself as the researcher soon find. One such problem was that of scheduling planning time. It emerged to be overwhelming and at times frustrating. Coordinating planning times between the special needs and the general education teacher at times did not coincided with one another, therefore creating an inability to develop joint plans for proper inclusion instruction. Poorly planned classrooms due to the lack of planning or inconsistent

12

administrative judgment, classrooms may end up saturated with students who have learning and behavioral problems. Proper placement of students with special needs is very important to the success of the program. This requires attentive consideration by the placement team to guarantee that heterogeneity is sustained in the classroom and that ample support could be provided for both students and teachers. Regrettably, these factors set urban classrooms up for failure and dissatisfaction. Poor planning weakens efforts and is predictable in low-achieving students and inadequate professional support. An effective urban inclusion classroom will have the above factors in place addressing issues of inequity at the building level and developing methods effectively using adequate resources. Students of the urban community depend on these elements. The factors encompassing the successful implementations of inclusion in an urban classroom focuses on but not limited to participant behavior and roles which leads to academic proficiency in special needs students. How would the achievement of the special needs student look if the implication of the inclusive program was truly successful? Is the urban classroom a prime environment to examine particular factors, such as planning, teacher, and peer relationship in the implication of inclusion? Will the level of professional development for teachers and paraprofessionals have a direct impact on the academic achievement of the inclusion student? As the researcher attempts to answer these questions, a closer look at the building of an effective organizational structure will be examined. Surveys, interviews involving students, teachers, administration, and support staff, IEP examination, and data collection of selective students will be conducted in order to determine what factors help to create a successful inclusion classroom.

13

Figure 1 gives a clear picture of the factors needed to successfully implement inclusion in an urban classroom. In examining this chart the concern is not placed on the provisions of an inclusive education, but how to implement inclusive education in ways the researcher trusts are both sufficient and successful in assuring academic success for all students.

Factors Needed for Successful Implementation of Inclusion in an Urban Classroom Paraprofessional

10% Cognitive Learning Strategies 5% Administration Support 10%

General Education Teacher 15% Professional Development 20%

Support Staff 5% Shared Philosophy of Teachers 5%

Special Needs Teacher 10% Mutural Respect 5%

Figure 1 Factors of Successful Inclusion

Adequate Planning 15%

14
Figure 2 Graphic Organizer of Focus Statement

There is a cohesiveness of ideas

All students imitate behavior with peers

What impact does the interpersonal relationship between teachers, and paraprofessional have on the academic and social advancement of the special needs student?

Comfortable classroom climate

General Ed. Teacher designs class environment, planning, scheduling, sets the tone for social relationships,

Factors encompassing a successful Inclusion program in an urban classroom

The ability to assess students, curriculum design,

What are the roles of all stakeholders ?

Paraprofessional supplemental aid, one on one with student, material

Special Ed. Teacher paraprofessional supervision, PD, IEP monitoring,

Shared vision of all stakeholders

What effect does the level of training of the paraprofessional and genernal education teacher have on the academic outcomes of the inclusion student ?

Collaboration of classroom adjustment

direct teaching, and planning

15

Design and Methods An understanding of the factors which would implement successful inclusion was obtained by blending available qualitative and quantitative research. The researcher plans to present this data a variety using the following methods.

Using the knowledge and skills of the special and general education teacher the researcher interviewed and surveyed them in order to understand the selection and adaptation of curricula and instructional methods.

Examined IEPs of students in particular classrooms to determine if there is a common relationship for placement.

Surveyed paraprofessionals, teachers, and students Created a questionnaire for all stakeholders Logs Test scores Observations

The qualitative and quantitative study has investigated the interactions of all stakeholders through observations, interviews, and the examination of school documents. This study attempted to observe about 30 special needs students within four classes as well as the special education teachers, general education teachers, and the paraprofessionals assigned the responsibility of educating them. The child study team and administration will also be included in this investigation. Information has come together in the form of formal conversations, lesson planning sheets, staff development materials, semi-structured individual interviews using open-ended questions, and various forms of school developed documentation. Formal and informal classroom observations have taken place over the last several months. Findings were crossed referenced to establish their authority and to preserve consistency among experiences of all contributors. Categories were developed as the participants responded to interview questions. All data was coded, reviewed and analyzed by the researcher. Categories included; Instructional delivery being carried out within the classroom Needs and concerns of inclusion Special and general education teachers roles in inclusive classrooms

16

Benefits of inclusion

Data was systematically collected and recorded and used to obtain knowledge of the effective inclusion program in an urban classroom. The researcher deemed it necessary to include a Triangulation Matrix to categorize data sources as it contributed to the comprehensiveness and evidence of the qualitative research. This allowed the researcher an instrument for using multiple hypothetical viewpoints to observe and understand the chosen data. The Triangulation Matrix can source data uniformity applying strategies in the form of experience, enquiring and examining the subject and measurable findings relating the research topic. Figure 3 gives example of this type of organizing information regarding the data sources needed to examine the factors needed to successfully implement inclusion in an urban classroom. Triangulation Matrix Research Question How did the special education teacher, the general education teacher, the administration perceive their role in an inclusive classroom? What impact did the relationship between the teachers and paraprofessional have on the effectiveness of an inclusive classroom? How did the level of training of the general education teacher, and paraprofessional have, impact the advancement of student achievement in an inclusion classroom Data Source #1 Stakeholders interviews and logs of stakeholders conversations Paraprofessional and general education teachers surveys Stakeholders questionnaires Data Source #2 Classroom observations Data Source #3 School-wide developed forms and documentation

Classroom observations and student surveys

Logs containing conversations with students

Professional Review student development/training IEPs and test materials scores of students who have been in an inclusion setting for at least two years

Figure 3 Factors of Successful Inclusion (Mills.2010, p. 93)

 March 15, 2011 Categorize Surveys e

Timeline for Completion of Action Research

These methods of study allowed the researcher the opportunity to measure the progress of particular skills, behaviors, or levels of performance which enabled participation in the urban classroom.

May 26, 2012 Organize and Finalize all data e

May19, 2011 Analysis and Categorize Classroom Observation e June 10, 2012 Action Plan Due April

May 12, 2011 Categorize PD Materials e

May 4, 2011 Log Student/Stakeholders Conversations e

Feb. 23, 2011 Collect Surveys e

April 5, 2011 Begin Collection of PD Materials e April 20, 2011 Begin Student Survey e

March 10, 2011 Analysis Surveys e

Feb. 7, 2011 Begin Surveys e April 15, Review logs e

March 29, 2011 Begin Classroom Observation and Logs e

April 29. Review Student IEPs and Test Scores e

Figure 4 Timeline

Jan. 17, 2011 Set up Logs e

Jan. 5, 2011 Begin Conversations e

Jan. 10, 2011 Conduct Interviews e

17

18

Family Feedback What Did the Surveys Uncover Family members, like students and their teachers, have different views of and experiences with inclusion (Bennett, Deluca, & Bruns, 1997; Garrick Duhaney & Salend, 2000; Soodak & Erwin, 2000). These reactions can affect the important roles that family members perform in the implementation of successful inclusion programs (Gallagher et al., 2000; Gibb et al., 1997), and the establishment of meaningful and reciprocal family-school collaborations (Roberts, Rule, & Innocenti, 1998). The researcher found it necessary to regularly gather feedback over the last four months from families about inclusion programs, rather than assume that they are pleased or displeased with these programs. The researcher also examined this feedback as part of an overall evaluation of the schools inclusion program, which included data from students and educators. Family members proved to be an excellent source of information concerning the effects of the inclusion program on the academic, social, and behavioral development of their children, as well as their childrens feelings about being educated in inclusive classrooms. The researcher also solicited information from family members concerning their perceptions of the effectiveness of the school districts inclusion practices and policies, and their recommendations concerning policies and practices in need of revision (Giangreco, Edelman, Cloninger, & Dennis,1993; Ryndak, Downing, Jacqueline, & Morrison, 1995). As the data collection began it was necessary to choose the proper process for gathering information from families concerning the schools and districts inclusion program. The decision had been made to use an interview process as well as a survey to accumulate usable and workable data. There were many types of surveys to decide upon that would be easy for families members to complete because they usually require only yes-no choices, true-false answers, or choices of numbers on a scale from 1 to 5 (a Likert-type scale that involves the selection of a number that best indicates someones feelings about various statements), which is the chosen on for the researchers

19

study. However this survey provides only quantitative information. Figure 5 shows the inclusion survey our family members completed for this study. An in-depth insight of our program was gathered from the statements, descriptions, recommendations, and examples provided by this survey. The researcher found it helpful to facilitate the interview process in the following ways: Being attentive. Establishing a comfortable and supportive atmosphere that fosters the comfort level and participation of family members. Asking open-ended, meaningful, and nonintrusive questions.

20

Please indicate your feelings about and experiences with inclusion using the following scale:

Strongly Disagree (SD) 1

Disagree (D) 2

Neutral (N) 3

Agree (A) 4

Strongly Agree (SA) 5

1. I feel satisfied with the educational and supportive services my child is receiving. 2. I feel satisfied with the school's communication with families. 3. I feel that being in an inclusion class has been positive for my child. 4. I feel that inclusion helps children academically and socially. 5. I feel that families are adequately involved in the inclusion process. 6. I feel that the school district did a good job of explaining the inclusion program to me. 7. My child learned a lot. 8. My child talks positively about school. 9. My child feels proud of his or her classwork.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

21

10. My child has learned to feel comfortable interacting with other students. 11. My child has grown socially and emotionally. 12. My child's education has been negatively affected. 13. My child has received fewer services. 14. My child has made more friends. 15. My child has become more confident and outgoing. 16. My child has become more accepting of individual differences. 17. My child has "picked up" undesirable behavior from classmates. 18. My child has been teased by classmates. 19. My child has teased classmates. 20. My child would like to be in an inclusion class next year.

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4

5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5

Figure 5. Family Inclusion Likert- scale Survey

22

1. Do you think that placing students with disabilities in general education classrooms with their peers who do not have disabilities is a good idea? Why or why not? 2. What things do you like about your child being in an inclusion classroom? 3. What concerns do (did) you have about your child being in an inclusion classroom? Do you still have these concerns? 4. How does your child feel about being in an inclusion classroom? What things does your child like about being in an inclusion classroom? What concerns, if any, does your child have about being in an inclusion classroom? How could these concerns be addressed? 5. How do you feel about the educational program your child is receiving in his or her inclusion classroom? 6. How do you feel about the special education and supportive services your child is receiving in his or her inclusion classroom? 7. How has being in an inclusion classroom affected your child academically, socially, and behaviorally? Please describe any benefits or negative consequences you have observed in your child. What factors led to these changes? 8. How has your child's placement in an inclusion classroom affected you? Please describe any benefits or any negative consequences for you. 9. What roles have you performed in the inclusion process? Are you satisfied with your role in the inclusion process? 10. What things seem to make inclusion work well at your child's school? What things seem to prevent inclusion from working well at your child's school? In what ways can inclusion be improved in your child's class and school? 11. What school wide and district wide inclusion practices would you like to see retained? What practices would you like to see revised? 12. How is the communication system between you and the school working? 13. What additional information would you like to have about inclusion and your child's class?

Figure 6. Family Inclusion Open-Ended Survey

23

After the researcher has collected the data from all stakeholders involved in the inclusive educational program, it was analyzed in order to determine strengths and family disquiets. The data analysis examined the following questions: What is the effect of the inclusion program on students academic, social, and behavioral performance? How do family members feel about the inclusion program and their roles in the program? How is the communication system between families and school personnel working? What is the effect of the inclusion program on families? What components and practices of the inclusion program appear to be effective? What components and practices of the inclusion program are in need of revision? The data from the questionnaires was examined using statistical measures. Also the ratings of individual items were examined to assess aspects of the inclusion program in our urban school that are successful, as well as that in need of modifications. The researcher analyzed the interview data to determine the effect of the program on students and their families, as well as the strengths and weaknesses in the program from the perspective and experiences of family members. It is the researchers desire to share this data with family members to clarify, revise, and confirm the data and to ensure that the interpretation of the findings is consistent with the experiences of family members (Miles & Huberman, 1984). The data is being used to address family concerns once all data analysis is completed, it is then used to generate and implement solutions to address family concerns and to enhance student performance. Table 7 shows the results of the above mention surveys.

24

Survey Results
Concerns Family members have a negative attitude about inclusion programs

Family members are concerned about the effect of inclusion on their childs academic, social, and behavioral development

Family members have concerns regarding the quality of their own involvement in the inclusion process

Solutions Identify the source of the negative attitudes Put together groups of parents who have had success with the inclusion program Make information and data about positive aspects of inclusion available Employ effective instructional and classroom management strategies, cooperative learning, differentiated instruction and technology Have regular family meetings Maintain open communications and partnerships between family and professionals Insure that all stakeholders participate in the development of the childs IEP Make sure the concerns are just Make sure all teachers are trained and that there is enough professional development in readily available Identify differences in cultural norms between families and professionals and assume a posture of culture reciprocity when collaborating with families (Kalyanpur & Harry, 1999, ReyesBlanes, Correa, & Bailey, 1999)

Family members are concerned about the availability of the professional responsible for their children Family members are frustrated with the schools failure to provide inclusive programs for their children

Table 7: Results Table

25

Action Plans The researcher found that all stakeholders must participate in order for the inclusion plan to be successful at the school as well as the district level. The identified stakeholders would include an administrator, special and general education teachers, paraprofessionals, family members, guidance counselor/psychologist and child study team. Team members will establish monthly team meetings equipped with a Schools Action Plan for Inclusion. Training for all stakeholders will be provided as needed. All areas of inclusion will be clarified for the purpose of the schoolwide inclusion team. The school-wide team will develop the initial action plan for the school to plan for inclusion of students with a range of disabilities in the general education setting. Each rolls will be define and long-range plans will be supported and implemented through the school year. Supporting implementation may include identifying dates for training for co-teaching staff, developing policies and procedures (e.g., guidelines for placement of students in the inclusion classes, roles and responsibilities, lesson plans, evaluation forms for collaborating teachers). Reach consensus in the team regarding its role in supporting staff throughout the school as they plan for and implement inclusion of all students. Scaffolds for staff that are learning how to effectively include all students and plans for increasing the quality of the implementation are addressed during team meetings. Develop strategies to transition inclusion of students with disabilities in general education settings with your team and identify steps to include in the action plan. Include district personnel to share information about the need to proper train of staff members involved in the inclusion program within the researchers school. The key is to make sure all stakeholders are informed of policies and procedures by sharing the action plan, writing newsletter updates, presenting at back-to-school night, and having a box in the parent room for faculty/families to share concerns relating to the inclusion program.

26

Planning Phase Students IEPs will be written in order to describe services and placement in the least restrictive environments. The researcher will use the (Continuum of Placement Options) to make sure that special education services are clearly described and based on the individual students needs. All students will be educated in the least restrictive environment. Students with disabilities placed in the general education classroom will be giving the support needed to reach their highest proficiency level. All students with IEPs will be governed by the teams of an effective implementation of each step in the continuum of placement options and supports. Students in need of support will receive inclusive supports. Special education and general education teachers will work together in order to abridge the level of support each student needs in order to be successfully included in the general education setting. Information will be collected using a chart which will organize the data collected, showing how students and staff are scheduling time and resources to meet all of the students needs. This will determine how the needs of all students can be met using staff assignment/support options (e.g., collaborative, consultative, teaming). The highs and lows abilities of the students will be identified for enrollment in the inclusion class. The inclusion classes will have a lower number of students enrolled in a general education classroom, to ensure student achievement. Identify teachers to provide inclusive supports. The researcher will be aware of teacher experience and areas of certification when staff is chosen to inclusion classrooms. Compatibility and/or opportunities to increase compatibility will be examined when assigning the teachers who will collaborate in the program. Support structures

27

will be looked at closely when determining staff assignment. Information on various support structures will be reviewed during meetings in order to develop an understanding of the situations appropriate to the use of each support structure, a partnering with a successful inclusion school structures for students with disabilities. Visitation of these schools will be advised and implemented. There must be a professional development plan in place to support the use of effective inclusive practices within the researchers school. Set up collaboration meetings with the professional development chair to identify relevant training opportunities within the district. Use data-driven decision-making to determine what staff members will need to learn to effectively support students. Develop co-teaching lesson plans and grading procedures which will allow teachers to reach consensus on what to use in their classrooms. The lesson plans will include a place for accommodations, modifications, and co-teaching methods to be used. If alternate grading procedures are specified in students IEPs, of the students will prompt teachers to address those procedures. Teachers will develop class procedures for class beginnings, transitions, interruptions, care of materials/equipment, group work, seat work, and teacher led activities. Classroom procedures will be explained to gain a better understanding as to why it is important for students to follow a predictable routine throughout the day. Time will be provided students to develop their procedures. Prepare faculty to engage students in meaningful activities during the entire class period teachers review resources on active learning and include these ideas in their lesson plans.

28

Identify barriers and develop a plan to address them, the researcher finds the need for all stakeholders must list barriers as issues which will be discussed. Also bring all of the questions and/or barriers elicited during meetings with the key stakeholder groups to the full planning team. Each barrier and/or question will present solutions for addressing them. Teachers will be asked how they want to obtain information on the following: collaborative teaming, roles and responsibilities of collaborating teachers, IEP basics, SOL basics,and co-teaching methods for planning, instruction, and assessment, and shared discipline. The bottom line is that there will be joint training sessions, view videos, read articles, etc. for the teachers to obtain the information they need in the way that they prefer in order to ensure student achievement.

29

References Berry. The Teacher Educator, 45:7595, 2010.ISSN: 0887-8730 print/1938-8101 online. DOI: 10.1080/08878731003623677.Reserch Article Pre-service and Early Career Teachers. Attitudes Toward Inclusion, Instructional Accommodations, and Fairness: Three Profiles. Bunch and Valeo. Inclusive Education Emergent Solutions Cameron. What is an Inclusion Specialist? A Preliminary Investigation. 1994. p56. Cleovoulou. Socially Inclusive Pedagogy in Literacy Classes: Fostering Inclusion in the Inner City. University of Toronto. Journal of Urban Learning Teaching and Research. Volume 4, 2008 Co-Teaching in Inclusive Classrooms: A Met Synthesis of Qualitative Research. Council for Exceptional Children. 2007. Vol.73, No.4pp.392-416. Ernst and Rogers. Development of the Inclusion Attitude Scale for High School Teachers. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25:305322, 2009. Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.ISSN: 1537-7903 print / 1537-7911 online. DOI: 10.1080/15377900802487235. Windsor High School, Windsor, CT, USA. University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island, USA Fritz and Miller. Teacher Perceptions: Impacts of Planning for Inclusion. April 1995. 13p. Giangreco. Edelman. Cloninger.& Dennis (1993). My child has a classmate with severe disabilities: What parents of nondisabled children think about full inclusion. Developmental Disabilities Bulletin, 21(1), 77-91. Kalyanpur. & Harry (1999). Culture in special education: Building reciprocal familyprofessional relationships. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes. McVay. Paraprofessionals in the Classroom: What Role do they Play?. The Training and Technical Assistance Centers at Virginia Tech and Radford University. Spring 2000 Vol. 8, No. 3 Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook for new methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Mills. (2011). Action research: A guide for the teacher researcher (4th ed.). Sassle River,NJ, Merrill Prentice Hall. Read more at Suite 101: What is a Paraprofessional?: The Role of Teaching Assistant in Special Needs Education http://www.suite101.com/content/what-is-a-paraprofessional220178#ixzz17TgAhTDo

30

Reddy and Pfeiffer. Inclusion practices with special needs students: theory, research. 1999 Reid. The Inclusive Classroom: How Inclusive is Inclusion? 2010 Rogers. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 25:305322, 2009.Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.ISSN: 1537-7903 print / 1537-7911 online.DOI: 10.1080/15377900802487235. Development of the Inclusion Attitude Scale for High Salend. Creating inclusive classrooms: Effective and reflective practices (4th ed., p. 448), 2001, Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall. School Teachers. Ernst. Windsor High School, Windsor, CT, USA. University of Rhode Island, Kingston, Rhode Island, USA. Smith and Leonard. Collaboration for Inclusion: Practitioner Perspectives. Equity and Excellence in Education, 38:269-279, 2005. Copyright University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Education ISSN 1066-5684 print/1547-3457 online. DOI: 10.1080/10665680500299650. Spruill. Albany, Georgia. mimi@theconsultantteacher.org Preparing General Education Teachers for Inclusive Classrooms: Assessing the Process Teacher Education and Special Education: The Journal of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children July 2001 24: 183-197. 20 United States Code (U.S.C.) Section 1400-1485,Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),34 code of Federal Regulations (C.F.R.) Part 300, State Law Education Law Sections 4401-4410-a,8 New York Code of Rules and Regulations (NYCRR),Sections 100.1(q), 100.2(u), 200.2(b)(8), 200.4(b)(4) and (5),200.4(3), 200.4(d)(1), and 200.5 Walther-Thomas. Co-Teaching Experiences: The Benefits and Problems that Teachers and Principals Report Over Time: Journal of Learning Disabilities. Vol.30, Number 4, July/August 1996, pages 395-407.