Brief History of Inclusion of Students with Special Needs in BC Schools

1. Brief History of Inclusion of Students with Special Needs in BC Schools (Naylor, 2004)

2. Over 2 centuries changes in societal thinking (Andrews & Lupart, 2000) • 19th century Institutionalization • 1900-1950s segregated schooling • 1950s-1960s categorization (separation of high and low categories; often low incidence in different schools, high incidence in different classes)

3. 1970s Integration vs. segregation • 1980s Mainstreaming (students with high incidence placement in regular classes) • 1990s to present: Inclusion; Neighbourhood Schools Concept

4. Terms: • Mainstreaming/Integration: In mainstreaming, as in partial inclusion, an individual with a disability’s home classroom is a special education classroom. They “earn” the right to be placed in regular classroom settings, sometimes subject by subject.

5. Terms: Inclusion: A philosophy that all children should be fully included in school community. • inclusion is about the child’s right to participate and the school’s duty to accept the child.

6. US LAWS With Canadian Implications • IDEIA (Individual with Disabilities Educational Improvement Act) 1990 and amendments -zero rejection -free, appropriate education -IEP written, implemented, reviewed -LRE( Least Restrictive Envt) -due Process - early intervention -confidentiality of records -parent participation

7. Amendments (2004, 2007 ) -use of person first language -transition services (16-21 yrs)-from preschool to adulthood

8. NCLB ( No Child Left Behind Act- 2001) -at least 95% of students with disabilities participate in statewide assessments • Accountability contracts • Highly Trained teachers

9. NCLB Follow-up Act 2011 - every child entitled to world class education -by 2020 goal have highest rate of completion of college education

10. Legal Framework in Canada Re: Education & Disabilities • Canadian Constitution (and in particular, the Charter of Rights and Freedoms) • Provincial Education Statutes • Provincial Human Rights Legislation

11. Judicial Interpretation of each • the need for individual student accommodations • with expectations that school districts will remove systemic barriers to such accommodations

12. At present, no Canadian province full Inclusionary system of Education • However, places expectation of school boards to place students in integrated settings, “Unless…

13. “…the educational needs of the student with special needs indicate that the ed program for the student with special needs should be provided otherwise.” ( Special Needs Order 1989)

14. Current Debate • One side: national and provincial Community Living organizations, argues vehemently for inclusion as a fundamental human right and supports litigants’ law suits in pursuit of such rights

15. A second group, represented in part by those supporting students with learning disabilities, argues that the very goal of the proponents of inclusion contravenes their fundamental right to access separate educative services.

16. Educational Expertise for Successful Inclusion (Henteleff, 2004) • 1. Full comprehension of exceptional conditions and appropriate accommodations to meet such conditions • 2. Ability to apply Individual Education Plans (IEPs) and to function within the system that creates them • 3. Skills in managing students in complex activities and through transitions

17. 4. Skills in making systematic observations of students and in making appropriate referrals • 5.Expertise in creating social structures in classrooms appropriate to diverse needs • 6. Understanding of family dynamics and capacity to interact with parents.

18. Benefits of Inclusion • positive effects on students with special needs, with more engaged behaviour, leading to improved gains vs. separate settings (Katz & Mirenda, 2002a/b) • findings supported by Willms (2002)

19. but challenged by Heath et al (2004), who argues that much of the research claiming benefits for students with behavioural difficulties from inclusion is “outdated or methodologically problematic.”(p. 242)

20. Katz & Mirenda (2002)also found no evidence that students without special needs were impacted negatively by the inclusion of students with special needs.

21. substantial evidence exists that social benefits accrue to all students in inclusive settings, particularly in terms of social and communication skills, friendship networks, and parent and community attitudes. (Katz & Mirenda , 2002)

22. Sparling (2002). Her review of existing literature found greater acceptance by peers in elementary schools than in secondary settings. • She found that limited acceptance was influenced by the nature of the disability, lack of knowledge about disabilities, peer pressure, school and community culture, and teacher attitudes

23. In B.C., teachers reported positive attitudes among all students towards students with exceptionalities (Naylor, 2002), • Improved social benefits for students with special needs, particularly in terms of peer interactions.

24. Improved academic attainment was identified, but to a lesser extent, and often in subjects such as Art, Music, and Physical Education. (Naylor, 2002)

25. “As general education began to shift towards these more inclusionary practices, it became increasingly apparent that regular classroom teachers and administrators were insufficiently prepared and ill-equipped to effect the multidimensional and complex changes that inclusive education reformers had envisioned.” (p. 18) Lupart & Webber’s (2002)

26. Necessary Skills of Special Educators/Resource Teachers • understand the philosophy and practices of inclusion, so that they can: • directly teach students and support the work of classroom teachers • carry out roles in assessment • collaborative planning, and communication with parents.

27. Teaching techniques and contexts that promote academic achievement for students with special needs in inclusive settings( Katz & Mirenda, 2002) - instructional arrangements • co- operative learning/peer tutoring • instructional adaptations • parallel or differentiated instruction • collaborative planning • curriculum and performance-based assessment; • community instruction

28. Rationale for teacher Pro D linked to inclusion: Stanovich & Jordan (2004) • classroom teachers are key to the successful inclusion of students with disabilities • successful learning in inclusive classrooms rests on foundational principles of effective teaching • professional development can be a major benefit for the inclusion of students with disabilities in general education classrooms.

29. Key Considerations: • incorporate “teaching to diversity” into each unit and approach, rather than treating diversity as a separate concept • Begin with framework of effective teaching for diversity, rather than consider it as an afterthought.