Illustrations by Délice Williams?
Inclusive Education
When building a house, using defective materials may work temporarily as an alternative to save money, but you will come to find that the house will deteriorate at a much faster rate compared to houses built with more expensive but stronger materials. This is generally what has been done regarding special education and inclusion practices in America’s public schools. Teachers are the foundation of our education system, but implementing inclusive education has left many of them feeling underprepared and unsupported. This affects how well they can do their jobs, which inevitably undermines the overall quality of education students with disabilities are receiving. Inclusive education, in its most basic form, is a form of education in which every student, regardless of learning ability, has the opportunity to get age-appropriate instruction in the general education setting. Inclusive education can look different for every student, but generally students with special education needs would spend the majority of their time in their general education classroom with small periods of time spent doing special education outside of the classroom with a special education teacher. Inclusive education would ideally provide special education students with a sense of belonging, better learning opportunities, and opportunities to make friends with peers their age (New Brunswick Association for Community Living). However, special education students are not seeing the benefits of inclusion in schools because of the damaging effects inclusion has had on teachers. Although there are many proponents of inclusive education, lack of funding and access to professional development for special education result in teachers and administrators receiving inadequate resources to implement inclusion correctly.
The federal government has not upheld any of the financial promises to public schools outlined in various pieces of federal legislation, forcing individual districts to pick up the slack. However, many districts cannot afford to cover this excess cost, which results in districts with lower public funding being left behind. According to The U.S. Education System Is Failing Special Needs Students,” written by Sarah Butrymowicz and Jackie Mader, The federal government is supposed to fund 40% of the “excess cost” of educating children with disabilities, [but] in fiscal year 2015, the federal government gave states about $12 billion, or 16% of the excess costs” (34). This means that there was a very large margin of schools left underfunded, causing many special education programs to suffer or never make it off the ground.
In addition to the budget being underfunded, another reason money is not being allocated to schools is because it is financed through the discretionary part of the budget […] competing with things such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and much of the overall education budget” (Rosenkrantz). This shows there was no solid funding for special education in schools to begin with, even under legislation that was specifically passed to further the education of students with disabilities. This lack of funding has created a chain reaction of issues for teachers who are implementing inclusion and hinders public schools from running successful special education programs.
Without any federal funding allocated specifically to fulfill the needs of both general and special education teachers in public schools, teachers are unprepared to teach students with a range of disabilities. According to Butrymowicz and Mader, General education teachers rarely have much training in special education […] Meanwhile, special education teachers have to balance completing extensive federal paperwork with planning lessons and teaching classes. And they aren’t always taught everything they need to know to handle the full range of disabilities they face” (33). The knowledge is not spread evenly across all teachers who need it, making some feel underprepared and others overwhelmed. If more money was allocated to support teachers in public schools, teachers could attend more professional development and trainings. Since there are such little opportunities for teachers to attend various professional development programs, teachers often have to take matters into their own hands if they want to help students in need of special education services. One interviewee from Butrymowicz and Mader’s article stated that she holds her [special education] students to the same standards as their general education peers, but she’s had to do research on her own to find strategies for how to help them cope with their disabilities” (33). The added stress of having to figure out the best ways to support their special education students without any support from school administrations has contributed to the widespread burnout of both general and special education teachers.
The prime reason for the widespread burnout among teachers in recent years is a combination of feeling unsupported and unprepared to teach a variety of different students. In a study done about the burnout of special education teachers, authors Amy Nichols and Frances LaPlante, found that lack of opportunity for professional development significantly increased the overall emotional exhaustion of teachers. They also determined that caseload and the variation of disabilities present in the classroom did not negatively impact the teachers (80). This means that the teachers were not overwhelmed with student disabilities or classroom size, but the feeling of being unprepared and not supported by the institutions to which they are employed is why the retention rate of special education teachers is so low. General education teachers also must learn how to teach students with special education needs while also teaching the rest of the students in the classroom. Simultaneously teaching an entire classroom the general education lessons while also ensuring that their special education students are receiving an adequate education adds extra stressors onto general education teachers. Additionally, without the money to fund new training and professional development, teachers who have been out of college for many years are lacking the skills that new teachers are taught in order to cater to many different students at once. This all boils down to the little funding allocated to special education programs in public schools across the country, because without funding, administrations cannot afford to educate their teachers on how best to cope with inclusive education models.
The minimal funding also causes teachers and administrators to miss out on professional development that would help them decipher various pieces of commonly misunderstood legislation regarding special education. One pertinent act is the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities (CRPD). The CRPD was passed to guarantee the right of persons with disabilities to have access to an education without discrimination and on the basis of equal opportunity, states should ensure an inclusive education system at all levels” (Jokinen 71). This act is widely misinterpreted, and teachers are not often taught how to properly interpret the unclear wording and inconclusive statements present in the act. It does not specify exactly what institutions should do to be inclusive.” Without getting a concrete idea of how inclusion should be implemented in schools, teachers are once again left feeling unprepared and overwhelmed when working with students in need of special education.
Without giving teachers the resources they need to interpret the CRPD, students are not receiving the highest possible quality of education that their school can offer. In a study done by Lorna Idol in Toward Inclusion of Special Education Students in General Education: A Program Evaluation of Eight Schools,” researchers evaluated the effectiveness of inclusion practices in four elementary schools. In the study, Elementary Schools A, B, and C had implemented some unspecified aspects of inclusion into their schools, while Elementary School D stated that they incorporated inclusion to the fullest extent, meaning all students with disabilities were taught in the general education program […] with no pullout programs for academic instruction” (Idol 80). Researchers for the study then examined standardized test scores at each school. They found that students in Elementary Schools A, B, and C all made improvements, as most students performed much better on their end-of-year tests in comparison to their pre-tests. Elementary School D, however, was the only school where nearly all students were reported as being at risk for academic failure” (Idol 80). Legislation like the CRPD leaves teachers and administrators to interpret inclusion in a variety of ways; this worked out in schools A, B, and C, but was quite detrimental to students in Elementary School D. Elementary School D is a prime example of what happens when teachers and administrations interpret the CRPD incorrectly. If school administrations were given more resources to understand how to properly implement inclusion, students in Elementary School D may not have been in danger of failing. These issues are occurring countrywide because teachers and administrators are not given the proper tools they need to understand and implement inclusive education in a beneficial way.
Another one of the more relevant acts pertaining to inclusion, the Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA), is also very confusing for teachers and administrators to understand without attending professional development or training. IDEA states that all students with disabilities are entitled to an education in the least restrictive environment” (McCabe et al. 2). The term least restrictive environment” (LRE) is widely misunderstood and interpreted differently from school to school. When creating Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) for students, teachers are supposed to center the student’s learning around what their LRE is. It is very common for teams to use unclear wording and not specify exactly who will be making decisions for students on a daily basis because they are unsure of what the LRE truly is for that specific student. This is why ensuring that teachers have a concrete understanding of LRE and the IDEA is imperative for student success.
Some teachers are able to interpret the confusing terminology in the IDEA and build IEPs that work for their students; however, this is not applicable everywhere and should not be assumed, since many teachers were never taught how to interpret the IDEA. This idea was explored in a study done by McCabe et al., where researchers evaluated the wording of various IEPs and the outcome. Researchers evaluated the IEP for Danny, a 3rd grade student with multiple disabilities. In his IEP, teachers clearly state when and where he will receive special education services, including exactly how long he should spend outside of the general education setting. Danny’s IEP was highly beneficial and gave him the opportunity to progress with his peers in the general education setting without taking away from his special education needs. Researchers then evaluated an IEP for Cassie, a 7th grade student with an unnamed health impairment. Her IEP stated that she should attend her general education classes when appropriate,” due to her academic level and behavioral issues (15). The wording in her IEP is very ambiguous and does not specify when Cassie will be attending general education classes and what specific behaviors were keeping her away from them. Ultimately, researchers found that Cassie’s IEP caused her to miss more grade-level classes than intended because of its unclear wording and ambiguous nature. This study truly demonstrates how important a concrete understanding of the IDEA is for implementing inclusion and making sure each student’s needs are being met. Without a concrete understanding of a student’s LRE and what that means specifically for that student, teachers will continue to make placement mistakes for students with special education needs, which can lead to a decrease in the quality of their education.
Without the necessary funding and access to professional development to support both special education and general education teachers in public schools, inclusive education is not serving its intended purpose ? to improve the education of students with special education needs. However, since a majority of the issues with implementing inclusion practices can be traced back to lack of funding, there are viable solutions and steps the government and individual school districts could take to improve the workplace for teachers, thus improving the quality of learning for students. Increasing the budget or setting aside money specifically for special education in public schools would help support teachers and would immensely improve inclusion practices. More funding means schools will be able to hold more professional development, train more general education teachers in special education practices, and offer support to struggling teachers which would truly go a long way.
Another possible solution would be to educate teachers on a more succinct and standard definition of LRE and how they can best determine what a student’s LRE is. Creating this standard definition would decrease misconceptions regarding special education legislation and the misplacement of students with special education needs. These solutions would increase support for teachers and could decrease the issues created when teachers misinterpret federal legislation like the IDEA and CRPD.
Overall, if the issues discussed were addressed by federal and local governments, as well as individual school districts/administrations, inclusive education could be a very effective way to educate students with special needs or disabilities without making them miss out on grade-level instruction with their peers.
Author: Nya Wynn
In my ENG110 class this past fall, we learned about increasing accessibility in society for everyone. When we were assigned to write this paper, I knew I wanted to write about something unrelated to my other studies as a Biology major and broaden my horizons in another field. I was inspired by the theme of the course “increasing accessibility” and by my mom, who is a special education teacher. I had never really learned in depth about what my mom had to deal with in school teaching special education, and this paper presented the perfect opportunity to learn more about it.
With this idea in mind, I started researching, and what I found online during my research was quite shocking and made me want to explore more about how inclusion in public schools affects the teachers as well as the students. I realized that the current system in place now isn’t helping anyone involved and is causing many teachers to end their career after a few years in the system. This loss of amazing teachers will affect the education of all students and this is an issue I believe everyone should be passionate about.
I hope that my paper encourages people to have conversations about school inclusion and how detrimental it can be to America’s teachers and students; there needs to be a massive change in how we run our schools and how we treat teachers if we want to ensure that children to get the highest quality education and that teachers want to continue teaching throughout their lives.
Instructor: Nicolette Bragg
Our section of Honors English 110 focused on the relationship between social justice and the built environment. The course was premised on the idea that conversations about social justice require skills akin to those of writing. With “Constructing Social Justice” as our theme, we thus developed our rhetorical awareness, learned to write about complex ideas with thoughtfulness, and thought about how to make arguments that are both ambitious and responsible. In the second half of the semester, students selected their own topic and composed a paper that entered into a relevant and timely conversation. The two essays featured in this collection are admirable in their efforts to put into practice the lessons of the course and for the care with which they treat their subject. Nya Wynn’s essay considers the effects when teachers bear the burden of inclusive education efforts. Both essays recall a lesson from our class discussions?when we are unsure of where to begin, it is often a good idea to pay attention to the lived experience of those involved.
Works Cited
Works Cited
Butrymowicz, Sarah, and Jackie Mader. The U.S. Education System Is Failing Special Needs Students.” Education Digest, vol. 83, no. 8, Apr. 2018, pp. 26?35. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=128627065&site=ehost-live.
Idol, Lorna. Toward Inclusion of Special Education Students in General Education: A Program Evaluation of Eight Schools.” Remedial & Special Education, vol. 27, no. 2, Mar. 2006, pp. 77?94. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/07419325060270020601.
Jokinen, Markku. Inclusive Education–A Sustainable Approach?” American Annals of the Deaf, vol. 163, no. 1, Spring 2018, pp. 70?77. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1353/aad.2018.0012.
Mccabe, Katie M., et al. Cracks in the Continuum: A Critical Analysis of Least Restrictive Environment for Students with Significant Support Needs.” Teachers College Record, vol. 122, no. 5, May 2020, pp. 1?28, doi:10.1177/016146812012200511.
New Brunswick Association for Community Living. (n.d.). Inclusive Education and its benefits. New Brunswick Association For Community Living (NBACL). Retrieved November 28, 2021, from https://nbacl.nb.ca/module-pages/inclusive-education-and-its-benefits/.
Nichols, Amy Sloan, and Frances LaPlante Sosnowsky. Burnout among Special Education Teachers in Self-Contained Cross-Categorical Classrooms.” Teacher Education & Special Education, vol. 25, no. 1, Dec. 2002, pp. 71?86. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1177/088840640202500108.
Rosenkrantz, Holly. “Special Education.” CQ Researcher, 11 June 2021, pp. 1-51, library.cqpress.com/cqresearcher/cqresrre2021061100.
Paper Prompt
Nicolette Bragg
Assignment Prompt
RESEARCH PROJECT
Requirements
Length: 6-8 pages
Due Date First Draft: Nov 5
Due Date Second Draft: Nov 19
Due Date Final: Dec 8
Bibliography Minimum Requirements: Seven sources, at least three of which must be academic journal articles, all of which much be used responsibly and carefully evaluated
Prompt
Compose a coherent and well-written essay in which you enter into a conversation on a chosen subject, taking a position and arguing for this position while demonstrating awareness of context. By doing research on this subject and learning what others think about it, you will help readers better understand its stakes and implications. Be sure that this subject falls within the scope of the course’s theme (social justice and the built environment).