Inclusion

1
Inclusion General Education

• Kristie, Kim, Sharyn,
• Lauren, and Helene

2
Outline

• Definitions of inclusion and supported inclusion
• Full Inclusion Movement (FIM)
• The inclusion controversy
• Prerequisite skills
• Benefits of inclusion
• Potential sites and programs
• Strategies for teaching children in the inclusion
  setting
• Strategies for support staff
• Evaluation of the inclusion placement
• Conclusion

3
What is Inclusion? (Bondy, 1996)

• The definition of inclusion is when students with
  special needs are placed in public school systems
  with typical peers and all services are provided
  within the regular classroom.
• According to Bondy, inclusion involves bringing
  the support services to the child (rather than
  moving the child to the services) and requires
  only that the child will benefit from being in
  the class (rather than having to keep up with the
  other students).

4
What is Supported Inclusion?

• The federal law states that all children are
  entitled to a free and appropriate education.
• The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
  (IDEA) includes a mandate that all services
  should be provided in the least restrictive
  environment.
• Supported inclusion is defined as the act of
  sending a student with autism or Pervasive
  Development Disorders (PDD) into a regular
  education accompanied by an aide or instructor
  trained in the principles of Applied Behavior
  Analysis (ABA) (Johnson, Meyer, Taylor, 1996) .

5
Who Considers Supported Inclusion? (Johnson et
al. 1996)

• Parents, behavioral consultants, educational
  consultants, and the school administration are
  responsible deciding if supported inclusion is
  appropriate for the child or not.
• Dymond (2001) reviewed the literature on
  inclusive school program evaluations and proposed
  a model that includes stakeholders in the
  evaluation process though a participatory action
  research approach, analyzes both program
  processes and outcomes, uses multiple methods and
  measures, and obtains perceptions from diverse
  stakeholder groups.

6
(Dymond, 2001)
7
Why Consider Supported Inclusion? (Johnson et
al. 1996)

• The following considerations should be carefully
  evaluated
• Can the child generalize social skills?
• Can the child learn new social skills in an
  inclusion setting?
• Can the child generalize academic skills from one
  setting to the next?
• Can the child learn new academic skills?
• Can the students time in the regular education
  setting gradually and systematically increase to
  prepare for a full transition?
• It is important to include young children with
  autism and other disabilities into regular
  education classes because benefits occur when
  children are included with peers, socialize with
  them, and actively engage in typical preschool
  activities including play (Harris Handleman,
  1997 Kellegrew, 1995 Koegel, Koegel, Harrower,
  Carter, 1999 McGee, Morrimer, Daly, 2001
  McWilliam, Trivette, Dunst, 1985 Rogers, Hall,
  Osaki, Reaven, Herbison, 2001 Strain, 1983).

8
What is Full Inclusion? (Bondy, 1996)

• The term full inclusion is the idea that all
  students with special needs must be placed with
  age appropriate peers.
• Services must be provided within the regular
  classroom setting.

9
FIM

• Qualifies as Quackery and Fraud (Worrall,1990)
• FIM meets the criterion for Quackery and Fraud
• Lack of evidence suggesting FIM to be true/goes
  against common sense
• Not consistent with evidence of effective
  treatments for children with disabilities.
• FIM s idea of justification of effective
  treatment leads to 2 unsatisfactory possibilities
• Pseudoscientific treatments may influence public
  into using an ineffective treatment solely on the
  basis of location.
• General education settings would be better
  learning environments for a child with a
  disability then a learning environment that
  provided evidence based interventions by
  specially trained teaching staff.

10

• The Controversy

11
The Delusion of Inclusion of the FIM

• According to Mock Kauffman (2004), these are
  the Delusions of Inclusion
• (a) students will receive the same learning
  opportunities because they are in the same
  environment.
• (b) The only way to provide fair treatment to
  students with disabilities is to share a learning
  setting with typically peers.
• (c) Students with disabilities should be treated
  exactly the same as students without
  disabilities.
• The Full Inclusion Movement (FIM) states that it
  is the place that does or does not make
  instruction qualify as effective.

12
Legislators

• According to legislators special education
  services
• Are poor and costly (Cottle,2001 Fletcher,2001)
• Those against special education argue
• Children with disabilities should not be
  separated from typically developing children for
  self esteem purposes.
• Claim that special educators are poorly trained.
• Claim that the disabilities themselves are poorly
  defined.
• Claim that goals and expectations for children
  with disabilities are not set to a high enough
  standard by special education teachers.

13
Advocates of Full Inclusion

• Aim to increase self esteem with the method of
  full inclusion.
• Do not want children with disabilities separated
  from the mainstream population.
• Idea established in 1968 by Dunn, and the again
  in 1970 by Deno. (Deno believed that children
  should not be separated from the mainstream class
  because it would be harmful for self-esteem).
• Against research because of its emphasis on
  individualized treatments which again would
  separate children from the general education
  classroom.
• Supporters of the FIM aim for social justice and
  on that premise they go on to say that the
  segregation of children with special needs from
  the general education classroom is similar to
  racial segregation.

14
Opponents of the FIM

• State that interventions are difficult to
  implement in a general education setting
  (Kauffman, Lloyd, Baker, Riedel,1995).
• According to parental anecdotal reports the
  general education setting may not be a successful
  learning environment and may actually result in
  an increase of maladaptive behaviors due to the
  unpredictability of reinforcement schedules and
  the environment in general (Crockett,
  Kauffman,1999).
• The effectiveness of teaching all the children in
  the class would be compromised because there will
  be higher demands placed on the teacher due to
  the special needs of the children with
  disabilities in the classroom (Palmer, 2001).
• According to Krantz and McClannahan (1999),
  putting children in integrated classrooms is not
  effective. Adverse outcomes often occur (e.g.
  tantrums can affect the learning of other
  students).

15
FIM Outcomes

• Supporters of the FIM cut costs at the expense of
  children with disabilities education
• The FIM is based on Quakery and Fraud and does
  not support research.
• Without specialized treatment, children with
  disabilities will be treated unfairly and will
  not receive optimal learning opportunities
• The class as a whole (general education) will not
  receive optimal learning opportunities due to the
  heavy demands placed on the teacher and the
  ineffective plans for accomidating all children
  in the classroom.

16

• Prerequisite skills children need to be
  considered for inclusion

17
(Johnson et al. 1996)
The prerequisite skills

• 1.Language Skills
• -Follow two-step directions when presented to a
  group
• -Communicate needs and desires
• -Answer simple questions
• -Ask simple questions
• -Engages in simple exchanges of conversation
• -Recalls experiences

18
Prerequisite skills. (Johnson et al. 1996)

• 2. Social Skills
• -Takes turns during activities
• -Walks quietly
• -Answers simple questions
• -Participate in circle activities
• -Initiates play activities with peers with or
  without adult prompts
• -Imitates peer play
• 3. Academic Skills
• -Learns through observation of others
• -Waits quietly
• -Raises hand to seek adult assistance
• -Learns targeted objectives during group
  instruction
• -Completes grade-level academic curriculum

19
Prerequisite skills. (Johnson et al. 1996)

• 4. Behavior Skills
• -Responds to delayed contingencies(reinforcement
  is delivered to child following a period of time
  rather than immediately after the targeted
  behavior.
• -Exhibits disruptive behaviors at near-zero
  levels in all environments
• -Stereotypic behavior under stimulus control

20
Benefits from an inclusion placement setting
(Johnson et al. 1996)

• Some questions to ask when considering an
  inclusion placement are
• What is the childs functional level of
  performance?
• How accurate and consistent does the performance
  have to be to produce positive outcomes for the
  child in various natural situations?
• What level of performance is expected of typical
  children of the same age?
• What is expected of most children in the
  inclusion setting you are considering?
• Does the child should demonstrate the
  prerequisite skills with proficiency in various
  settings and across instructors, before inclusion
  placement begins.
• Robertson et. al. 2003 found variability in
  teachers reports of their relationship with
  included students with autism, childrens level
  of behavior problems, degree of social inclusion,
  and the associations between these factors.

21
How do you identify potential inclusion sites?
(Johnson et al. 1996)

• Team review of
• Community settings
• Preschools
• Kindergarten and primary classes
• Inclusion coordinator and/or parent, observe each
  class for 1 hour
• Other considerations
• Age
• Distance from home or specialized school
• Teacher characteristics
• Classroom schedule
• Class size

22
Examples of programs with inclusion sites

• Douglas Developmental Disabilities Center (DDDC)
• Alpine Learning Group (ALG)
• Princeton Child Development Institute (PCDI)

23
The DDDC (Handelman, Harris, Arnold, Cohen,
Gordan, 2006)

• Mainstreaming and inclusion are an important
  piece of the school program
• Initially students are segregated and then given
  opportunities in the integrated setting.
• Fundamental skills are taught initially and then
  these skills will generalize into the
  normal/community based setting
• The transition process is systematic and well-
  
• planned.

24
DDDC(Handelman et al. 2006)

• The process evaluates staff student ratio,
  contingencies, school / life activities,
  classroom structure, and classroom visits are
  done to check for appropriate placement
• The DDDC works with the local school district and
  parents to identify the best integration setting
  for the leaner
• This process of integration begins one year prior
  to any placement changes

25
DDDC (Handelman et al. 2006)

• Additionally, the DDDC staff looks at what
  requisite skills are needed for the new setting
• After transitioning occurs in the inclusion
  setting, the DDDC will have increased visits to
  the students new placement
• Cooperative planning will take place between the
  DDDC and the staff at the new placement.
• Follow-up services and parent preparation are
  available to make the transition process smooth
  as possible for the student

26
ALG(Meyer, Taylor, Cerino, Fisher, Moran,
Richard, 2006)

• Students can interact with peers in an inclusion
  setting
• Referrals into inclusion can be made by any team
  member and the decision is made collaboratively
  by the team.
• Inclusion settings are located within a close
  range of ALG
• Initially, most of the students day is at ALG
• and part of their day is at the inclusion
  
• setting

27
ALG(Meyer et al. 2006)

• When a placement in found, training in ABA is
  offered to the staff members at the inclusion
  site
• ALG conducts on-going supervision and provides
  feedback to the inclusion staff
• ALG staff member goes with the student to the new
  setting until the student no longer needs support
  or someone is trained at the inclusion site.

28
ALG (Meyer et al. 2006)

• Time in the inclusion setting increases when data
  shows improvement and objectives continue to be
  mastered
• The ALG staff member implements interventions to
  promote independence and generalization skills in
  the inclusion setting
• The district prioritizes skills according to
  curriculum standards
• When full inclusion is made an on-going
  consultation and follow-up services are done at
  home, school, and in the community
• Students can go to the ESY program to focus on
  
• targeted skills at ALG

29
PCDI(McClannahan Krantz, 2006)

• Data is taken on the learners skills, and staff
  make arrangements for the learner to interact
  with their non-disabled peers.
• These play dates are done with a staff member
  who goes initially. Once the student has
  appropriate social interactions, the staff member
  will gradually fade.

30
PCDI (McClannahan et al. 2006)

• There are programs to help the students interact
  appropriately with family and within the
  community.
• When readiness skills are met, a gradual
  transition is made from PCDI to the inclusion
  setting
• Inclusion is relevant only if the student can
  interact appropriately with peers, imitate peers
  behaviors, and participate in non-verbal
  interactions.

31
PCDI (McClannahan et al. 2006) Is the student
successful?

• Is the child engaged with teacher directed
  activities?
• Does the child follow individual/ group
  direction?
• Does the child respond to a behavior contract,
  and teacher notes?
• Does the child have inappropriate behaviors? If
  so how frequent?

32
Strategies for Teaching Students in the Inclusion
Setting (Johnson et al. 1996)

• Support staff must be trained in ABA principles,
  such as data collection, time delay, prompt
  fading, and positive reinforcement procedures
  when working directly with students in the
  inclusion settings.

33
Recommended Strategies for Support Staff
(Johnson et al. 1996)

• 1). Shadow student and systematically fade back
  as soon as possible.
• 2). Support a student to remain on task and
  behave appropriately.
• 3). The teachers instructions should never be
  repeated by the support staff. If needed, provide
  a gestural or physical prompt.
• 4). After classroom teacher gives a direction,
  prompt only after 15 seconds elapse.
• 5). Give subtle physical prompt from behind and
  fade as soon as possible.
• 6). Provide intermittent verbal and social
  reinforcement when appropriate.
• 7). All questions should be redirected to
  classroom teacher.
• 8). Promote social interaction as often as
  possible.
• 9). If a skill has been targeted for instruction,
  follow the written teaching procedure.
• 10.) Summarize data on target skills daily on
  graphs.

34
Evaluation of the Inclusion Site? (Johnson et
al. 1996)

• Select objectives that can be measured.
• Collect baseline data on all programs prior to
  starting a teaching intervention
• Record data on the performances of a variety of
  typical peers on the same skills and to assess
  changes in behavior.
• Data on targeted objectives should be reviewed
  weekly to monitor progress toward goals.
• According to Craft, Alber, and Heward (1998),
  academic productivity is essential in the
  classroom because the ultimate purpose of
  training students to recruit teacher praise is to
  maintain and extend the targeted academic or
  social skill for what they are recruiting praise
  for.

35
Conclusions

• It is important to include young children with
  autism and other disabilities into regular
  education classes because benefits occur when
  children are included with peers, socialize with
  them, and actively engage in typical preschool
  activities including play.
• There continues to be a controversy if inclusion
  is beneficial to students with special needs.
• Douglass, Alpine, and PCDI offer effective
  inclusion programs for children with autism.
• With various supports (including a trained
  support staff), along with ABA techniques and
  strategies, a childs success in the inclusion
  setting will be maximized.

36
References

• Bondy, A. (1996). What parents can expect from
  public school programs. In C. Maurice, G. Green,
  and S. C. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral interventions
  for young children with autism (pp. 323-330).
  Austin, TX Pro-ed.
• Craft, M.A., Alber, S.R., Heward, W.L. (1998).
  Teaching elementary students with developmental
  disabilities to recruit teacher attention in a
  general education classroom effects on a teacher
  praise and academic productivity. Journal of
  Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 399-415.
• Crockett, J.B., Kauffman, J.M. (1999). Taking
  inclusion back to its roots. Educational
  Leadership, 56,. 74-77.
• Cotle, M (2000). Jeffords Kills Special ed.
  reform school. The New Rebubplic,14-15.
• Dymond, S. K. (2001). A participatory action
  research approach to evaluating inclusive school
  programs. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental
  Disabilities, 16, 54-63.
• Deno, E. (1970). Special education as
  developmental capital. Exceptional Children, 37,
  239-237
• Dunn, L. (1968). Special education for the mildly
  retarded -- Is much of it justifiable?
  Exceptional Children, 34, 5-22.
• Fletcher,M.A (2001). Overhaul planned for special
  education. The Washington post, PA3.
• Green. (1996). Early behavioral intervention for
  autism what does research tell us? In C.
  Maurice, G. Green, and S. Luce (Eds.), Behavioral
  intervention for young children with autism (pp.
  15-28). Austin, TX Pro-ed.
• Johnson, Susan C., Linda Meyer, and Bridget A.
  Taylor. "Supported Inclusion." Behavior
  Intervention for Young Children with Autism.
  Austin Pro-Ed,

37
References

• Harris, S.L., Handleman, J.S. (1997). Helping
  children with autism enter the mainstream. In
  F.R. Volkmar (Ed.), Handbook of autism and
  pervasive developmental disorders (2nd ed., pp.
  665-675). New York John Wiley Sons.
• Handleman, J.S., Harris, S.L., Arnold, M.S.,
  Cohen, M., Gordon, R. (2006). The Douglass
  Development Disabilities Center. In J.S.
  Handleman S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age
  education programs for children with autism
  (pp93-94). Austin, TX Pro-ed
• Kellegrew, D.H., (1995). Integrated school
  placements for children with disabilities. In
  L.K. Koe-gel (Ed.) Teaching children with autism
  Strategies for initiating positive interaction
  and improving learning opportunities (pp.
  127-146). Baltimore Paul H. Brookes.
• Krantz, Patricia J., and Lynn E. McClannahan.
  "Strategies for Integration Building Repertoires
  That Support Transitions to Public Schools."
  Autism Behavior Analytic Perspectives. Reno
  Context P, 1999. 221-229.
• Koegel, L.K., Koegel, R., Harrower, J.K.,
  Carter, C.M. (1999). Pivotal response
  intervention I Overview of Approach. The
  Journal of the Association for Persons with
  Severe Handicaps, 24, 174-185.
• Maurice, C., Green, G., Luce, S. C. (Eds.).
  (1996). Behavioral intervention for young
  children with autism. Austin, TX Pro-Ed.
• McClannahan, L.E. Krantz, P.J. (2006) Behavior
  analysis and intervention for school-age children
  at the Princeton Child Development Institute. In
  J.S. Handleman S.L. Harris (Eds.), School-age
  education programs for children with autism
  (pp151-152). Austin, TX Pro-ed.
• McGee, G.G., Morrimer, M.J., Daly, T. (2001).
  The Walden early childhood programs. In S.L.
  Harris (Ed.), Preschool education programs for
  children with autism (Vol. 2, pp. 157-188).
  Austin, TX Pro-ed.
• McWilliam, R.A., Trivette, C.M., Dunst, C.J.
  (1985). Behavior engagement as a measure of the
  efficacy of early intervention. Analysis and
  Intervention in Developmental Disabilities, 5,
  33-45.
• Meyer, L.S., Taylor, B.A., Cerino, K.E., Fisher,
  J.R., Moran, L. Richard, E. (2006). Alpine
  Learning Group. In J.S. Handleman S.L. Harris
  (Eds.), School-age education programs for
  children with autism (pp 35-36). Austin, TX
  Pro-ed.

38
References

• Palmer, D. S., Fuller, K., Arora, T., Nelson,
  M. (2001). Taking sides Parent views on.
  inclusion for their children with severe
  disabilities.
• Exceptional Children, 67, 467-484.
• Rogers, S.J., Hall, T., Osaki, D., Reaven, J.,
  Her-bison, J. (2001). The Denver Model A
  Comprehensive integrated education approach to
  young children with autism and their families.
  In S.L. Harris (Ed.), Preschool education
  programs for children with autism (pp. 95-134).
  Austin, TX Pro-ed.
• Strain, P.S. (1983). Generalization of autistic
  childrens social behavior change Effects of
  develop-mentally integrated and segregated
  settings. Analysis and Intervention in
  Developmental Disabilities, 3, 23-34.
• Worall, R.S (1990. Detecting health fraud in the
  field of learning disabilities. Journal of
  Learning Disabilities, 23, 207-212.