1 Part I: Inclusive Education: What We Know about Its Effects

Algozzine et al.,1988; Gelzheiser et al., 1998; Hollowood et al., 1995; Logan & Keefe, 1997; Raudenbush et al., 1992; Ryndak et al., submitted; Sontag, 1997; Vaughn et al., Efficacy of Segregated Settings  Resource rooms provide primarily whole group reading instruction with little differentiated materials  Few differences in instructional methods across self- contained classes for students with various disabilities  More instructional time and 1:1 in general classrooms  IEP-specified peer interactions were not implemented in segregated settings  Placement & labeling lowered teachers’ perceptions of students’ efficacy  Less learning over time for students with similar diagnoses in segregated settings  Better life outcomes for students with inclusive services

3 Provide Strategies for Fostering Class Membership Achieve Social Outcomes Foster Social Relationships Social Aspects of Inclusion

Evans et al., 1992; Odom et al., in prep4 Fostering Class Membership & Belonging  Why foster class membership? Students with disabilities are at an increased risk of social rejection if they are:  Socially withdrawn  Display aggressive and/or conflictive qualities, and  Lack an effective communication system Number of social interactions received from students without disabilities may decline over time

Fryxell & Kennedy, 1995; Kennedy et al., Social Outcomes for Students With Disabilities  Have more contact with students without disabilities across a wider range of settings and activities  Receive and provide higher levels of social support  Enjoy larger friendship networks  Develop longer-term relationships with peers without disabilities

Fisher & Meyer, 2002; Logan et al., 1998; Ryndak et al., Social Outcomes (continued)  Achieve higher scores on measures of social competence  Exhibit more displays of happiness behaviors  Report increases in children’s participation in extra-curricular activities and decreases in inappropriate social behaviors

Evans et al., 1994; Favazza & Odom, 1997; Fisher et al., 1998; Helmstetter et al., 1994; Kishi & Meyer, 1994; Peck et al., 1990; Staub et al., Social Outcomes for Students without Disabilities  Increased acceptance and tolerance of others  More developed sense of responsibility and positive self-concept  Realistic expectations and perceptions of students with disabilities

Janney & Snell, 1996; Schnorr, 1990, 1997; Staub et al., Strategies for Fostering Class Membership  Provide access to peers without disabilities during social times  Provide meaningful ways to participate  Use cooperative instructional strategies  Provide student age-appropriate materials during class activities  Know when to “Back Off”

9 Communication/Literacy for Children with Disabilities Develop Literacy Skills Achieve Communication Outcomes Provide Strategies to Enhance Communication

Downing, 2001;Erickson & Koppenhaver,1997; Ryndak, Morrison, et al., Communication Outcomes for Students with Disabilities  More opportunities to engage in meaningful communication occur in inclusive settings  More opportunities for communication occur naturally throughout the day in inclusive settings

Ryndak, Downing, et al., 1995; Ryndak, Morrison, et al., Communication Outcomes for Students with Disabilities  Demonstrate growth in articulation, language use, and vocabulary  Participate actively in conversations

Hunt et al., 1996; McSheehan, Sonnemeier, et al., Communication Outcomes for Students without Disabilities  Increased reciprocity of interactions, so children without disabilities received support, as well as gave support  Improved ability to interpret communicative intent of students with disabilities (i.e., providing natural supports)

Downing, 2001; Erickson & Koppenhaver, 1995,1997; Ryndak, Morrison, et al., Strategies for Enhancing Communication  Recognize that opportunities for communicative exchanges exist  Build communicative opportunities into the activities throughout the day  Foster responsive communication partners

Ryndak, Morrison, et al., Literacy Skills for Students with Disabilities  “ …allows individuals with severe disabilities to improve & maintain interpersonal interactions, convey needs and wants, exchange information, and express their feelings and ideas”.

15 Academic Aspects for Students with Disabilities Academic Achievement Service Delivery Learning Opportunities Academic Performance

Ferguson et al., 1993; Gilbert et al., 2001; Hunt & Farron-Davis, 1992; Hunt, Farron-Davis, et al., 1994; Hunt, Stab, et al., 1994; Logan & Malone, 1998; McDonnell et al., Service Delivery in Inclusive Settings  Higher quality IEP: high overall quality, emphasis on basic skills (academic, social, and communication) along with functional skills  Increased task-related interactions with others  Increased use of various learning formats: peer- tutoring, cooperative learning

Ferguson et al., 1993; Hollowood et al., 1995; Janney & Snell, 1997; Logan & Malone, 1998; Ryndak et al., Service Delivery in Inclusive Settings  Higher expectations for student performance  Increased teaching support: teacher collaboration  Improved match of instructional contexts to students’ educational needs  Comparable time allocated and used for instruction between inclusive and segregated settings

Cooperland et al., 2001; Fisher & Frey, 2000; Ferguson et al., 1993; Giangreco et al., 1997; Gilbert et al., 2001; Janney & Snell, 1997; McDonell et al., 2001; Ryndak et al., Learning Opportunities in Inclusive Settings  Learning opportunities are increased by: Using accommodation and modifications of curriculum, instruction, activities, classroom routines, and settings Providing appropriate peer or adult support (proximity of instructional assistant) Teaching self-monitoring for classroom survival skills or study skills

Fisher & Meyer, 2002; Hollowood et al., 1995; hunt, Farron-Davis et al., 1994; Logan & Malone, 1998; McDonnell et al., 2001; Mills et al., Academic Performance in Inclusive Settings  Students with disabilities in inclusive settings displayed : Higher level of engaged behavior in inclusive settings than in segregated settings Slightly less actively engaged behavior than students without disabilities Similar or better scores in developmental assessments than students in segregated settings Increased responding to academic tasks, prompts, and directions

Gilbet et al., 2001; Kliewer & Biklen, 2001; Ryndak et al., 1995; Ryndak et al., Academic Achievement in Inclusive Settings  Parents perceived their children’s dramatic growth in communication after the placement in inclusive settings  Better acquisition of academic skills and behavior  Better maintenance and generalization of academic skills and behavior across time and settings

Dugan et al., 1995; Maheady, et al., 1987; Manset & Semmel, Academic Outcomes for Students without Disabilities  Positive gains in basic skills for students without disabilities  High school math study showed achievement scores increased by 20 points and the number of students earning an “A” rose by 40%

Fisher & Meyer, 2002; McDougall & Brady, Academic Outcomes for Students without Disabilities  Students increased math fluency and self- monitoring  Equal or better norm-referenced test scores

Cole & Meyer, 1991; Giangreco et al., 1993; Hunt, Farron-Davis, et al., Development of Motor Skills for Students with Disabilities  IEP goals are met in inclusive environments  Acquisition through infused instruction from peers & paraprofessionals  Improved motor skills