Inclusion BEHAVIORAL APPROACHES FOR INCLUSION

Students with emotional or behavioral problems face serious hurdles both in school and when their education has ended. Few receive services outside the school, making school the only place they receive any help (Mannella et. al., 2002). In recent years, professionals have devised better ways for dealing with these students (Childs et. al., 2001). The approaches include inclusion in regular settings instead of isolating the students in special settings whenever possible, using tools such as functional behavioral analyses (FBA), and using the results of behavioral analyses to plan positive educational and behavioral interventions.

One problem with using inclusion with any kind of student, but especially students with emotional or behavioral disorders, is that schools often think they're using inclusion when they are not. Some schools have claimed to be using inclusion when all special-needs students remained in special classes (Mamlin, 1999). In one case, students who had been in special classes were called "individual schedule students." Although they functioned as special classes, they were counted as being enrolled in regular fourth grades on official school forms (Mamlin, 1999). The plan was that the children would be worked into the regular classroom for subjects they were strong in, and that they would all be in the regularly scheduled computer classes. But in reality, only two students were in regular classes, and computer skills were taught in a segregated way. True inclusion requires careful planning, teamwork between the regular and special staff, and expert guidance (Mamlin, 1999).

It does take extra training to make inclusion work. All too often, school staff respond to the problems of students with emotional or behavioral disorders with punishment or exclusive. These types of interventions do not correlate with either improved individual behavior or better student behavior, and sometimes, they only increase disruptive and even violent behaviors (Mannella et. al., 2002). One popular positively...

al., 2002). However, this research shows that by using an organized approach to providing knowledge, training and support for classroom teachers, students with emotional or behavioral disorders can be successfully included into regular education. In the process, teachers and support staff provided both environmental and individual support for the students, curriculum support, and instructional techniques supported empirical research. By keeping students on-task more, disruption was reduced and students increased the amount of inclusion time in regular classrooms. Training, based on empirical research, included sessions where all involved brainstormed about the inclusion process. They were provided both direction instruction and modeling. They were provided guided practice, and given regular feedback about how they were doing. However, the new teacher skills did not automatically generalize in classroom teaching. The teachers needed, and received, consultative support to help them apply what they had learned in their classrooms. Improved student behavior (more time on task and less disruptive acts) carried over to the time they were in special classes (Mannella et. al., 2002), suggesting that the students were generalizing new behavioral skills.
One of the most effective tools staff have available when working in an inclusion setting is the "Functional Behavioral Assessment," or FBA. And FBA is conducted to determine why a student has exhibited a specific disruptive behavior at a specific time. The assumption is that behavior is the result of the effects of variables upon variables, or cause-and-effect (Anderson et. al., 2001). The staff analyzes the antecedent events, the environmental circumstances, what others have to say about the incident, what the student says, and what the student gained or attempted to gain. The analysis looks for a functional relationship between the student's behavior and the other circumstances present…