Inclusion concepts and applications

¶ … Inclusion of Students Diagnosed with Emotional Behavioral Disorder in the Regular Education Classroom

Outcomes for the majority of children and youth identified with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders (EBD) have been well documented. Half of students labeled EBD drop out of school, the highest rate among all disability categories. Of those who remain in school, only 42% graduate with a diploma and overall have lower grades than any other group of students with disabilities. Twenty percent of students with EBD are arrested at least once before they leave school, over half are arrested within a few years of leaving school, and a staggering 70% of those who have dropped out have been arrested (Van Acker, 2004). The prospects of students with EBD post-school are bleak as many face unemployment, substance abuse, and poor social support (Wagner et al., 2005).

Current State of Inclusive Services

A significant challenge in providing educational support for students with EBD is the current Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) definition and the traditionally accepted evaluation model that seeks to determine a diagnosis based on behavioral characteristics that are supposed to represent an underlying mental illness. IDEA clearly states that children found eligible for special education services must not be benefiting from the general education curriculum because of a suspected disability. However, a medical model is used in the identification process to determine EBD. The continued reliance on a non-educational model for eligibility is based on the current federal definition of serious emotional disturbance (SED). Unfortunately, the continued reliance on a restrictive medical model definition and evaluation process has lead to significant under-identification of children and youth in need of service. Currently, less than 1% of students across the United States are identified as having an EBD. Estimated prevalence rates offered by special education and mental health professionals can vary from 2% to 20% of the school-age population, however, the generally accepted expected prevalence rate among K-12 age students is 5% -- 7%. If we use the current incidence of children and youth being served under IDEA within the SED category and the low end of the estimated prevalence of 5% then apply that against the total K-12 student population, 2,810,149 students who might otherwise be eligible are not receiving services under the category of SED (Lewis et al., 2010).

Current State of Classroom Teachers

Many students with EBD display both learning and behavioral problems that make it difficult for teachers to provide effective instruction. In turn, a lack of exposure to effective instruction contributes to poor academic and behavioral outcomes.

Traditionally, both researchers and practitioners have focused their intervention efforts on EBD students' disruptive behaviors and social skills deficits. However, the poor academic progress displayed by students with EBD, as well as the bleak post school outcomes associated with the resulting school failure have led to an increasing focus on academic deficits. However, exclusive efforts to bolster EBD students' academic skills may be misplaced and may not lead to long-term gains in either their academic achievement or behavior (Sutherland et al., 2008). That is, an either -- or choice may be a false dichotomy. Instead, it may be important for practitioners to focus their intervention efforts on both the academic and behavioral deficits of students with EBD because a multitude of factors influence the social and emotional development and the academic development of students with EBD and there is inconsistent evidence about the directionality of effects between learning and behavior problems. Consequently, understanding the impact of various factors such as instructional delivery and classroom contexts on academic achievement and behavior is difficult.

Both students with EBD and their teachers can experience the classroom as an aversive environment. For example researchers studied the classroom behavior of students identified with behavior problems and documented less time attending and complying to group directions; higher rates of aggression and of out-of-seat and noise-making behaviors; and an overall higher rate of negative interactions with teachers. The impact of these high rates of problem behaviors can lead to the establishment of negative patterns of interaction between teachers and students. One characteristic of these patterns is a low rate of instructional engagement, which can further undermine a student's academic progress. Thus, the teacher's behavior, such as whether to provide the student with an opportunity to respond to a question, can have strong associations with the student's behavior such as whether to continue to be disruptive (Sutherland et al., 2008).

The academic and behavioral challenges presented by students with EBD affect the nature of their interactions with their teachers. Aggressive behavior patterns increase the likelihood that children will develop negative relationships with their teachers. Indeed, problematic relationships in kindergarten between students with behavior problems and teachers are associated with academic and behavioral problems through eighth grade. Henricsson and Rydell (2004) report that poor teacher -- student relationships tend to be stable over time and have a negative effect on school adjustment. These problematic relationships with teachers may contribute to the documented low rates of positive teacher attention, such as academic interactions and teacher praise in classrooms for students with EBD. Teacher -- student interactions in classrooms for students with EBD have been described both in terms of negative reinforcement and as reflecting the transactional nature of social interchanges.

Students with and at risk for developing EBD are uniquely influenced by teacher -- student interaction patterns in general education classrooms. General education teachers sometimes believe that their classrooms are inappropriate placements for students with EBD. Yet general education teachers tend to make limited accommodations and/or are resistant to changes in tasks, materials, and teaching formats. In addition, these teachers identified alternative placements to be the most needed modification.