Research proposal development and methodology

Special education has been a major concern for human rights advocates and open-minded educators in recent decades. Since the 1970s, many great strides have been made in assuring that all students receive a fair and equal education. However, every liberal movement made in the education system is met with backlash from those reluctant to see changes. Many legitimate concerns have been raised by the most recent movement in special education, inclusion. The inclusion movement pushes for all students to be educated in a single classroom, so that there is complete integration between normal students and those with special needs. "Inclusive education means that all students in a school -- regardless of their strengths, weaknesses, or disabilities in any area -- become part of the school community." (King 2003) Special needs students can benefit from having non-disabled peers help mentor them through example, and normal students can benefit from learning to interact with disabled peers. A great deal of research has supported the viewpoints of the proponents of inclusion, while other research has supported the opinions of those not in favor of inclusion. The question must be asked whether or not inclusion is an effective approach to education. The many fears include that special needs students will not receive the individualized attention and care they need, and instead be neglected. Other concerns are that the curriculum of normal students will be watered down to accommodate for the disabled students, or that the disabled students will simply be a distraction. Regardless of the opposition, inclusion seems to be the new wave of special education, and efforts must be made to make inclusion work for the students.

Literature Review

In the article "Handicapping education - full inclusion of disabled children in classrooms" by Thomas J. Murphy (1994), the author is not in support of inclusion in the classroom. Murphy recounts tales of havoc in the classroom, where special-needs children disrupt the classroom and make it impossible for normal children to take advantage of their education.

According to Murphy, the full inclusion movement is a form of illegal discrimination, despite the fact that proponents of inclusion insist it can improve education for all students. "Proponents argue that full inclusion is required by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which says disabled children should be educated with nondisabled children 'to the maximum extent appropriate.' Yet IDEA also requires that public schools provide highly specialized education 'designed to meet the unique needs' of handicapped children. That is precisely what full inclusion fails to do." (Murphy 1994) This description of full-inclusion definitively paints a picture where normal children are distracted and not given the attention they deserve, while handicapped children are outright neglected and abused due to insufficient classroom conditions. One teachers trying to handle a full-inclusion classroom describes it at "a three-ring circus." (Murphy 1994) Murphy claims that there is no scientific basis for the believe that handicapped children will benefit from being placed with non-handicapped children, and that instead handicapped children will become more isolated, have more psychological pressure on them, and will have more behavioral problems. Murphy also warns that full-inclusion will drive parents away from the public school system and will encourage them to take advantage of vouchers for private schools.

Iida Carreiro King has a far less negative view of inclusion than Murphy. In King's article "Examining middle school inclusion classrooms through the lens of Learner-Centered Principles," from the publication Theory Into Practice (2003), instead of simply shooting down the idea of inclusion, ideas for how to best make an integrated classroom benefit all students are presented. There has been a drastic increase in the inclusion of special education students into normal classrooms, and King says it is important for teachers to learn how to make this trend a positive experience.

Learner-Centered Psychological Principles, also known as LCPs, are intended to enhance the learning experience and individual motivation of students. "Among those practices that most influence student success are attention to individual developmental differences, appreciation of student voice while setting appropriate challenges, directly teaching higher order thinking skills, and creating positive interpersonal relationships." (King 2003) King admits that teachers often seem to utilize learner-centered practices, but they do not actually embrace the special-needs children in the classroom. Learner-centered principles focus on the importance of learner outcomes and individual needs. "This focus on learner outcomes requires teachers to vary instruction, curriculum, and assessment practices to meet the range of developmental and educational needs present in today's classrooms. This is also consistent with inclusion demands to attend to individualized educational programs of the special needs students placed within their classrooms." (King 2003) King points out that among both normal and special needs students, students consistently report that their teachers do not take individual differences into account in the classroom.

King also suggests that collaborative learning will benefit all students in the classroom by allowing teachers to have more time to coach and conference, while students are also able to coach each other. This is motivational and psychologically beneficial, as well as practical and utilitarian.

Thomas Hehir (2003) shows that the inclusion movement has been largely positive for students with disabilities in his article, "Beyond inclusion: educators' 'ableist' assumptions about students with disabilities compromise the quality of instruction." However, the "one-size-fits-all" style of handling a classroom that is often applied by teachers (and by the administrators that have power over teacher's lesson plans) cannot met students' needs.

Hehir suggests that "the controversy around inclusion is dysfunctional and we need to shift from the value of inclusion as a practice to the successful implementation of inclusionary education that recognizes the full range of needs of the disability population. Central to moving beyond the debate is the need to focus on the goals of education for students with disabilities." (Heir 2003) Educating disabled students to be able to function in a "normal" world is important, therefore there may be some benefits to giving special needs students the opportunity to become accustomed to functioning without special treatment in a safe environment, like the classroom. However, there has been a long-standing problem in the education system of teachers trying to change disabled students in order to make them appear as normal as possible, without consideration of whether the child will actually benefit. "Schools have failed to teach visually impaired children to use Braille and instead provided them with taped books or large text books based on the perception that these are more normal ways to read. The devaluation of this disability-specific mode of learning has resulted in increasing levels of functional illiteracy among the visually impaired." (Hehir 2003) The constant inclusion of aids in the classroom may put a barrier between the students and encourage prejudices. Students should be given the same opportunities to succeed, but also the tools needed to take advantage of them. Heir suggests that educators "encourage disabled students to develop and use the skills and modes of expression that are most effective and efficient for them...; maintain special education as a specialty....; promote high standards, not high stakes...; [and] apply concepts of universal design to schooling." (Heir 2003)

Jo Williams, in the article "Achieving Meaningful Inclusion for People with Profound and Multiple Learning Disabilities," (2005) presents a very positive view of the value of inclusion. Williams encourages people to recognize that disabled people, even students, have the ability and right to communicate regarding their needs, and that fostering communication is very important. Flexibility and innovation are also noted as key factors to having successful inclusion.

C. Dybvik (2004) expresses further concerns regarding inclusion, and how to make the inclusion movement benefit all students, in the article "Autism and the inclusion mandate: what happens when children with severe disabilities like autism are taught in regular classrooms." Before the inclusion movement, most special needs students either spent the entire day or a large part of the say separated from the rest of the student population, where they received specialized instruction. The Regular Education movement put more students with mild disabilities into normal classrooms. "Inclusion is a noble endeavor. Proponents of inclusion rightly stress the importance of all children, their value as members of the human community, and their right to belong and to be included, no matter what their individual differences and abilities may be." (Dybvik 2004) Unfortunately, both segregated education and inclusion are full of problems when they are not properly enforced. Whether a student is in a special education classroom, receiving special tutoring for part of the day, or working with an aid in a normal classroom, improper training will interfere with the learning. Many teachers and aids have minimal training that prepares them to work with special needs students. Poorly implemented inclusion programs will insist on inclusion at all costs, whether or not it makes sense. These poorly designed programs will settle for disabled students being physically in the classroom, but not actually get the students involved in the class on a deeper level. Providing little or no training to the staff, not communicating properly between professionals, and watering down the curriculum are also actions taken often by suboptimal attempts at inclusion. Additionally, other students must be educated about disabilities and how to include others that are different. (Dybvik 2004)