This paper examines the concept of inclusion in special education through three distinct models: full inclusion, inclusion in select classes such as physical education, and inclusion in all classes except core academic subjects. Drawing on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act's least restrictive environment (LRE) requirement, the paper analyzes each model's benefits and drawbacks for students with disabilities. It also evaluates whether the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) should be applied universally to special education students, weighing the standards' intended accessibility against their potential to overwhelm learners with lower cognitive capacities. The paper concludes with a school leader's perspective on supporting a hybrid inclusion model alongside differentiated curriculum planning.
The paper demonstrates structured comparative analysis: it breaks a complex policy concept (inclusion) into clearly defined sub-categories, analyzes each independently, and then synthesizes findings into a leadership recommendation. This technique is particularly effective in education policy writing because it prevents overgeneralization and forces the writer to engage with the nuances of each model.
The paper opens with a definition of inclusion, then moves through three models in ascending breadth — full inclusion, partial inclusion in physical education, and inclusion across all subjects. A parallel structure follows for CCSS: first presenting the standards' intended universality, then their risks for disabled learners, and finally a position statement. The conclusion integrates both threads, calling for strong leadership and individualized planning.
The term inclusion means the complete acceptance of every student, which fosters a sense of belonging and acceptance in the classroom. Over the years there has been no single fixed definition of inclusion; instead, different groups and organizations have offered their own definitions. The most basic definition states that every student with special needs is supported in "chronologically age-appropriate general education classes" in schools and receives instruction specialized for them through Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) within the general activities of the class and the main curriculum. The idea of inclusion is to ensure the presence of disabled students at school alongside neighbors and friends from their community, while at the same time providing the specially designed support and instruction they require in order to meet high standards and succeed in learning (FDDC, 2012).
It is important to note that the term "inclusion" is not formally part of the law. The law instead states that each student must be educated in the least restrictive educational environment (LRE). Inclusion is therefore an educational philosophy applied in response to that legal mandate, and it takes several different forms depending on the nature and severity of a student's disability.
Inclusion has different aspects that take into consideration the severity of a student's disability. Full inclusion is one such aspect, in which every student — regardless of their disability or its severity — participates in the regular programs of the school (Power, 2010). This model has faced significant debate when it comes to the learning and education of students with special needs. Children with disabilities may have slower processing capacities that require focused attention, and many professionals have argued that these students learn best within inclusive school programs. On the other hand, professionals in favor of full inclusion argue that every child should experience full-time programs at school, and that disabled children should be placed in general classrooms following the general curriculum.
Different research studies show that several approaches have been used to plan inclusive programs. Analyses of such programs have examined how they are designed and carried out in practice (McLeskey & Waldron, 2011). The debate ultimately centers on whether the benefits of social integration outweigh the instructional challenges that arise when students with widely varying ability levels are taught in the same setting.
Many researchers have discussed the advantages that inclusion can bring to physical education programs. Students with disabilities need to develop life skills that they can draw upon over the long term. Physical education helps prepare students for adult life by giving them the opportunity to become contributing and capable members of their communities. A separate, segregated setting may not give individuals the opportunity to develop skills in realistic environments, since they would lack sufficient opportunities to build the values, attitudes, and practical abilities needed to live as independent members of society.
Schools, by contrast, give students the chance to practice skills daily and then apply them in varied settings. This develops a sense of belonging and boosts self-confidence and self-esteem. Students with special needs in a physical education environment gain numerous opportunities to grow academically and socially, because they are among peers and have regular chances to interact with them. Physical activities also improve overall well-being and health, reduce long-term health risks, and provide social benefits through peer interaction. These social benefits are particularly valuable for disabled children who may hold a diminished view of themselves. Regular peer interaction — beyond the family context of siblings and parents — also supports psychological well-being. Children with special needs can draw on these benefits toward a healthy and independent life with high levels of self-confidence (Power, 2010).
The reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) would require every student in the country to meet CCSS — that is, a fixed grade-level standard. The Common Core State Standards define what a student must know in order to be ready for college and career readiness (Constable, Grossi, Moniz, & Ryan, 2013). However, several professionals have argued that the term "inclusion" implies that children with special needs should be provided a different curriculum aligned to their level of understanding. They point to research demonstrating the success of inclusive education and argue that strong leadership is needed to bring about curriculum reform and carry out inclusive programming. These professionals also contend that educators must think differently and acknowledge the distinct challenges faced by disabled students — a shift that requires strong leadership and genuine commitment to inclusive practices (Cologon, 2013).
According to the Division of Early Childhood (DEC), inclusion supports the right of every child to participate in natural community settings. This does not mean that children should be included in programs merely as a formality; rather, it reflects the belief that disabled children learn best when placed in environments alongside their peers, yielding long-term benefits. A successful inclusion program requires a competent team that plans and implements services while honoring the individuality of each student. Adequate resources must be available, and families must be empowered to participate in the planning of such programs (Working with Children with Special Needs, n.d.).
Cologon, K. (2013). Inclusion in education. Children with Disability Australia.
Constable, S., Grossi, B., Moniz, A., & Ryan, L. (2013). Meeting the Common Core State Standards for students with autism. Council for Exceptional Children.
Evers, T. (2011). Common Core State Standards for literacy in all subjects. Madison: Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
FDDC. (2012). What is inclusion? Florida: Florida State University Center for Prevention and Early Intervention Policy.
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. (2011). Full inclusion programs for elementary students with learning disabilities: Can they meet student needs? National Harbour: Council for Exceptional Children Convention.
Power, D. B. (2010). The inclusion of students with disabilities in mainstream post-primary physical education from the perspective of the physical education teacher. Waterford Institute of Technology.
Thurlow, M. L. (2012). The promise and the peril for students with disabilities. The Special Edge.
Working with children with special needs. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://us.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/23472_Willis_Chapter_1.pdf
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.