Blog #3: Jessica Tomic

Inclusion can be defined as the participation of students with disabilities alongside their nondisabled peers in academic, extracurricular, and other school activities (Turnbull, 2016, p. 42).  There are several arguments surrounding inclusion as it remains a controversial topic in our schools and society.  Driven advocates on both sides of the spectrum provide evidence of the pros and cons.  Supporting arguments among educators and families firstly include the belief that “all children, youth, and young adults with disabilities are entitled to a free and appropriate education and/or services that lead to an adult life characterized by satisfying relations with others, independent living, productive engagement in the community, and participation in society at large” (CEC, 1994).  Research shows that students in the inclusive environment “achieved higher scores on Iowa Test of Basic Skills in language and mathematics and had comparable scores reading, science, and social studies” (Jimenez & Graf, 2008, p.81).  Using the inclusive model, it was acknowledge that students receive more individualized attention among teachers and co-teachers.  In the video, Including Samuel Preview, a disabled gentleman named Keith Jones expressed his education as a child.  Keith Jones, a hip hop artist, who grew up in the 1970s and was segregated from regularly educated kids, voiced he had a family who knew what they wanted for their child.  Jones also stated “it’s not all on the school, it’s a two-sided equation,” implying that families and schools need to collaborate for benefit of the child, educationally and socially.  Arguments against inclusion often reflect failed efforts of our schools.  These failed efforts may include lack of training among teachers or lack of funding for resources and/or technology.  Other families may fear that inclusion may represent the loss of services for their child; however, the CEC believes that a continuum of services must be available for all children, youth, and young adults (CEC, 1994).  Additionally, the  American Federation for Teachers (AFT) have acknowledged “a suspicion that school administration motives for moving toward more inclusive approaches are often more of a budgetary (cost-saving) measure than out of a concern for what is really best for students” (Tornillo, 1994; Leo, 1994).

It is in my experience, where I am surrounded by evidence for both arguments, that although our schools are so dedicated to our students with exceptional learning needs, students are placed into classrooms with teachers that lack basic special education training.  I resonate with argument because I live it, which is why I went back to school.  Even with a degree in education, I sometimes feel as though I’m not qualified to handle certain situations or understand ideas regarding special education.  “Inclusion of students with disabilities in general education is an ambitious goal, but it is possible” (Graf & Jimenez, 2008, p. 93).  As inclusion is not specific to academics, it also refers to extracurricular and school activities. Exceptional learners are to have the same opportunities as their nondisabled peers in all activities such as sports, clubs, and dances.  I do believe inclusion can be a wonderful service to many students, but I also believe that education can be delivered to students with exceptional learning needs in many settings of the families’ choice.  Understanding that inclusion can be the students’ least restrictive environment (LRE), environments such as pull-out programs or resource rooms may also be fitting to students.