special education inclusion models

The Role of Special Education Teachers in Promoting an Inclusive Classroom

The adoption of inclusive education strategies—where special education students are immersed in classrooms with typically developing peers—has increased rapidly in recent decades. More than 60 percent of students with disabilities spend at least 80 percent of their school day in general education classrooms, according to the US National Center for Education Statistics.

Studies have shown that inclusive learning benefits all students in the classroom by providing thoughtful, personalized instruction and promoting individuality and equity. A student with autism might feel calmer when surrounded by a diverse peer group, while a nondisabled student might learn how to form positive relationships with a greater variety of children.

Establishing a successful integrated learning environment is a complex task involving teachers, administrators, and families. Special education and general education teachers often work together to develop a curriculum and create a positive student culture. In an inclusive classroom, special education teachers have the essential role of ensuring that students with disabilities or special needs receive a quality education.

Why Adopt Inclusive Learning?

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) states that students with individual education plans (IEPs) must be educated in the least-restrictive environments (LREs) available. Under IDEA, inclusive education (or mainstreaming) has become a standard operating procedure for US public schools. Students with IEPs can range from individuals with Down syndrome or forms of autism to those with speech impediments or dyslexia—all of which require varying levels of support.

Under IDEA, if a differently abled student’s needs can be met in a general classroom, with or without the support of a special education teacher or paraprofessional, they must be educated in that environment. When needs are not fully met in a general classroom, some students spend part of their days in a resource room or in pullout sessions, while others are educated entirely in a special education classroom.

While there is some debate about whether inclusive instruction is the best way to serve students with disabilities, there is mounting evidence that inclusive learning improves educational outcomes. Inclusive educational settings lead to stronger math and reading skills, higher attendance and graduation rates, and fewer behavioral problems, according to an evaluation of more than 280 studies from 25 countries by Abt Associates. In addition to promoting academic success for students with disabilities, inclusive learning can help improve social cognition in typically developing students.

Role of Special Education Teachers in Inclusive Classrooms

For inclusion to show positive benefits, the learning environment and instructional models must be carefully established to provide strong learning opportunities for all students. Special education and general education teachers must have mutual respect and open minds toward the philosophy of inclusion, as well as strong administrative support and knowledge of how to meet the needs of students with disabilities. The involvement of a special education teacher is crucial to the success of a combined learning environment in a number of areas:

Curriculum Design

Special education teachers help craft the lessons for inclusive classrooms to ensure that the needs of students with disabilities are considered. Teachers may work together to develop a curriculum that is accessible to all students, or the special education teacher might make modifications to the general education teacher’s lesson plans. A special education teacher will also create supplemental learning materials for specific students, including visual, manipulative, text, and technology resources, and determine when one-on-one lessons might be needed.

Teachers must examine students’ strengths, weaknesses, interests, and communication methods when crafting lessons. The students’ IEPs must be carefully followed to meet achievement goals. As many general education teachers have limited training in inclusive learning, it is important for the special education teacher to help the instructor understand why certain accommodations are needed and how to incorporate them.

Classroom Instruction

Many inclusive classrooms are based on a co-teaching model, where both teachers are present all day. Others use a push-in model, where special education teachers provide lessons at certain times during the day. It takes extensive cooperation between general and special education teachers to implement a truly inclusive classroom. Special education teachers often sit with or near students with IEPs to monitor their progress and provide any special instructions or supplemental learning materials. Students require varying levels of individual instruction and assistance, based on their unique needs.

Teachers might also pull students out of the classroom for one-on-one lessons or sensory activities, or arrange for time with counselors, speech therapists, dyslexia coaches, and other specialized personnel. Special education instructors may need to make sure that paraprofessionals or therapists are present in the classroom at certain times to assist the students. To help maintain a positive climate, they also might assist the general education teacher in presenting lessons to the entire class, grading papers, enforcing rules, and other classroom routines. General and special education teachers might break classes into smaller groups or stations to provide greater engagement opportunities.

Learning Assessments

Another role of special education teachers in inclusive classrooms is to conduct regular assessments to determine whether students are achieving academic goals. Lessons must be periodically evaluated to determine whether they are sufficiently challenging without overwhelming the students. Students should gain a feeling of self-confidence and independence in general education settings but should also feel sufficiently supported. Special education teachers also organize periodic IEP meetings with each student, their family, and certain staff members to determine whether adjustments need to be made to the student’s plan.

Advocating for Students

Special education teachers serve as advocates for students with disabilities and special needs. This includes ensuring that all school officials and employees understand the importance of inclusion and how to best implement inclusion in all campus activities. Advocacy might include requesting inclusion-focused professional development activities—especially programs that help general education teachers better understand inclusion best practices—or providing information to community members about success rates of inclusive teaching.

Communication with parents is also essential for inclusive classroom success. Families should receive regular updates on a child’s academic, social, and emotional development through phone calls, emails, and other communication means. Parents can help students prepare for classroom routines. Expectations for homework and classroom participation should be established early on.

Learn More About Inclusive Education

Special education and general education teachers can develop a greater understanding of inclusive learning and other progressive teaching methods by pursuing an advanced education degree. American University’s School of Education gives students the skills to drive meaningful change in educational environments. The school’s Master of Education in Education Policy and Leadership and Master of Arts in Teaching degrees prepare teachers to take on transformative leadership roles and create equitable learning environments for all students.

Disproportionality in Special Education: Impact on Student Performance and How Administrators Can Help

What Is Holistic Education? Understanding the History, Methods, and Benefits

What Is Lunch Shaming? How Accessibility to Lunch Impacts Student Learning

Abt Associates, “A Summary of the Evidence on Inclusive Education”

ASCD InService, “Inclusive Classrooms: Looking at Special Education Today”

Houston Chronicle, “The Role of a Special Ed Teacher in an Inclusion Classroom”

EducationNext, “Has Inclusion Gone Too Far?”

Education Week, “Students with Disabilities Deserve Inclusion. It’s Also the Best Way to Teach”

Noodle, “The Benefits of Inclusive Education: What Special Education Teachers Need to Know”

Understood, “4 Benefits of Inclusive Classrooms”

Request Information

NASET.org Home Page

Exceptional teachers teaching exceptional children.

• Overview of NASET
• NASET Leadership
• Directors' Message
• Books by the Executive Directors
• Mission Statement
• NASET Apps for iPhone and iPad
• NASET Store
• NASET Sponsors
• Marketing Opportunities
• Contact NASET
• Renew Your Membership
• Membership Benefits
• Frequently Asked Questions
• Membership Categories
• School / District Membership Information
• Gift Membership
• Membership Benefit for Professors Only
• NASET's Privacy Policy
• Forgot Your User Name or Password?
• Contact Membership Department
• Resources for Special Education Teachers
• Advocacy (Board Certification for Advocacy in Special Education) BCASE
• Board Certification in Special Education
• Inclusion - Board Certification in Inclusion in Special Education (BCISE) Program
• Paraprofessional Skills Preparation Program - PSPP
• Professional Development Program (PDP) Free to NASET Members
• Courses - Professional Development Courses (Free With Membership)
• Forms, Tables, Checklists, and Procedures for Special Education Teachers
• Video and Power Point Library
• IEP Development
• Exceptional Students and Disability Information
• Special Education and the Law
• Transition Services
• Literacy - Teaching Literacy in English to K-5 English Learners
• Facebook - Special Education Teacher Group
• NASET Sponsor's Products and Services
• ADHD Series
• Assessment in Special Education Series
• Autism Spectrum Disorders Series
• Back to School - Special Review
• Bullying of Children
• Classroom Management Series
• Diagnosis of Students with Disabilities and Disorders Series
• Treatment of Disabilities and Disorders for Students Receiving Special Education and Related Services
• Discipline of Students in Special Education Series
• Early Intervention Series
• Genetics in Special Education Series
• How To Series

Inclusion Series

• IEP Components
• JAASEP - Research Based Journal in Special Education
• Lesser Known Disorders
• NASET NEWS ALERTS
• NASET Q & A Corner
• Parent Teacher Conference Handouts
• The Practical Teacher
• Resolving Disputes with Parents Series
• RTI Roundtable
• Severe Disabilities Series
• Special Educator e-Journal - Latest and Archived Issues
• Week in Review
• Working with Paraprofessionals in Your School
• Author Guidelines for Submission of Manuscripts & Articles to NASET
• SCHOOLS of EXCELLENCE
• Exceptional Charter School in Special Education
• Outstanding Special Education Teacher Award
• Board Certification Programs
• Employers - Job Posting Information
• Latest Job Listings
• Professional Development Program (PDP)
• Employers-Post a Job on NASET
• PDP - Professional Development Courses
• Board Certification in Special Education (BCSE)
• Board Certification in IEP Development (BCIEP)
• NASET Continuing Education/Professional Development Courses
• HONOR SOCIETY - Omega Gamma Chi
• Other Resources for Special Education Teaching Positions
• Highly Qualified Teachers
• Special Education Career Advice
• Special Education Career Fact Sheets
• FAQs for Special Education Teachers
• Special Education Teacher Salaries by State
• State Licensure for Special Education Teachers

Go to the PDP Menu

Introduction.

NASET is proud to offer a new series devoted exclusively to the concept of inclusion as a special education setting and working in an inclusive setting.. This series will cover all aspects of inclusion  focusing especially on understanding this population and what skills and information are necessary if you are asked to teach this population of students.  However, to understand who is included in this population we must first clarify several concepts, definitions, and foundational issues.

At the end of this series you should:

• Understand concepts and terminology associated with inclusion.
• Understand the different categories of exceptional students. To understand historical and legal development of special education and its relevance in today’s schools.
• To understand contemporary issues of educating students with mild disabilities, including foundations, theories, and conceptual models.
• To understand the purpose and procedures for screening, pre-referral, referral, identification, and placement of students with mild disabilities.
• To understand concepts and definitions, prevalence, and causes of mild disabilities.
• To understand the legal rights of persons with mild disabilities.
• To understand the related service options for children with mild disabilities
• To gain knowledge of the physical, cognitive, and learning characteristics of persons with severe/profound disabilities
• To be able to identify components of Individual Educational Plans for students with mild disabilities.
• To develop instructional strategies and tactics for teaching the acquisition of new behaviors and skills to students with mild disabilities.
• To develop skills for independently seeking information about educational and related services for students with mild disabilities.
• To understand the procedures for developing, implementing and amending Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for students with disabilities.
• To understand methods of planning and managing teaching/learning environments for students with disabilities.
• To become familiar with the use of instructional technology to differentiate instruction.
• To become familiar with the use of assistive technology to facilitate instruction.
• To become familiar with the development and implementation of positive behavioral interventions.

As you progress through this series, you will be presented with principles, foundations, classroom management techniques and other practical factors for working with students in an inclusive setting.

Latest and Archived Issues

Latest issue: promoting success: the role of advocacy and family involvement in fostering academic and social development for students with down syndrome, archived issues:, enhancing inclusion: a comprehensive literature review on supporting students with disabilities in mainstream classrooms  click here, inclusiveness for students with autism spectrum disorders  click here, manifestation determination  click here, help get me out of here: inclusion in the high school environment  click here, how culture affects inclusion: a literature review  click here, partnering for greatness -  click here, learners with special gifts and talents click here, exceptional students -  click here, least restrictive environment placements -  click here, accommodations, modification and supports for students with disabilities - click here, alternative educational delivery systems - click here, promoting positive social interactions in an inclusion setting for students with learning disabilities - click here, teaching students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder - click here, teaching students with emotional and behavioral disorders - click here, teaching students with intellectual disabilities - click here, teaching students with learning disabilities - click here, learners with autism spectrum disorders - click here, learners with communication disorders - click here, discipline of students with disabilities - click here, integrated co-teaching services - click here, challenges to collaboration, inclusion and best practices within the special education community - click here, preschool inclusion videos -  click here, publications.

• Inclusion Series- Exceptional Students
• Inclusion Series- Least Restrictive Environment Placements
• Inclusion Series- Accommodations, Modifications and Supports for Students with Disabilities
• Inclusion Series- Alternative Educational Delivery Systems
• Inclusion Series- Promoting Positive Social Interactions in an Inclusion Setting for Students with Learning Disabilities
• Inclusion Series- Teaching Students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
• Inclusion Series- Teaching Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
• Inclusion Series- Teaching Students with Intellectual Disabilities
• Inclusion Series- Teaching Students with Learning Disabilities
• Inclusion Series - Learners with Autism Spectrum Disorders
• Inclusion Series- Learners with Communication Disorders
• Inclusion Series- Discipline of Students with Disabilities
• Inclusion Series- Learners with Special Gifts and Talents
• Inclusion Series- Integrated Co-Teaching Services
• Inclusion Series- Partnering for Greatness
• Inclusion Series- Challenges to Collaboration, Inclusion and Best Practices within the Special Education Community
• Inclusion Series- Preschool Inclusion Videos
• Inclusion Series- How Culture Affects Inclusion: A Literature Review
• Inclusion Series- Help! Get Me Out of Here: Inclusion in the High School Environment
• Inclusion Series- Manifestation Determination
• Inclusion Series- Inclusiveness for Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders
• Inclusion Series- Enhancing Inclusion: A Comprehensive Literature Review on Supporting Students with Disabilities in Mainstream Classrooms
• Inclusion Series- Promoting Success: The Role of Advocacy and Family Involvement in Fostering Academic and Social Development for Students with Down Syndrome

©2024 National Association of Special Education Teachers. All rights reserved

• Skip to Nav
• Skip to Main
• Skip to Footer

New research review questions the evidence for special education inclusion

Please try again

For the past 25 years, U.S. policy has urged schools to keep students with disabilities in the same classrooms with their general education peers unless severe disabilities prevent it. It seems a humane policy not to wall off those with disabilities and keep them apart from society. Who would argue against it?

Schools have embraced inclusion. According to the most recent data from 2020-21 school year, two thirds of the 7 million students with disabilities who receive special education services spent 80% or more of their time in traditional classrooms. Separation is less common today; only one out of every eight students with disabilities was taught separately in a special-needs only environment most of the time.

But a recent international analysis of all the available research on special education inclusion found inconsistent results. Some children thrived while others did very badly in regular classrooms. Overall, students didn’t benefit academically, psychologically or socially from the practice. Math and reading scores, along with psychosocial measures, were no higher for children with disabilities who learned in general education classrooms, on average, compared to children who learned in separate special education classrooms.

“I was surprised,” said Nina Dalgaard, lead author of the inclusion study for the Campbell Collaboration , a nonprofit organization that reviews research evidence for public policy purposes. “Despite a rather large evidence base, it doesn’t appear that inclusion automatically has positive effects. To the contrary, for some children, it appears that being taught in a segregated setting is actually beneficial.”

Many disability advocates balked at the findings, published in December 2022, on social media. An influential lobbying organization, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said it continues to believe that inclusion is beneficial for students and that this study will “not change” how the disability community advocates for students.

“Students with disabilities have a right to learn alongside their peers, and studies have shown that this is beneficial not only for students with disabilities but also for other students in the classroom,” said Lindsay Kubatzky, the organization’s director of policy and advocacy.

“Every student is different, and ‘inclusion’ for one student may look different from others. For some, it could be a classroom separate from their peers, but that is rarely the case.”

The Campbell Collaboration study is a meta-analysis, which means it is supposed to sweep up all the best research on a topic and use statistics to tell us where the preponderance of the evidence lies. Dalgaard, a senior researcher at VIVE—The Danish Centre for Social Science Research, initially found over 2,000 studies on special education inclusion. But she threw out 99 percent of them, many of which were quite favorable to inclusion. Most were qualitative studies that described students’ experiences in an inclusion classroom but didn’t rigorously track academic progress. Among those that did monitor math or reading, many of them simply noted how much students improved in an inclusive setting, but didn’t compare those gains with how students might have otherwise fared in a separate special-needs only setting.

Fewer than 100 studies had comparison groups, but still most of those didn’t make the cut because the students in inclusive settings were vastly different from those in separate settings. Special education is a particularly difficult area to study because researchers cannot randomly assign students with disabilities to different treatments. Schools tend to keep children with milder disabilities in a regular classroom and teach only those with the most severe disabilities separately. In comparing how both groups fare, it should be no surprise that students with milder disabilities outperform those with more severe disabilities. But that’s not good evidence that inclusion is better. “It’s a serious, confounding bias,” Dalgaard said.

In the end, Dalgaard was left with only 15 studies where the severity of the disability was somehow noted so that she could compare apples to apples. These 15 studies covered more than 7,000 students, ages six through 16, across nine countries. Four of the studies were conducted in the United States with the others in Europe.

The disabilities in the studies ranged widely, from the most common ones, such as dyslexia, ADHD, speech impairments and autism, to rarer ones, such as Down syndrome and cerebral palsy. Some students had mild versions; others had more severe forms. I asked Dalgaard if she found clues in the results as to which disabilities were more conducive to inclusion. I was curious if children with severe dyslexia, for example, might benefit from separate instruction with specially trained reading teachers for the first couple of years after diagnosis.

Dalgaard said there wasn’t enough statistical evidence to untangle when inclusion is most beneficial. But she did notice in the underlying studies that students with autism seem to be better off in a separate setting. For example, their psychosocial scores were higher. But more studies would be needed to confirm this.

She also noticed that how a school goes about including students with disabilities mattered. In schools that used a co-teaching model, one regular teacher and one trained in special education, students fared better in inclusion classrooms. Again, more research is needed to confirm this statistically. And, even if co-teaching proves to be effective over multiple studies, not every school can afford to hire two teachers for every classroom. It’s particularly cost-prohibitive in middle and high school as teachers specialize in subjects.

Instead, Dalgaard noted that inclusion is often a cost-cutting practice because schools save money when they no longer run separate classrooms or schools for children with disabilities. “In some cases, children with disabilities no longer had access to the same resources. It’s not supposed to happen this way, but it does in some places,” said Dalgaard. “That is probably why the results of the meta-analysis show that some children actually learn more in segregated settings.”

I was surprised to learn from Dalgaard that no sound meta-analysis has found “clear” benefits for special education inclusion. Indeed, previous meta-analyses have found exactly the same inconsistent or very small positive results, she said. This latest Campbell Collaboration study was commissioned to see if newer research, published from 2000 to September 2021, would move the dial. It did not.

As a nation, we spend an estimated $90 billion a year in federal, state and local taxpayer funds on educating children with disabilities. We ought to know more about how to best help them learn.

*Correction: This story has been updated with the correct spelling of Lindsay Kubatzky’s name.

This story about special education inclusion was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter .

Special Education and Inclusion

Best Practices to Support Inclusion

• Lesson Plans
• Applied Behavior Analysis
• Behavior Management
• Math Strategies
• Reading & Writing
• Social Skills
• Inclusion Strategies
• Individual Education Plans
• Becoming A Teacher
• Assessments & Tests
• Elementary Education
• Secondary Education
• Homeschooling

The inclusive classroom means that all students have the right to feel safe, supported and included at school and in the general classroom as much as possible. There is ongoing debate about placing students completely in the general classroom . Views from both parents and educators can create a great deal of anxiety and passion. However, most students today are placed in agreement with both parents and educators. Often, the placement will be the general classroom as much as possible with some cases where alternatives are selected.

The Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), amended version 2004, does not actually list the word inclusion. The law actually requires that children with disabilities be educated in the "least restrictive environment appropriate” to meet their “unique needs.” The "least restrictive environment" typically means placement in the general education classroom which typically means 'Inclusion' when ever possible. IDEA also recognizes that it is not always possible or beneficial for some students.

Here are some best practices to ensure inclusion is successful:

• An Overview of the Inclusive Classroom In the inclusive classroom , it is important that the teacher fully understands the learning, social and physical needs of the students. A teacher has a special role to play when trying to maximize learning potential for students with special needs . It becomes the educator's role to create a welcoming environment and provide students with ongoing opportunities to learn, share, and engage in all classroom activities. Determining what alternate assessment needs to occur is another area where the educator needs to make changes to specifically support the student in the general classroom.
• Preparing Students for the Inclusive Classroom This checklist helps both parent and teacher prepare the student for the inclusional classroom setting. The child needs to know what to expect, equally important is to ensure that there are no surprises.
• The Inclusional Classroom Checklist
• I am a big fan of checklists. This checklist provides educators with guidance about maximizing success for students in an inclusional setting. There are 12 key items that will guide the establishment of a successful inclusional setting. Each item points to some form of action which will be key in maximizing sucess for the student with special needs. You'll find that the checklist includes strategies for academic, social and physical success.
• Using Peer Support in the Inclusive Classroom Peer support is one of the most essential ingredients in the inclusive classroom setting. Peer support helps to build rapport and a sense of belonging and community among students. Students with special needs often become the targets for inappropriate behavioral conduct from other students, however, by education the whole class and having members of the class become peer supporters, the problem of teasing is often minimized.
• How To Reach and Teach all Students in the Inclusive Classroom It always helps to have great resources to help out. Without a doubt, this resource is my favorite! The pages of my book are dog-eared, marked up and highlighted. I have come across and read many books and articles about inclusion but this book is the practical one that my colleagues all agree on as needing at their fingertips.

Some food for thought regarding some of the challenges of the full inclusional model include:

• How can you ensure that the student relationsips in your class are not superfical?
• How will you provide intense one to one instruction? Time for this is often greatly reduced.
• How will you ensure that equal rights are in place for all students?
• Sometimes you'll be faced with research that suggests the inclusional classroom may not be as successful based on the specific needs of the student.
• Many parents want both inclusion and alternative settings. Sometimes the full inclusional model just won't support all the needs.

Although inclusion is the preferred approach, it is recognized that for a number of students, it is not only challenging but sometimes controversial. If you are a special education teacher , there is no doubt that you have discovered some of the challenges of inclusion.

• The Inclusive Classroom as the Best Placement
• Accommodations for Students With Special Needs
• What is Special Education?
• Differentiating Instruction for Success in Special Education
• Self Contained Classrooms
• Project Based Learning for Special Education and Inclusion
• Introduction to Special Education Resource Rooms
• What Is Inclusion?
• Teaching Students with Down Syndrome
• 10 Questions to Ask Yourself to Design Your Educational Philosophy
• Writing a Lesson Plan: Guided Practice
• Problems for Teachers That Limit Their Overall Effectiveness
• A List of Accommodations to Support Student Success
• 25 Things Every Teacher Wants From Their Stakeholders
• Testing and Assessment for Special Education
• A Comprehensive Breakdown of the Roles of School Personnel

Models of Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities in International Practice: Historical Experience and Current Trends

• First Online: 04 November 2022

Cite this chapter

• Natalia A. Grigorieva   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-8057-7130 3 , 4 ,
• Svetlana B. Lazurenko   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-0642-8545 3 &
• Tatiana A. Solovyova   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5876-6584 3  

326 Accesses

1 Citations

The paper aims to identify and classify the main groups of models of inclusive education for children with disabilities presented in international practice over the past three decades. The research object is the historical experience of the development of public policy in the field of inclusive education in countries with different educational systems and economic conditions. The authors pay particular attention to the dynamics of the formation and development of inclusive education models in the context of public policy objectives. It is emphasized that inclusive education remains the primary public mechanism for translating key social attitudes and values, maintaining the possibility of dialogue between generations, and providing a balanced combination of traditions and innovations in understanding current social relations towards children with disabilities. The methodological basis of the research consists of the principles of historicism, scientific objectivity, consistency, and comprehensiveness, which allow us to study the experience and current trends in the creation and development of existing models of inclusive education as a complex problem, analyzing the factual material in its totality and interconnection. The primary results and conclusions of the research are the essential characteristics of the models of inclusive education and features of their development in the context of public policy of different countries in 1990–2000. A special contribution of the authors to the research in this area is a comprehensive analysis of the evolution of approaches to creating and developing inclusive education models over recent decades. The research novelty lies in the systematization of the main groups of models of inclusive education of children with disabilities, presented in international practice.

• Educational models
• Public policy
• Children with disabilities

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Government of the Kyrgyz Republic. (2012). Decree “On the strategic directions of education system development in the Kyrgyz Republic” (March 23, 2012 No. 201). Bishkek, Kyrgyz Republic. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from http://cbd.minjust.gov.kg/act/view/ru-ru/92984/10?cl=ru-ru

Government of the Republic of Moldova. (2014). Decree “On approval of the education development strategy for 2014–2020 ‘Education-2020’” (November 14, 2014. No. 944). Kishinev, Moldova. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from https://base.spinform.ru/show_doc.fwx?rgn=73133

UN General Assembly. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (December, 13 2006 A/RES/61/106). Retrieved November 4, 2021, from https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/GEN/N06/500/79/PDF/N0650079.pdf?OpenElement

UNESCO. (2000). The Dakar Framework for Action. Education for all: Meeting our collective commitments (adopted by the World Education Forum 26–28 April 2000). Dakar, Senegal. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from http://www.undp.org.lb/programme/governance/institutionbuilding/basiceducation/docs/dakar.pdf

Balyasnikova, L. A., & Zolotukhina, N. F. (2011). Education for all: A dialogue with UNESCO. UNIVERSUM: Bulletin of the Herzen University , 6 , 3–6. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from https://lib.herzen.spb.ru/media/magazines/contents/2/2011_6/baliasnikova_06_11_3_6.pdf

Bank-Mikkelson, N. E. (1980). Denmark. In R. J. Flynn & K. E. Nitsch (Eds.), Normalization, social integration and community services (pp. 51–70). University Park Press.

Google Scholar  

Bond, R., & Castagnera, E. (2006). Peer supports and inclusive education: An underutilized resource. Theory Into Practice, 45 (3), 224–229. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4503_4

Article   Google Scholar  

Liventseva, L. A. (2011). A review of contemporary foreign research on inclusive education. Psychological Science and Education, 3 , 114–121.

Nagel, B. (2018). Inclusive education in Germany. Education and Upbringing of Children with Disabilities, 5 , 22–26.

Nazarova, N. M. (2005). Special pedagogy . Academia.

Surudina, E. A. (2020). Models of organization of inclusive education in foreign pedagogical practice. World of Science, Culture and Education, 6 (85), 304–306. https://doi.org/10.24412/1991-5500-2020-685-304-306

Tang, Ch. (2008). Opening remarks by the Deputy Director General of UNESCO to the conference. In Proceedings from Inclusive Education: Problems of Improvement of Educational Policy and System (pp. 7–11). Publishing House of Russian State Pedagogical University named after A. I. Herzen.

Winzer, M. (2018). From integration to inclusion. Defectology , 6 , 11–20.

World Health Organization. (2010). CBR guidelines: Education component. WHO. Retrieved November 4, 2021, from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/44405/9789241548052_education_eng.pdf?sequence=3

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Special Education of the Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia

Natalia A. Grigorieva, Svetlana B. Lazurenko & Tatiana A. Solovyova

Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia, Moscow, Russia

Natalia A. Grigorieva

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Natalia A. Grigorieva .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Center for Learning Content and Technology, Institute of Education Management of the Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russia

Anna A. Arinushkina

Igor A. Korobeynikov

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Grigorieva, N.A., Lazurenko, S.B., Solovyova, T.A. (2022). Models of Inclusive Education for Children with Disabilities in International Practice: Historical Experience and Current Trends. In: Arinushkina, A.A., Korobeynikov, I.A. (eds) Education of Children with Special Needs . Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13646-7_32

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-13646-7_32

Published : 04 November 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-13645-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-13646-7

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Inclusive Classrooms: Looking at Special Education Today

Two types of classrooms.

• specific learning disability, 35 percent;
• speech/language impairment: 21 percent ;
• other health impairment: 12 percent;
• autism spectrum disorder: 8 percent;
• intellectual disability: 7 percent ;
• developmental delay: 6 percent;
• emotional disturbance: 6 percent;
• multiple disabilities: 2 percent;
• hearing impairment: 1 percent;
• orthopedic impairment: 1 percent.

Benefits of Integration

• more instructional time;
• fewer absences;
• better post-secondary outcomes;
• social benefits to non-disabled students as they learn to form “positive relationships” and better relate to “a variety of people.”
• differentiated instruction geared to each student’s unique learning style;
• supportive teaching strategies with “specially designed instruction and support”;
• reduced stigma, since everyone is viewed as a having unique learning needs;
• effective use of resources, since in-classroom specialists can help all students;
• high expectations for all, since the goals for all students, should be based on state academic standards.

Strategies for Inclusion

• Begin at the end , making use of backward planning to ensure daily lesson planning aligns with year-end goals.
• Embrace universal design to make the curriculum accessible to all students, regardless of their unique needs.
• Apply multiple intelligence theory , which will aid in accessing the unique pathways by which each student processes information.
• Incorporate life skills training by using routine classroom tasks to create learning opportunities for special education students.
• Employ collaborative teaching techniques by partnering with special education teachers and others.
• Formulate a flexible behavior management plan by maintaining control of the classroom in a manner that adapts to the needs of special education students.
• positive attitudes and beliefs toward special education students;
• a commitment to provide what’s needed to meet their needs;
• school leadership support in terms of adequate personnel, training, equipment and policies; and
• instructional methods that are adapted to the needs of special education students and foster a learning environment that is cooperative and promotes socialization.

Alexis Anderson   is a digital PR coordinator covering K-12 education at 2U, Inc. Anderson supports outreach for their school counseling, teaching, mental health, and occupational therapy programs. 

ASCD is dedicated to professional growth and well-being.

Let's put your vision into action., related blogs.

Confronting the Uncomfortable: Strategies to Teach About Enslavement

Today, You’re a Podcast Host

Young Minds, Big Thinking

The Power of Peers

2 Simple Strategies to Launch Nonfiction Reading

To process a transaction with a purchase order please send to [email protected].

Special Education Guide

The term inclusion captures, in one word, an all-embracing societal ideology. Regarding individuals with disabilities and special education, inclusion secures opportunities for students with disabilities to learn alongside their non-disabled peers in general education classrooms. Honestly establishing a successful inclusive classroom varies in complexity, based upon the challenges created by the disability at hand. However a knowledgeable approach and positive attitudes on the parts of parents and teachers proves vital to triumphing over any obstacles which may emerge.

Inclusion: What is it? Theory and Practice

A knowledgeable approach and positive attitude toward inclusion begins by understanding the concept and the theory behind it. Why integrate children with special needs into a general education classroom? Who benefits? What results? Special education professional Gretchen Walsh M.S. Ed. , who runs the Academic Support Center at Notre Dame College, gives a concise synopsis when she says “Inclusion is important because through our diversity we certainly add to our creativity. If you don’t have a diverse classroom or a diverse world, you don’t have the same creative levels and I think our strength lies in our diversity.” See What’s Inclusion? Theory and Practice  for an in-depth look into this idea.

Adaptations, Accommodations, and Modifications

According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), students with special needs have the right to receive necessary curricular adaptations. Adaptations include accommodations and modifications. Students who receive accommodations are held to the same academic expectations as their general ed classmates; on the other hand, modifications entail making changes that lower these expectations. Curricular adaptations vary based upon each learner’s individual needs. Individualized education programs (IEPs)  list what accommodations or modifications a student should receive. To obtain a more comprehensive glimpse into adaptations read Adaptations, Accommodations, and Modifications .

The General Ed Teacher’s Guide to the Inclusive Classroom

The complexity involved in integrating students with disabilities into general education classrooms can make this process seem intimidating or overwhelming to a general education teacher. If you feel this way, take comfort in the realization that you are not alone. Actually the fact you find yourself currently exploring this website indicates you are journeying down the right path. As already noted, a knowledgeable approach proves vital to a thriving inclusive environment. So, be sure to consider the strategies shared within The General Ed Teacher’s Guide to the Inclusive Classroom .

New to the site? Try Quick User Guide

We track anonymous visitor behavior on our website to ensure you have a great experience. Learn more about our Privacy Policy .

• The Learning Accelerator
• Resources & Guidance
• Parabola Project
• What can teaching and learning practice look like?
• What are the conditions needed for success?
• How can blended learning help?
• How can I support quality remote and hybrid learning?
• Lovett Elementary School
• Trailblazer Elementary School
• The Forest School Online
• Valor Collegiate Academies
• ASU Prep Digital
• Lindsay High School
• Laurel Springs School
• Pleasant View Elementary School
• My Tech High
• CICS West Belden
• Bronx Arena High School
• Map Academy
• ReNEW DTA Academy
• Virtual Learning Academy Charter School (VLACS)
• Cisco Junior High School
• Locust Grove Middle School
• Crossroads FLEX High School
• Roots Elementary
• Gem Prep Online
• LPS Richmond
• Texas Tech University K-12
• Teaching & Learning Practices
• Conditions for Success & Scale
• Train Your People
• Research & Measurement
• Learning Commons
• Problems of Practice
• Targeted and Relevant
• Differentiated pathways and materials

Full Inclusion of Students with Learning Disabilities

Providing special education resources to students with additional need in general education classrooms

Lovett operates in a full inclusion model for their students with learning disabilities (those who have an Individualized Education Plan or “IEP”). All students are fully integrated into the general education classrooms, and no students are pulled out of the general education classroom for special instruction.

Recognizing that nearly all of their students have unique learning needs, regardless of IEP status, Lovett tries to incorporate as many adults in the classroom as possible, including those who might traditionally serve students with learning disabilities. This includes the general education teacher, special education teacher, aides, and student teachers from University of Illinois at Chicago . Given that Lovett operates within a blended rotation model, these adults can all help promote learning in different ways (facilitating small groups, prompting independent work, etc.), allowing special attention to be paid to those that need it. Not only does this approach better meet the needs of all students, but it also reduces the stigma around being a students with learning disabilities as students recognize that everyone sometimes needs special help.

(This Approach is Illustrative of LEAP's Learner Focused Strategies)

Student Does

• Students with learning disabilities have an Individualized Education Plan and may receive modified instruction based on that plan.

Students are grouped based on instructional need, so a group may contain a mix of students with and without IEPs (students do not know who has one and who doesn’t).

Teacher Does

• Special education teachers support four or five classrooms.

Special education teachers create a weekly schedule to ensure all of his or her students are getting the support they need (based on their Individualized Education Plan).

Special education and general education teachers coordinate during weekly planning sessions to figure out the best time for special education teachers to be in the classroom.

Special education teachers work in classrooms addressing students with the lowest skill levels during core content blocks when students are grouped based on abilities . This practice often enables them to reach all of their students in a single classroom.

All teachers modify content and instruction based on individual student needs .

Technology Does

• Provides data via online programs on student progress for individual skills, helping to identify student needs.

Provides NWEA data to help teachers understand which students need the most support in certain skill areas.

Featured Artifact

Blended benefits for students with learning differences at lovett.

Lovett educators discuss the benefits of a blended environment for their students with learning differences. Learn More

Strategy Resources

Teacher planning to meet the needs of students with learning differences at lovett.

Lovett educators discuss how they plan throughout the week to meet the needs of their... Learn More

Multiple Adults in the Classroom at Lovett

Lovett strives to maximize the number of educators in the classroom. This video discusses "why"... Learn More

Lovett Elementary in Chicago provides blended and personalized learning to its students in grades 2-5.

The Hechinger Report

Covering Innovation & Inequality in Education

PROOF POINTS: New research review questions the evidence for special education inclusion

Share this:

• Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
• Click to share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window)
• Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)

The Hechinger Report is a national nonprofit newsroom that reports on one topic: education. Sign up for our  weekly newsletters  to get stories like this delivered directly to your inbox. Consider supporting our stories and becoming  a member  today.

Get important education news and analysis delivered straight to your inbox

• Weekly Update
• Future of Learning
• Higher Education
• Early Childhood
• Proof Points

For the past 25 years, U.S. policy has urged schools to keep students with disabilities in the same classrooms with their general education peers unless severe disabilities prevent it. It seems a humane policy not to wall off those with disabilities and keep them apart from society. Who would argue against it?

Schools have embraced inclusion. According to the most recent data from 2020-21 school year, two thirds of the 7 million students with disabilities who receive special education services spent 80 percent or more of their time in traditional classrooms. Separation is less common today; only one out of every eight students with disabilities was taught separately in a special-needs only environment most of the time.  

But a recent international analysis of all the available research on special education inclusion found inconsistent results. Some children thrived while others did very badly in regular classrooms. Overall, students didn’t benefit academically, psychologically or socially from the practice. Math and reading scores, along with psychosocial measures, were no higher for children with disabilities who learned in general education classrooms, on average, compared to children who learned in separate special education classrooms. 

“I was surprised,”said Nina Dalgaard, lead author of the inclusion study for the Campbell Collaboration , a nonprofit organization that reviews research evidence for public policy purposes. “Despite a rather large evidence base, it doesn’t appear that inclusion automatically has positive effects. To the contrary, for some children, it appears that being taught in a segregated setting is actually beneficial.”

Many disability advocates balked at the findings, published in December 2022, on social media. An influential lobbying organization, the National Center for Learning Disabilities, said it continues to believe that inclusion is beneficial for students and that this study will “not change” how the disability community advocates for students. 

“Students with disabilities have a right to learn alongside their peers, and studies have shown that this is beneficial not only for students with disabilities but also for other students in the classroom,” said Lindsay Kubatzky, the organization’s director of policy and advocacy. “Every student is different, and ‘inclusion’ for one student may look different from others. For some, it could be a classroom separate from their peers, but that is rarely the case.”

The Campbell Collaboration study is a meta-analysis, which means it is supposed to sweep up all the best research on a topic and use statistics to tell us where the preponderance of the evidence lies. Dalgaard, a senior researcher at VIVE—The Danish Centre for Social Science Research, initially found over 2,000 studies on special education inclusion. But she threw out 99 percent of them, many of which were quite favorable to inclusion. Most were qualitative studies that described students’ experiences in an inclusion classroom but didn’t rigorously track academic progress. Among those that did monitor math or reading, many simply noted how much students improved in an inclusive setting, but didn’t compare those gains with how students might have otherwise fared in a separate special-needs-only setting. 

Fewer than 100 studies had comparison groups, but still most of those didn’t make the cut because the students in inclusive settings were vastly different from those in separate settings. Special education is a particularly difficult area to study because researchers cannot randomly assign students with disabilities to different treatments. Schools tend to keep children with milder disabilities in a regular classroom and teach only those with the most severe disabilities separately. In comparing how both groups fare, it should be no surprise that students with milder disabilities outperform those with more severe disabilities. But that’s not good evidence that inclusion is better. “It’s a serious, confounding bias,” Dalgaard said.

In the end, Dalgaard was left with only 15 studies where the severity of the disability was somehow noted so that she could compare apples to apples. These 15 studies covered more than 7,000 students, ages six through 16, across nine countries. Four of the studies were conducted in the United States with the others in Europe. 

The disabilities in the studies ranged widely, from the most common ones, such as dyslexia, ADHD, speech impairments and autism, to rarer ones, such as Down syndrome and cerebral palsy. Some students had mild versions; others had more severe forms. I asked Dalgaard if she found clues in the results as to which disabilities were more conducive to inclusion. I was curious if children with severe dyslexia, for example, might benefit from separate instruction with specially trained reading teachers for the first couple of years after diagnosis. 

Dalgaard said there wasn’t enough statistical evidence to untangle when inclusion is most beneficial. But she did notice in the underlying studies that students with autism seem to be better off in a separate setting. For example, their psychosocial scores were higher. But more studies would be needed to confirm this. 

She also noticed that how a school goes about including students with disabilities mattered. In schools that used a co-teaching model, one regular teacher and one trained in special education, students fared better in inclusion classrooms. Again, more research is needed to confirm this statistically. And, even if co-teaching proves to be effective over multiple studies, not every school can afford to hire two teachers for every classroom. It’s particularly cost-prohibitive in middle and high school as teachers specialize in subjects. 

Instead, Dalgaard noted that inclusion is often a cost-cutting practice because schools save money when they no longer run separate classrooms or schools for children with disabilities. “In some cases, children with disabilities no longer had access to the same resources. It’s not supposed to happen this way, but it does in some places,” said Dalgaard. “That is probably why the results of the meta-analysis show that some children actually learn more in segregated settings.”

I was surprised to learn from Dalgaard that no sound meta-analysis has found “clear” benefits for special education inclusion. Indeed, previous meta-analyses have found exactly the same inconsistent or very small positive results, she said. This latest Campbell Collaboration study was commissioned to see if newer research, published from 2000 to September 2021, would move the dial. It did not.

As a nation, we spend an estimated $90 billion a year in federal, state and local taxpayer funds on educating children with disabilities. We ought to know more about how to best help them learn. 

This story about  special education inclusion was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the  Hechinger newsletter .

Related articles

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn't mean it's free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Jill Barshay SENIOR REPORTER

(212)... More by Jill Barshay

Letters to the Editor

At The Hechinger Report, we publish thoughtful letters from readers that contribute to the ongoing discussion about the education topics we cover. Please read our guidelines for more information. We will not consider letters that do not contain a full name and valid email address. You may submit news tips or ideas here without a full name, but not letters.

By submitting your name, you grant us permission to publish it with your letter. We will never publish your email address. You must fill out all fields to submit a letter.

re: https://hechingerreport.org/proof-ponts-new-research-review-questions-the-evidence-for-special-education-inclusion/ Ref: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1291 The effects of inclusion on academic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing of children with special educational needs

Jill Barshay, Hechinger Reports cc Dr. Nina Dalgaard

It is important to conduct periodic meta-analysis of topics related to public policy, funding and other aspects of education.

I disagree with the reporting by Jill Bashay regarding special education learner inclusion/exclusion.

The reason for my disagreement is that the referenced study authors report contains the authors’ data collection and meta-analysis conclusions (see below) that valid information for meta-analysis is inadequate. My read of the Dalgaard met-analysis report suggests that the two extremes – full inclusion or full exclusion – of SEN students in the ‘normal’ population may be harmful but is really unknown. Therefore, until more and better research is achieved, some logical blend of inclusion/exclusion can be designed and implemented to achieve learning and social integration objectives. My opinion comes from leading manufacturing ventures that have intentionally accommodated “SEN” adults successfully in ways that give them personal work settings along with collaborative opportunities. The emotional intelligence for diversity, equity and inclusion is, I believe, better achieved by starting in the K-12 system.

Larry Gebhardt Ph.D., Captain US Navy (Retired) Pocatello, Idaho

Data Collection and Analysis The total number of potentially relevant studies constituted 20,183 hits. A total of 94 studies met the inclusion criteria, all were non-randomised studies. The 94 studies analysed data from 19 different countries. Only 15 studies could be used in the data synthesis. Seventy-nine studies could not be used in the data synthesis as they were judged to be of critical risk of bias and, in accordance with the protocol, were excluded from the meta-analysis on the basis that they would be more likely to mislead than inform. The 15 studies came from nine different countries. Separate meta-analyses were conducted on conceptually distinct outcomes. All analyses were inverse variance weighted using random effects statistical models. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate the robustness of pooled effect sizes across components of risk of bias.

Authors’ Conclusions The overall methodological quality of the included studies was low, and no experimental studies in which children were randomly assigned to intervention and control conditions were found. The 15 studies, which could be used in the data synthesis, were all, except for one, judged to be in serious risk of bias. Results of the meta-analyses do not suggest on average any sizeable positive or negative effects of inclusion on children’s academic achievement as measured by language, literacy, and math outcomes or on the overall psychosocial adjustment of children. The average point estimates favoured inclusion, though small and not statistically significant, heterogeneity was present in all analyses, and there was inconsistency in direction and magnitude of the effect sizes. This finding is similar to the results of previous meta-analyses, which include studies published before 2000, and thus although the number of studies in the current meta-analyses is limited, it can be concluded that it is very unlikely that inclusion in general increases or decreases learning and psychosocial adjustment in children with special needs. Future research should explore the effects of different kinds of inclusive education for children with different kinds of special needs, to expand the knowledge base on what works for whom.

Of course inclusion, just in general, doesn’t increase outcomes. Just like exclusion, just in general, doesn’t help anyone. So many other things have to be true. What the kids and adults are actually doing when they are being ‘included,’ matters the most. Is there one general education teacher with 25 kids and kids with disabilities are just in class receiving whole group instruction without any targeted supports? Is there a strong co-teaching model led by two content experts with most time spent in small groups? Is the special educator a content expert? If you think about what is true about a self-contained classroom that would, arguably, be better for a student, those things can be replicated within a general education setting. As a school leader, professor, former self-contained, and inclusion teacher, there is no arguing with the notion that a non-verbal student with autism is NOT categorically better off in an autism classroom than in an inclusion classroom with strong language models. The structure of the classroom and the roles of adults have to be strategically designed so that kids benefit from any classroom structure, inclusion or otherwise. I have trained hundreds of school leaders all across the country and have learned that most schools don’t know how to do inclusion well. Let’s talk about that.

I am in total agreement with Tony Barton’s comment. Jill Barshay’s article reinforced what we know: that the right set-up plays a critical role in the outcome. Therefore, since there are so few properly conducted studies, we must focus our attention to ensure that our students with disabilities are all in settings that are conducive to progress in all domains- academically, psychologically and socially. Ensuring all our educators are properly trained is the first step. I have also found that I will create the learning environment for each struggling student based on the current conditions – and include each student’s personality traits as part of the assessment done to determine where the student will truly feel best and progress most. This is similar to a general statement regarding pain. One can never compare his pain to another since pain is physiological and cannot be measured via comparison. Since the personality and individual abilities of the student, teacher, assistant and special educator all will impact the student’s outcome- it is hard to measure and determine where success is most feasible without being aware of all variables. I agree that most schools don’t know how to do inclusion well- or don’t have the staff to properly support it. This article is great in raising our collective awareness of why the Campbell Study couldn’t be more targeted and concise with its results and what we can do to support our students best.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Sign me up for the newsletter!

Submit a letter

KCPS Special Education Inclusion Model

As part of our mission of closing the achievement gap, SchoolSmartKC has dedicated over $700,000 to support Kansas City Public Schools in developing a new Special Education Inclusion Model. This initiative was founded with the goals of reducing the gap between students with disabilities and general education students by 10%. This model utilized an integrated classroom approach, where special education and general education teachers work together to meet the needs of special education students within their classrooms.

Early research into the SPED populations at KCPS showed that a large majority of students with disabilities were young children with a developmental delay, therefore the pilot of the Special Education Inclusion Model focused on the K-2 grade levels, and included up to three hub schools.

In these schools, special education students received special education services inside the classroom, with each school receiving support for two highly specialized special education teachers to perform this work, or a total of up to six new special education teachers across the district.

In-school programming supports covered by this grant included special scheduling to allow general education and special education teachers to co plan three days a week, monthly professional development for co-teaching pairs, research and evidence-based reading and math intervention electives for students, and touchscreen devices and internet hotspots for special education students.

In addition to in-classroom work, the Special Education Inclusion Model also focused heavily on parent and family involvement. As part of this work, parents and families were encouraged to have quarterly progress meetings with their school and dedicate 30 minutes per day to academic learning in math and reading. This grant also provided transportation that allowed special education students to attend hub schools and receive specialized support, something which had previously been unattainable for many of these families.

SchoolSmartKC was proud to partner with KCPS on the development of these special classrooms, and of the results seen from this programming for special education students.

For more information on the KCPS Special Education Inclusion Model, contact Angelique Nedved at [email protected]

Related content, profile in leadership: rhonda erpelding, harvesters, communities in schools, 20/20 leadership.

Prep With Harshita

Push In model

The push-in model refers to a different approach to inclusive education where special education services are brought into the general education classroom.

In the push-in model, rather than removing students with disabilities from the general education classroom for specialized instruction, support services and resources are “pushed in” to the general education setting. This means that a special education teacher or support staff members enter the general education classroom to provide additional support to students with disabilities while they remain in the regular classroom environment.

The push-in model is often used in combination with other inclusive practices, such as co-teaching or consultation models, where collaboration between general education and special education teachers is emphasized. The aim is to promote access to the general education curriculum, increase social interaction, and provide targeted support within the least restrictive environment.

Here are some details about the push-in model of inclusive education:

• Support within the General Education Classroom: In this, specialized support personnel, such as special education teachers, therapists, or paraprofessionals, enter the general education classroom to provide targeted support to students with disabilities. They work directly with the students in the same classroom environment rather than pulling them out for separate instruction.
• Collaboration with General Education Teachers: In this, collaboration between general education and special education teachers is emphasized. The support personnel work closely with the general education teacher to align instruction, modify materials, and adapt teaching strategies to meet the individual needs of students with disabilities.
• Individualized Support: Support personnel in the push-in model provide individualized support to students with disabilities based on their specific needs and goals outlined in their Individualized Education Plans (IEPs). They may offer additional explanations, adaptations, or accommodations to help students access the curriculum and participate in classroom activities.
• Differentiated Instruction: The push-in model encourages differentiated instruction within the general education classroom. Teachers and support personnel employ various instructional strategies to address the diverse learning needs of all students, including those with disabilities. This may involve adjusting the pace of instruction, providing visual aids, using assistive technology, or implementing multisensory approaches.
• Social Interaction and Inclusion: By providing support within the general education classroom, the push-in model promotes social interaction and inclusion for students with disabilities. They have opportunities to engage with their typically developing peers, participate in group activities, and develop relationships within the regular classroom environment.
• Gradual Release of Support: In the push-in model, there is often a gradual release of support over time. As students with disabilities become more comfortable and confident in their abilities, the level of support provided may be reduced gradually, allowing them to increasingly participate independently in the general education classroom.
• Flexibility and Individualization: The push-in model offers flexibility and individualization in the provision of support. Support personnel can tailor their assistance to meet the changing needs of students, providing different levels of support for different subjects or activities throughout the day.
• Professional Development and Collaboration: Teachers and support personnel in the push-in model benefit from ongoing professional development and collaboration opportunities. These may include training on inclusive practices, effective collaboration strategies, understanding diverse learning needs, and implementing appropriate accommodations and modifications.

Also Read: Meaning and Need of Inclusive Education

Also Visit: Prep with Harshita

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Make your learning journey easy and much interesting

[Phosphogliv: mechanism of therapeutic action and clinical efficacy]

Affiliation.

• 1 Orekhovich Institute of Biomedical Chemistry, Pogodinskaya, 10, Moscow.
• PMID: 12189622

The review summarizes the results of long term study (from design to clinical trial) of a new hepatoprotective drug Phosphogliv. Some theoretical ground for its creation has been considered with special emphasis on its ingredient properties: soy bean phosphatidylcholine and glycyrrhizinic acid from licorice roots. Experimental and clinical data concerning polyene phosphatidylcholine repairing action on cell membranes as well as antiviral and immunomodulating effects of glycyrrhizinic acid are presented. Their selected combination in Phosphogliv provided its high efficiency in rat hepatitis models. After standard toxicology tests it was allowed to carry out the clinical trials of this preparation in the treatment of liver diseases patients--mainly with acute and chronic viral hepatitis B, C, A and mixed hepatitis B + C (total 203 patients). The inclusion of Phosphogliv into therapy coarse accelerated disappearance of intoxication symptoms and decrease of serum aminotransferase and other hepatic markers. The effect was more pronounced for intravenous drug form.

Publication types

• English Abstract
• Adjuvants, Immunologic* / chemistry
• Adjuvants, Immunologic* / pharmacology
• Adjuvants, Immunologic* / therapeutic use
• Antiviral Agents* / chemistry
• Antiviral Agents* / pharmacology
• Antiviral Agents* / therapeutic use
• Cell Membrane / drug effects
• Clinical Trials as Topic
• Drug Combinations
• Glycyrrhizic Acid / chemistry
• Glycyrrhizic Acid / pharmacology
• Glycyrrhizic Acid / therapeutic use
• Hepatitis, Viral, Human / drug therapy
• Liver / drug effects
• Liver / metabolism
• Liver / pathology
• Liver Diseases / drug therapy*
• Phosphatidylcholines* / chemistry
• Phosphatidylcholines* / pharmacology
• Phosphatidylcholines* / therapeutic use
• Adjuvants, Immunologic
• Antiviral Agents
• Phosphatidylcholines
• Glycyrrhizic Acid