Impact of Inclusion. McLeskey, 1998). Others have indicated concerns whether inclusive education is

Transcription

1 1 Impact of Inclusion Pamela O. Cook, Special Education Teacher, Jefferson Elementary School, York, SC Stephen B. Richards, Associate Professor, Special Education, University of Dayton, OH Susanna V. Duckworth, Professor, Special Education, Winthrop University, Rock Hill, SC Introduction Inclusion is a service delivery approach that has become commonplace in the public schools. More than 95% of students with disabilities are educated in general education schools. The majority (more than 70%) of these students are placed in general education classes and receive special education services for some portion of the school day in a general education class or a resource room (Lewis and Doorlag, 1995). A number of researchers and writers have investigated inclusive education and cited both social and academic benefits for students with and without disabilities (Brucker, 1994; Freagon, 1993; Giangreco, 1997; Moore, 1998; Sharpe, York, and Knight, 1994; Waldron and McLeskey, 1998). Others have indicated concerns whether inclusive education is universally beneficial (LoVette, 1996; Taylor and Justen, 1996). There is a continuing need to evaluate the outcomes and effectiveness of inclusive education, particularly at the local school level. This level of research is important to determine how students with disabilities are performing in comparison to their peers without disabilities in specific settings. The purpose of this study was to devise and implement a relatively simple but effective method for examining those outcomes at the individual high school level. More specifically, the research question was, Do students with disabilities in academic inclusive classes perform as well as students without

2 2 disabilities? Methods Sample Forty students without disabilities at a high school in the southeast United States were randomly selected for the study. All of the students with disabilities involved in inclusive academic general education classes were included. This method was used to obtain equal n s for group comparisons. Students without disabilities were randomly selected in equal numbers to the number of students with disabilities in each academic class across two academic school years. Students were in the tenth, eleventh, or twelfth grades. The students with disabilities and the students without disabilities were compared on their grade performances in the academic classes. Variables of Concern The independent variable was the presence or absence of a disability. All students received an inclusive education. In this school, typically, a general and special education teacher co-taught in the academic class. Both teachers were available to provide help to any student in need. One variation of this approach involved the special education teacher focusing assistance only on those students who had Individualized Education Programs. This variation resulted when the special educator was not able to participate in the class for the entire period. Classes were taught on a block schedule. The dependent variables were the grades received in the inclusion classes and the overall Grade Point Averages (GPAs) of the students. Instrumentation Assessments used were based on the grading system determined by this particular = A = B = B = C = C = D+

3 3 high school. The grading system was Procedures Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the principal and teachers of the high school. The subjects' identities were kept anonymous. Parents were informed of the study and their consent was obtained. No information was provided by which an individual could be identified. The students were selected from English I, II, and III, U.S. History, Physical Science, Government and Economics, Algebra II, Math Tec II, and Geometry classes. Final grades and GPAs were compared between the students with and without disabilities. T-tests were conducted to determine if the grades and GPAs between the students with and without disabilities differed significantly. After the research was completed the student participants who so desired were informed of the results. Results Data were compiled and analyzed using the MYSTAT statistical program. T- tests were used to test for differences between general education and special education students. In each table, Group refers to general education education students and Group refers to special education students. N is the number of students in each group. The Mean is the grade average in particular class or GPA average for each group of students. The SD is the standard deviation for each distribution. T-test #1 depicts the overall mean grades the students made in the inclusion classes. Results indicate that the mean for the numerical grades of the forty general education education students was The mean for the forty special education

4 4 students was These mean grades are very close. Based on the school scale, the general education students achieved an overall mean grade of C+ while the special education students achieved an overall mean grade of C for all classes across both academic school years. T-test #1 Independent Samples t-test on Grade Grouped by Type Group N Mean SD Separate variances t = df = 76.1 prob =.101 Pooled variances t = df = 78 prob =.101 The standard deviations for the two groups were reasonably close also. This indicates that there were not great differences in the variation within the distributions. The probability for t-test #1 was not significant further indicating that the distributions were similar. The second t-test was used to test for mean differences on grade point averages or GPAs in inclusion classes. GPAs are the grade point averages for two semesters. Type refers to either the general education (1) or special education students (2).

5 5 T-test #2 Independent Samples t-test on GPA Grouped by Type Group N Mean SD Separate variances t = df = 76.9 prob =.218 Pooled variances t = df = 78 prob =.218 T-test #2 depicts the overall GPAs earned by groups of students in and Again, the overall means and standard deviations were reasonably similar and there was not a significant difference in the distribution of scores. It should be noted that t-tests were conducted for mean grades for each individual academic class for each of the two academic years and for mean overall GPA s in each academic year included in the study. None yielded statistically significant differences. We chose not to report these however because the n for each group in each class was typically about five. Thus, the assumptions for parametric analyses were seriously violated. Still, the failure to obtain statistically significant results may suggest that a Type II error (i.e., a statistically significant difference was not detected) was less likely. Discussion Do students with disabilities in academic inclusive classes perform as well

6 6 as students without disabilities? The research question was investigated to determine if students with disabilities perform as well as students without disabilities in an inclusive education program. The t-tests indicate that there do not appear to be any significant differences between the general education and the special education students grade averages nor in their overall GPAs in the inclusion classes. These analyses reveal two potentially important findings. First, the use of an inclusive strategy that involves co-teaching throughout a block scheduled high school program appeared to be effective for both students with and without disabilities. There appeared to be no significant advantage for either group as assessed by the typical measures used in determining progress toward high school graduation. Second, the study provides a simple yet apparently effective model for at least partially evaluating the effectiveness of inclusion at a high school level. The records are available, confidentiality is easily protected, data may be entered and analyzed using a computer statistical package, and the impact of particular students grades at either extreme may be reduced through analyzing group means. Additionally, the method used also helps to identify potentially problematic classes for students regardless of presence or absence of disability (e.g., there was one academic class in which both groups obtained mean grades below the C level). In this study there are obvious limitations. The sample size is small and restricted to one high school (although that was one purpose of the research). Random selection of general education students, particularly with small n s, may limit the range of grades actually obtained by those students without disabilities.

7 7 Only five inclusion classes for and five inclusion classes for were used. Including other academic years could yield richer data that would provide a long-term perspective on the effectiveness of the inclusive program. Also, there were no controls over how each teacher awarded or assessed grades within his/her class beyond the scale (A F) that was used as a guideline for all classes. Obtaining qualitative data from students, teachers, and parents (e.g., obtaining their perceptions about program success) would clearly provide still deeper insight into the effectiveness of a program. Finally, the students included here were those with milder disabilities. The effects of a program for students with more moderate to severe disabilities would likely require different or modified means of assessment. In conclusion, inclusion programs are implemented in various ways. Educators have suggested that when special education students are successful in their academic classes this encourages them to continue school. It would appear coteaching in this high school was effective. Also, a simple but systematic means for evaluating the effectiveness of programs at the secondary level is desirable. In this study, we have attempted to provide such a model. References Baker, E., M. C. Wang, and H. J. Walberg (1995). "The Effects of Inclusion on Learning," Educational Leadership, 52, Beckers, G.G. and J. S. Carnes (1995). "Proof Positive... Inclusion Works. Topic Area: Learning Disabilities." Paper presented at the Annual International Convention of the Council for Exceptional Children (73rd, Indianapolis, IN, April 5-9, 1995).

8 8 Boudah, D.J., J. B. Schumacher, and D. D. Deshler (1997). "Collaborative Instruction: Is It an Effective Option for Inclusion in Secondary Classrooms?" Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, Brucker, P. O. (1994). "The Advantages of Inclusion for Students with Learning Disabilities," Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, Freagon, S., et al. (1993). Some Answers for Implementation to the Most Commonly Asked Questions Regarding the Inclusion of Children with Disabilities in General Education (Report No. EC303161). Northern Illinois University, DeKalb (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED372529) Giangreco, M.F. (1997). "Key Lessons Learned about Inclusive Education: Summary of the 1996 Schonell Memorial Lecture," International Journal of Disability, Development and Education, 44, "Inclusion-Council for Exceptional Children." (1994, October). CEC Today, 2, 1. Lewis, R.B. and D. H. Doorlag (1995). Teaching Special Students in General Education Classrooms. (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc. LoVette, O.K. (1996). "Inclusion: Who Wins? Who Loses?" Paper presented at the 25 th annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association. Tuscaloosa, AL, November 6, Moore, C. (1998). Educating Students with Disabilities in General Education Classrooms: A Summary of the Research (Report No. EC306415). Eugene, OR: Western Regional Resource Center. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED419329) Ohio State Legislative Office of Education Oversight, Columbus. (1995). Special Education Issues for Discussion: Funding, Inclusion, and Impact (Report No. EC304702). (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED ) Sharpe, M.N., J. L. York, and J. Knight (1994). "Effects of Inclusion on the Academic Performance of Classmates without Disabilities," Remedial and Special Education, 15, Taylor, R. and J. E. Justen (1996). "Full Inclusion of Students with Mild Disabilities: A Question of External Validity," The Clearing House, 70, Waldron, N. and J. McLeskey (1998). The Effects of an Inclusive School Program on Students with Mild and Severe Learning Disabilities," Exceptional Children, 64, Zigmond, N., J. Jenkins, D. Fuchs, S. Deno, and L. Fuchs (1995). "When Students Fail to Achieve

9 Satisfactorily," Phi Delta Kappan, 77,