Proof Positive: inclusive education does not equal inclusive placement
Proof Positive: inclusive education does not equal inclusive placement
The Hechinger Report writes about a new research review that questions the evidence for "special education inclusion." But is it the question we should be asking?
Happy New Year, Everyone!
I’m Tim Villegas, and you are reading or listening to my bi-weekly newsletter, where I break down what is happening in the field of inclusive education and whatever else is going on in my brain concerning inclusion.
This week, I can’t stop thinking about an article by The Hechinger Report called PROOF POINTS: New research review questions the evidence for special education inclusion by Jill Barshay. The tagline reads, “Analysis unable to disentangle which students benefit from being taught alongside general education peers.”
If you read the article, which I hope you do, it makes a few different points.
The effect of inclusion (or inclusive placement) is inconclusive. It benefitted some, while some it didn’t.
Math and reading scores and psychosocial measures were no higher for learners in general education classrooms than those who learned in separate special education classrooms.
How a school included students mattered, with evidence that learners who had access to a general education teacher and a special education teacher did better.
Here are a few of my thoughts. From what I can tell, this meta-analysis examined inclusive placements but not necessarily inclusive education as our friends who developed the Beyond Access Model, and we would define it: Placement, Membership, Participation, and Learning. Inclusive education is much more than access to the general curriculum and placement. Were the learners authentically included? Did they feel a sense of belonging?
The meta-analysis included four studies from the United States and the rest from around the world but did not include some of the most seminal research to date about the effects of inclusive education, like The Relationship Between Special Education Placement and High School Outcomes by Cole Et Al. (2022) which showed “students with disabilities spending 80% more time in inclusive classrooms did better in reading and math than peers spending more time in special education classrooms.”
Finally, the author of the study shares an unsubstantiated claim that school districts use “inclusion” as a cost-cutting measure. I have yet to see this actually in practice. The vast majority of school districts I am aware of would rather pay more for separate and segregated disability-specific programs. But I’m very willing to be proved wrong on this point. If you know of an actual district moving toward inclusive practices only to save money, I’d love to hear about it.
If this article proves anything, it is that there continues to be confusion that inclusive education means inclusive placement. They are not the same thing.
I’d love to know what you think. If you have thoughts about the Hechinger Report article or anything else regarding inclusive education, let me know in the comments or reply right from your inbox.
Thanks for your time and attention, everyone. I’m looking forward to getting back to regular Weeklyish offerings. Oh, and BTW, I’m not including a links section in this edition or going forward. I’m trying to come up with ways to make the Weeklyish more sustainable for a communication team of one. In future editions, I’ll also include the sponsors of our new podcast series, Inclusion Stories. Have a great week, everyone!
Tim
***
The Weeklyish is written, edited, and sound designed by Tim Villegas and is a production of MCIE.
Our intro stinger is by Miles Kredich.
Additional music by REDProductions.
For information about inclusive education, visit mcie.org and check out our flagship podcast, Think Inclusive, on your favorite podcast app.