HOW SHOULD THE DISABLED BE EDUCATED?
NOT ONLY IN REGULAR CLASSROOMS, EDUCATOR ASSERTS

	CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va., Oct. 11 -- The trend of eliminating
pull-out programs for children with special needs and placing all of
them in regular classrooms is wrong, says a leading advocate of
special-education reform.
	The effort to place all children with learning disabilities,
emotional and behavior disorders and mental retardation in regular
classrooms in neighborhood schools -- the controversial ÒinclusionÓ
movement -- diminishes the potential of such students and reduces
teacher effectiveness, believes James M. Kauffman, professor at the
University of VirginiaÕs Curry School of Education and author of an
article in the fall issue of ÒLearning Disabilities Research and
Practice.Ó He believes the inclusion movement focuses too much on
where instruction for special education students is provided instead
of the types of services delivered.
	ÒThe concern for the place students are taught has gotten
out of hand.  The inclusion movement is leading educators to define
the regular classroom in the neighborhood school as the promised
land for students with disabilities. Instead of focusing on where
services should be delivered, educators should design specialized
programs that meet diverse student needs,Ó says Kauffman in the
national journal article titled ÒWhy We Must Celebrate a Diversity
of Restrictive Environments.Ó
	He believes the focus on where students with disabilities
are taught began to emerge 20 years ago when a federal law, now
known as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, was
passed.  In recent years many school administrators and reformers
have misinterpreted the federal law as implying that all
special-needs children should be taught in regular classrooms and
that pull out programs should be eliminated. Kauffman says.
	"Although some special-needs children should be placed in
regular classrooms, for others the regular class is inappropriate.
The decisions about placement must be individualized, and options
must be maintained," said Kauffman, co-editor of the 1995 book
"Issues in Educational Placement."
	Another factor fueling the inclusion trend, Kauffman says,
is that democratic ideals make it seem inappropriate to remove
children from established places, such as regular classrooms.  ÒIn
our society we view removing an individual from established
normative groups with great wariness,Ó said Kauffman.  He believes
that is one reason educators and parents often suggest bringing
special-education services to students in regular classrooms rather
than students receiving services at other locales.
	The inclusion movement doesn't take into account that
individualsÕ behaviors are often shaped by the environment, with its
physical and social restrictions, Kauffman says.  It also
contradicts the notion of an "ecological niche," a habitat that
supplies the support individuals or groups need to survive and
thrive, adds Kauffman, who has taught and written about special
education for more than 20 years.
	  Removing students with special needs from an environment
created to support them reduces their performance, says Kauffman,
who points to a 1995 study (published in "Phi Delta Kappan") that
shows many learning-disabled students performed poorly in regular
classrooms even when substantial efforts were made to accommodate
their needs.  He also cites 1988 research that shows some students
made greater academic progress in pull-out settings than in regular
classrooms.
	Inclusion advocates propose that having special-needs
children educated in regular classrooms always promotes
socialization and acceptance by their peers.  ÒThis simplistic view
is inconsistent with the complexity of social relationships.
Proximity is neither necessary or sufficient to ensure social
relationships,Ó said Kauffman, co-author of the text "Exceptional
Children," now in its sixth edition.
	A major flaw in believing that students with disabilities
should always be placed in regular classrooms to observe and imitate
behavior of their peers is that disruptive and sometimes violent
behavior occurs in regular classrooms, he notes.  ÒInclusion ignores
or distorts the realities teachers and students face daily,Ó
Kauffman said.
	He is convinced that special education should offer
effective instruction in academic and social skills and foster
social networks among children and adults that induce and sustain
desirable behavior regardless of where students are placed.  He
wants special education to focus on methods, materials and equipment
used in instruction; what students are being taught; which teachers
are providing instruction; and tasks pupils are asked to perform.
ÒResearch indicates that appropriately restrictive instructional
environments are necessary to provide the best learning outcomes for
all students,Ó he added.
	Saddened by the divisiveness the inclusion movement has
caused in special education, Kauffman hopes educators will stop
disparaging pull-out programs and see renewed value in promoting a
diversity of alternative learning environments.  ÒOur profession has
been seriously divided and weakened by the ideology of full
inclusion.  I hope those in special education can become united in a
conviction that diverse environments are necessary to meet the needs
of students.Ó
###

October 10, 1995
FOR MORE INFORMATION, Kauffman can be reached at (804) 924-0763.