RESEARCH

Annotated Bibliography/ Summaries

 
 

Effective Structures/Promising Practices Inclusion/ Implementation Issues
Restructuring for Responsible Inclusion
 Resilience Building

"Time and chance  come to us all. We can be either hesitant; or we can be courageous enough to stand up and shout.
This is my time and my place. I will accept the challenge" (Villa, 1992, p. 134).

---

Effective Structures/Promising Practices: The following section includes literature selections that illustrate structures and strategies addressing the needs of diversity and disability. The journal articles reflect true to life classroom applications. 

Cain, R. & Caine G. (1994).  Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

   In the first two sections of this work (see breadth section), the authors define  the concept of "brain-based learning", and present research based evidence on current theories in brain function. Brain-based learning is concerned  with fully understanding the ways in which the brain operates, and utilizing  this knowledge in maximizing learning potential.   Caine and Caine, encapsulate their research findings into twelve principles that emphasize the connections and patterns the brain makes, and offer implications for educational practice. The brain is seen as complex, dynamic and social in nature. It has the innate ability to search for meaning and patterns and to perceive and process parts and wholes simultaneously. The human brain's capacity to learn involves both focused attention, and peripheral perception, as well as conscious and unconscious processing; emotions evoked in the learning environment impact on learning. Memory is organized in at least two ways, one involving factual content that is easily lost and requires an inordinate amount of repetition and rehearsal, and the second involving spatial mapping and neurological connections, that facilitate recall.  Complex learning is enhanced by routine and challenge, and impeded by threat. Finally, the human brain has universal, intrinsic capacities that are organized differently in each individual and results in the"uniqueness" of mankind.    This work challenges educators to move beyond a narrow, simplistic approach to teaching and learning, towards educational practices that integrate current knowledge with effective classroom practices. The latter portion of this work,, is concerned with educational structures and applications of brain-based learning.

The authors critique current educational practices, and provide educators with practical strategies for successful implementation of basic elements reflected in brain-based schooling.  The strategies offered and clarified include creating educational environments that integrate the three pivotal elements of brain-based learning,"relaxed alertedness","orchestrated immersion", and"active processing". Factors that facilitate the implementation of brain-based schooling , as well as barriers to successful implementation, are presented. Research studies, model programs, and specific methodology that support the efficacy of brain-based schooling, are illustrated. The authors recognize the challenges inherent in educational reform, while extolling the rewards of participating in the exciting process of change.

Caine, R., N., & Caine G., Reinventing schools through brain-based learning. Educational Leadership. 52 (7) . 43-47

    In this article, the authors document a successful application  of brain-based learning at the Dry Creek Elementary School in Rio Grande California, a Chapter One School with a student constituency of  low socio-economic background, as well as many dysfunctional families. Prior to implementing brain-based learning, students at Dry Creek, demonstrated poor performance on standardized tests and there was an exceedingly high turnover rate, forty-nine percent, for the 1993-1994 school year. The authors expected academic improvement, but not until the end of the third year of the program; yet, improvement was noted from the start. The most impressive results were reported for the learning disabled population. Additionally, Dry Creek was presented with a distinguished school award at the end of the first year, to document the school's commitment to the ideas expressed in the California Elementary Task Force report.

As a first step, Dry Creek accepted the notion of an"apprentice community", as its ultimate goal. This goal entails embracing the idea that students can experience, and test the relationships and ideas that they will need in the real world, in a safe, nurturing and challenging context. This concept parallels Gardner's paradigm for MI schooling. In this type of environment, students are engaged in multiple apprenticeships to peers, teachers, and community members.   In the process of reform, the authors attempt to integrate the three elements of brain-based learning into the total school environment, the first step being a state of"relaxed alertedness". Relaxed alertedness entails combining challenge with low threat, and countering"downshifting". To this end, the authors accepted that a period of three to five years would be necessary for the reconfiguration of the Dry Creek School. As an additional step,"process groups" were conducted three times a week, for two hours each, with the purpose of reflection, input and shared experiences about brain-based learning. In addition, participation was voluntary, and ultimately almost everyone at Dry Creek participated.

    The second step involved  the element of "orchestrated immersion", where children learn not only from teachers, but also through events, ongoing activities and social interactions. The total school environment, including the physical context of the school, reflects this process. All adults in the building, including custodial staff, nurses, cafeteria workers and teaching/administrative staff, are included in the processes groups.  All members considered themselves as teachers, contributing in some way to the total learning experience of the students. The theories and principles of brain-based learning, are embedded in the daily routine of the school. All students and adults alike are immersed in daily experiences of writing, workshops and other methods of bringing their understanding of the process to bear at any point.

    The third element of brain-based schooling,"active processing", was integrated through experiences that facilitated the internalization of the theory, principles and practices, within social settings of the school. Each staff member was provided with the book,"Mindshift", which offered them a guide through the principles, and implementation of the process. The book was also a focus for the process groups, encouraging staff members to reflect on how they themselves learn and to relate those insights to teaching. A two-day retreat at the beginning of the year, provided additional opportunities for creative self direction, precise guidelines, shared practices and celebrations. Continuity was encouraged through ceremonial or formal ways of starting each meeting, a process for orderly sharing of opinions and general principles, practices and exploration of each of the principles of brain-based learning. Members also participated in a four-day workshop on brain-based   instruction, examining authentic assessment, innovative instructional methods and ways to become more creative.
All, in all, these experiences provided staff members with an opportunity for connecting with a learning community, involved in mutual caring, and an intellectually challenging climate.

    Results of this three-year process, indicate that Dry Creek is a successful learning community, immersed in the process of brain-based learning. This is reflected in an increase in positive parent interaction, redesigned classrooms that reflect a dynamic approach to learning, and a staff that has maintained its interest and commitment to the process. The most positive result, as reported by the authors, is reflected in the bonding of process groups. Staff members who barely knew each other at the start of the process, developed close relationships, after only two months of sharing this commitment to teaching and learning. Through these interactions, they began to experiment and do things in a way that looked very much like brain-based learning, from the start. Results here offer implications for educational reform. It is clear that the"dance between letting go of old beliefs and taking on a new way of thinking and perceiving is a delicate and complex process." It is a process that requires"the engagement of an entire school is in intellectual discussions that link theory to practice, applying the force of a coherent, orderly mini-society". While every school learns and develops in different ways, and customization needs to be effected, the experience at Dry Creek validates the author's notion that"the theory can and does work with average teachers and children"  (p.47)..
 

Ducharme, C. (1995). Valuing differences: The children we don't understand. Journal of Learning Disabilities 28 (9). 582-585

     In this article, the author presents a qualitative study of one young , learning disabled student in a regular education  classroom. The author's thesis reflects the opinion that the educator's responsibility towards learning disabled students is not one of labelling, diagnosing or explaining differences; rather, teachers need to respond to the unique differences in the classroom, supporting students by teaching through their strengths. This type of"responsive", differentiated instruction, requires the dual process of  listening to students, and reflecting on one's educational practices. The author chronicles the story of Nate, a first grade youngster, with an idiosyncratic learning style that may have brought him to the attention of learning specialists or teams in a classroom hall marked by traditional teaching. Nate's uniqueness is characterized by mirror reading and writing. Rather than referring Nate for an evaluation, the author responds by acknowledging Nate's personal style and directly explaining the process of writing and directionality used in the English language. She does not focus on his mistakes, but offers the knowledge that in some languages, writing is indeed accomplished from a right to left orientation. She then directs his attention to the English format, which proceeds from left to right.

    Through this patient, and sometimes labor intense process of"responsive" intervention, Nate is able to proceed through his personal journey in developing writing literacy skills; a journey that at times involves parent confrencing to establish familial patterns, and to discuss concerns and academic progress.  Due to the patient, individual attention of  Nate's teacher, he never has to experience the sometimes painful  process of referral, evaluation and classification and all the concomitant stigma.  Nate remains with his teacher over a two-year period, and when he is ready to transition to third grade, only some minor, reversals are evident. Of greater import is the fact that Nate has emerged as a confident youngster, filled with natural curiosity and intelligence that override his occasional weaknesses.

    The author, so validated by Nate's success, concludes that often children with special needs suffer from "dysteachia" rather than "dyslexia". Nate never had to suffer the humiliating experiences of early school failure because he was not  singled out or admonished for his learning differences; he was simply supported through direct individualized instruction and validated for his strengths. The author utilizes this experience of her early teaching years, and continues the responsive, individualized approach to teaching. over the course of her ten year career in the California public school system. Whenever confronted with the challenges of special needs students, rather than attempting to seek a diagnosis, or understand the nature of the disability, she responds to their unique learning needs. She shares her experiences with Tanya, another special child who represents the flip side of the Nate coin. Tanya, like Nate, had difficulties with emerging reading and writing skills.  Unfortunately for Tanya, she is placed in classrooms, where teacher's stereotypical expectations, bring her to the attention of referral teams. She twice fails to meet eligibility criteria for classification.. The quest to label Tanya persists and she is finally classified as learning disabled, on the third attempt. The saga continues and demonstrates the humiliation that some children face when dealing with the process of labelling. Tanya is recommended for pullout resource center, and her negative experiences, closely parallel those chronicled in the article entitled "Broken Promises" (Schumn, Watson and Vaughn, 1998). The humiliation she feels at having to leave the room, coupled by the inappropriateness of the material she is offered. leads to humiliation, poor self-esteem, and extreme frustration..

    These two experiences leads the author to wonder about the rightness involved in the early quest to seek answers and labels for students with learning differences. This process only serves to make Tanya  acutely aware of her shortcomings. Perhaps, she might have been spared this humiliation had she been treated like Nate, with a teacher responsive to her needs rather than focusing on her purported deficits.  The author acknowledges Howard Gardner who points to the vast variations in readiness for learning, and the uniqueness of each learner. According to Gardner, teachers need to adopt a broader view of intelligence, based on the assumption that all children have gifts and strengths that are valuable and waiting to be cultivated. From this perspective all children are viewed as smart, but in different ways.

    Many LD students, like Tanya, suffer great humiliation and the destruction of self-image due to early labelling. The author aptly states, "The energy spent in searching for causes for Tanya's difficulties did not affect her education positively; rather, she was a victim of her fist and second grade teacher's expecting less of her, failing to try to understand her, and rejecting her for her differences".  This qualitative study demonstrates the need"to protect children from a system that is founded on reductionist and reductionism learning", and the efficacy of valuing and responding to diversity rather than searching for and responding to their labels (p.585)..
 
 

Gardner, H. (1999), Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century.   New York, N.Y.: Basic Books

    Howard Gardner, in his current work, expands on his original theory of multiple intelligences by considering two candidate intelligences for inclusion into his taxonomy.  Gardner's original work, which identifies seven intelligences, is a critique of traditional intellectual assessment, with an arbitrary focus on"mathematical-linguistic" intelligence. Gardner's theory is consistent with brain-based learning, in its contention that the human brain consists of numerous intrinsic capacities that are blended differently in each individual. He identifies seven areas of competency, including,""linguistic","logical-mathematical","spatial","bodily-kinesthetic","musical","interpersonal" and"interpersonal intelligence.

    In this current work Gardner applies "naturalistic intelligence" and"existential intelligence" to his set of eight eligibility criteria, and adds naturalistic intelligence to his taxonomy. Gardner agrees, that despite current findings, our educational system continues to focus on the linguistic-mathematical model and challenges educators to act responsibly and facilitate change. Gardner, offers suggestions for global implications, as well as specific strategies for developing MI schools and MI educational strategies. Research findings that evaluate the efficacy of MI practice in forty-one schools are presented in the latter portion of this book. In this section, Gardner also addresses facilitating and inhibitory factors within the implementation of MI practice. Parallels can be drawn to recommendations offered by Caine and Caine on this topic. These discussions are particularly helpful in their broader application to educational reform.

Hanson, R. J. and Silver, H.F. (1996), Learning styles and strategies . Woodbridge, New Jersey: The Thoughtful Educational Press

    In this work, Hanson and Silver build upon the theoretical framework of Jung's psychological types, in the development of"learning style theory".  The authors consider the attitudes, functions and levels of learning, defined in Jungian theory, and derive four basic learning/teaching styles,"sensing-thinking","sensing-feeling","intuitive-thinking" and"intuitive-feeling".  The intent of the work is to offer educators a tool for self-analysis in order to facilitate a three-way match between teaching style, learning style and instructional strategies. The book includes teacher and student inventories that facilitate the identification of teaching and learning competencies, methods for developing student learning"profiles", and a  bank of instructional strategies that cut across learning styles, and allow students to learn  within their unique styles,  while developing competencies outside of their own preferences.

    Hanson and Silvers work provide both a theoretical framework, as well as a teaching/learning model of education.  The comprehensive analysis of the four basic learning/teaching styles, offer guidelines for the development of instructional models that are consistent with the ways in which students process information and demonstrate their knowledge. Implications for educational planning strongly highlight the importance of creating a balance between the student's dominant style, the teacher's learning style, the instructional materials, and the modes of presentation . Additionally, the role of attitudes and orientations are considered decision-making regarding grouping, placement and management. Finally, the need to offer each student with both the opportunity to work within his domain, as well as stretching his competencies across all domains is addressed. Educators are challenged to transform this knowledge and provide students with instructional options that allow them to access information and demonstrate knowledge.

Hearne, D. & Stone, S. (1995). Multiple intelligences and under achievement: Lessons from individuals with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities 28 (7).  439-448

    The authors of this article explore the strong evidence that traditional education fails to meet the needs of diversity."Schools today allow millions of imaginative kids to go unrecognized and let their gifts remain untapped, simply because educators focus too much attention on numbers, words....and not enough on images, pictures and metaphors."  Due to the persistence of the traditional mathematical-linguistic model, many talented youngsters end  up in LD classes or waste away in regular  classrooms. In light of our current knowledge, this is a tragedy that we can no longer afford to ignore. The author's intent here is to identify talents in students with learning disabilities and to summarize the evidence of research findings and the implications for educational application, The authors cite the provocative work of Victor and Mildred Goertzel,  in 1962,"Cradles of Eminence", where the lives of four hundred eminent twentieth century Americans are explored. The research of these authors reveals that sixty percent of these world famous individuals demonstrated a strong dislike for school, as well as serious learning problems.  Today, many of these individual would no doubt, be referred for evaluation by teams, and classified within numerous categories of disability.

    This landmark research, as well as others that have followed, offers strong implications regarding the efficacy of traditional criteria for measuring intelligence and school performance.  To compound this dilemma, the field of learning disabilities has been grounded in a deficit driven model, seeking deficits in assessment, diagnoses and interventions; talents and giftedness are rarely sought or identified within this population. This is no doubt a"reductionist' approach to learning, and there is little support that this approach has been even mildly successful in affecting the lives of students with learning disabilities. It is in fact, the failure of this model that spearheaded the educational reform, now associated with the"inclusion" movement.

    Educators in the field of learning disabilities have long identified students with incredible talents that remain untapped due to the linguistic model of education. Even success in the arts, is strongly dependent on literacy. The painful results of our failure to nurture the variations and the talents in these youngsters have been documented. The authors acknowledge the work of Gardner, and others who have begun to recognize and address this issue. Despite Gardner's work, that is nearly two decades old in origin, there is still no wide-scale plan on a national, state or even local level, for nurturing the various talents of all youngsters, especially those with special needs. The dilemma inherent in this thesis is that there are no statistics on student possibilities that are not nurtured in our schools. We cannot cite evidence of all that"may have" evolved. The authors accurately state,"If we do not believe that students have multiple ways of knowing things and demonstrating their knowledge, it is because we have not looked for evidence of it..." Studies on child prodigies suggest that the creative powers of individuals stretch well beyond the traditional classroom's ability to accommodate them.  The authors contend that since"we cannot predict the advent of geniuses in our midsts, schools should abound with opportunities for talents and genius to materialize as if the time is always right for these things to happen".

    The authors go on to  cite several studies that have been conducted in the past two decades that identify the strengths and talents of students with learning disabilities. Baum, in 1988, found that high ability LD students performed better than other students in problem solving and abstract thinking. These strengths were particularly evident when tasks were not dependent on areas of identified weakness, and when students were engaged in challenging tasks, based on their own interests. Further research findings indicate that conceptual writing, divergent thinking, computer attitude, and musical abilities are additional areas of strength and talent for LD students. In 1990, a study by Stone found that LD elementary ages students were significantly higher than their non-disabled peers in the area of humor and other forms of creativity. Despite these apparent strengths, a study by Minner, in 1990 , concludes that the majority of teachers do not refer students with disabilities for gifted programs; thus entire segments of school population are not served appropriately by challenging programs.

    Implications here once again offer strong support for developing new instructional strategies for individuals with learning differences and the host of other at risk students who fail to achieve in traditional settings. As a first step, educators must acknowledge the fact that we continue to identify strengths solely on the basis of written language.
The authors justly ask, "If music, art and divergent thinking were valued, would we not have a different group of students labelled as learning disabled?" They advocate for instructional strategies that help divergent and multiply talented learners, especially those for whom the traditional mathematical-linguistic model is problematic. They propose interdisciplinary instruction that brings diverse information to bear on single topics, as one method of addressing this dilemma. Additional approaches, include cooperative learning, which offers students the opportunity to think through curriculum in their own way and to understand one another's thoughts, processes and insights, rather than relying solely on the teacher's perspective. The emphasis here on active learning also aids those students who thrive on activity and suffer in passive, teacher directed classrooms. All of these approaches offer vast potential for the population of learners who are ignored in the traditional model.

    Alternative assessment is an additional important issue that cannot be ignored. Educators must provide students experiencing difficulty in test taking , with authentic ways of proving their knowledge, such as demonstrations, oral reports and projects. Along with the knowledge that there are multiple ways of "knowing" and"learning", we must acknowledge that there are also multiple ways of"demonstrating" knowledge. The authors conclude that educators must consider the proposition that individuals with learning disabilities may well in part be simply a group of students whose talents mismatch the primary values and expectations of our school system. Given the research findings it can be strongly suggested that a vast majority of the learning disabilities are socially and culturally determined, and based on the values structured into the requirements of a deficit driven educational system.

Hodkin, J.,Wooliscroft, C. (1997). Eric learns to read: Learning styles at work. Educational Leadership 54 (6). 43-45

     The authors here explore the thesis suggested in Hanson and Silver's work that learning is facilitated when students are given the opportunity to learn according to their individual learning styles. The authors consider various learning style models and choose the twenty-one elements of the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model. The focus of the study is on variations in design , noise, light, mobility, temperature and intake. Additional factors include the"active learning environment of the classroom, with numerous perception/learning centers providing activities for the auditory, visual, tactile-kinesthetic modes of instruction on a daily basis. The use of a computer, a listening center and a language master is also available on a regular basis. Reading strategies are varied to accommodate reading styles, and children with special needs participate in whole group instruction, and read at their developmental level, on a daily basis. After global instruction, children are given the opportunity to hear, see and become actively involved with the lesson. In this way perceptual strengths are accommodated.

    The article reflects both a qualitative study of one extremely shy third grader, Eric, with significant reading difficulty, and the whole class performance of a third grade at the Alta Vista Elementary School in Albine Texas. Eric entered the third grade  inclusive class, after attending a second grade class where was referred for attention deficit screening. Upon his transition to third grade, Eric demonstrated concomitant issues, including low self-esteem, and refusal to participate in classroom activities. Using the Carbo/Reading Styles inventory Eric was identified as having strong tactile/kinesthetic preferences, with an extreme sensitivity to light. In consideration of these factors, teachers allowed Eric to move away from his desk to complete independent practice. Eric chose to work under a large desk, reading in dim lighting and, swinging or tapping his arm and leg. This constant motion had annoyed other students and teachers in the past.   As Eric continued to work in these conditions over the year, a dramatic improvement was noted in his achievement, attitude, social maturity, and peer interactions.   The ADD evaluation was no longer indicated, and in the spring semester, Eric qualified for the gifted program. Additionally, his performance on the standardized test scores, reflected mastery of all the skills, and he received recognition for his work.

    Eric's performance demonstrates the dramatic changes the teachers at Alta Vista elementary school observed in all the students participating in this inclusive classroom, since the learning style model was implemented.  Students, in the class of twenty-two, reflected issues of second language (10), learning disabilities (4), and attention/concentration (3).  IQ's ranged from seventy-four to one twenty-six. Indicators of success within a three-year period, from 1993-1996 illustrate the efficacy of inclusive education when reading and learning styles are accommodated. In 1993, prior to starting the program, only fifty percent of the regular education students in the class passed the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TASS), and none of the special needs students passed. Once the program began all of the regular education students passed, and twenty to twenty-five percent of the special needs students passing over the next two years. Additionally, student mastery of test objectives increased from eleven percent in 1994 to sixty-seven percent in 1995, and eighty percent in 1996. Aside from academic achievement, other indicators of success included improved classroom climate, interpersonal skills, self-esteem and acceptance of diversity. Teachers felt that a real community of learners was achieved.

 Jensen, E.  (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria ,Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

     In this seminal work, Jensen supports and extends the work of Caine and Caine in the area of brain-based learning. Jensen coins the concept of "brain-compatible" learning and cites hundreds of studies conducted within the past two decades that reflect this concept.  He charges educators with the responsibility of developing expertise in the jargon, as well as the principles and theories reflected in "brain-compatible learning".  Jensen highlights the important role educators have in transforming theory into practice. He calls upon teachers to take on the task of "action research", distinguishing between "unreliable sources" and "high confidence sources".  He asks educators to transform their classrooms into living laboratories, testing the efficacy of these theories by integrating the suggested applications into existing structures and strategies. He further charges educators with the role of change agents, by sharing their findings with parents, administrators, school boards and the community at large.

    Jensen reviews research studies illustrating the brain's role in seeking meaning, as well as in activating attention and memory. He addresses the physiological structures of the brain, and the chemical factors affecting brain function. Jensen considers the issue of resistance to change, and implicates educators as  the chief culprits in this resistance due to their lack of initiative in making the changes that are so compelling in view  of current findings. No one is spared in Jensen's critique, and he brings to light the issue of "inadequate school readiness" as a contributory factor in our continued struggle to educate. Today's child, left in the hands of day care, or unreliable and less than adequate primary care providers, is less equipped than student's two decades ago, in taking on the challenges of learning.  Jensen contends that educators can choose to ignore this lack of readiness, or take on the roles of surrogate parents, and compensate for  the readiness lags reflected in today's classroom. This can be accomplished by identifying individual student needs, and by providing incoming students with appropriate readiness activities that allow the brain to adequately customize itself to the task of learning. This simple acknowledgement can make the difference between a baseline brain that is a "barren wasteland" and one that is a "rich forest" ready for learning.

    Jensen addresses the impact of environmental factors, movement, emotion, stress and threat on the process of learning. He notes the fact that prior to implementing any positive changes, the removal of negative factors, such as stress and threat, must be addressed.  Implications for educational practice are presented, and a variety of simple, practical strategies are associated with each category of brain-compatible learning explored.
Jensen, like Gardner, is passionate about his life's work, and considers the global implications of brain-based learning as extending beyond the active engagement of educators in the change process. Jensen concludes that it is the utilization of research findings in creating a better society and in dealing with cosmic, relevant issues that is the true intent of his work.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R.T., Markovchick, K., & Putnam, J. (1996). Cooperative learning and peer acceptance of students with learning disabilities. Journal of Social Psychology, 136 (6). 741-752

     At the heart of inclusion is the assumption that placement of special education students in regular education classrooms, for the majority of the school day, results in positive academic and social gains; however, a review of the literature suggests that such placement, within the context of traditional educational structures, offers little or no positive impact on both special education and regular education outcomes. The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy of the cooperative learning structure as a facilitator of inclusionary education. The specific positive outcome investigated relates to student perceptions as determined by regular education student's acceptance of special education students over an eight month period.  Additional considerations addressed, include the perception of special education students regarding peer acceptance, positive educational outcomes, as well as facilitating factors that can be identified as a result of this investigation

    The study included four hundred and seventeen regular education students and forty-one special needs students in grades five through eight in two schools in Maine. The variable conditions included competitive and cooperative teaching models used by the same teachers, and the competitive teaching model used by a random selection of teachers. Both regular and special education students were interviewed in October and in May to determine how they rated their peers as desirable work partners. The purpose of this study was to extend previous studies in this area, which failed to validate the notion that inclusion serves to facilitate positive peer interactions between regular and  special needs students. Questions left uncertain by previous studies include, the determination that interactions in fact take place, and whether these interactions are positive in nature. The risk of these interactions, and the resulting negative outcomes can include prejudice, stereotyping, rejection, hostility, teasing, and destructive forms of conflict. Positive outcomes can include friendship, caring, support and acceptance.

    The authors cite research that indicate that cooperative learning has been studied exhaustively, and has been suggested as the most promising method for encouraging positive interactions between learning disabled and non-learning disabled groups of students.   The authors here contend that previous studies fail to address three critical areas, including the stability of the students' perceptions, the impact of varying instructional methods as facilitators of this positive interaction, and the possibility of a decrease in positive interactions over the course of the year. The intent of this study is to determine if impressions formed in October persisted over the year, if using cooperative learning strategies over more traditional strategies improved acceptance, and if continued participation in this program served to facilitate greater acceptance. The traditional strategies included lecture format, whole class instruction, group work, individual work and periodic tests.  Assignments were always completed individually. The same teachers who taught the cooperative groups taught the classes in the first competitive group, and the classes were matched for grade level and subject matter.

    Results of the study offer strong support for the general notion that positive results of the inclusionary process are far stronger when implemented within the context of structural and strategic changes. Findings validate the author's original assumptions that regular education student's perception of their special education peers would become increasingly positive over the course of a school year.  Results also support the presuppositions that regular education student's perceptions of their peers do change over the course of a school year, and that these perceptions apply to their special education peers.  These finding were not supported in the traditional, competitive conditions. In the traditional classes, regular education students' perceptions remained static throughout the year.

    Implications here suggest that when traditional approaches are maintained, special education students are viewed in a stereotypical fashion, and that and this may present a major barrier to the successful implementation of inclusion. A further result suggests that the special education students, are viewed by their regular education peers, as undesirable work partners, and this perception remains static, as is indicated in interviews in October and May. These findings are consistent with views of regular education students with regard to their regular education peers, which remain fixed as well. Thus, perceptions remained rigid in the traditional classrooms for both populations and initial rejection does not improve. Implications for self-esteem are strong. The notion that instructional models used in the classroom impact on positive outcomes is confirmed in this study. Although cooperative learning does not guarantee that their peers will value all special education students, it does suggest that a higher degree of acceptance is likely to occur within the cooperative model.  Furthermore, when implemented within the context of cooperative learning, inclusion tends to facilitate positive relationships between regular education and special education students. The authors conclude that cooperative learning may be a necessary component of inclusion.

    Despite these findings, the authors accurately note that student and teacher reactions to inclusion has received scant research attention and that many special education students are anxious about working with non handicapped peers. This is due in large part to the fact that their limitations are exposed on a daily basis within these settings. This study suggests that when instructional models facilitate long-term student-to-student interactions, negative myths and stereotypical perceptions are likely to be invalidated, thus allowing special education students to be viewed as valuable working partners. Special education students, as well, appear to enjoy these interactions and view their regular education peers as helpful in the learning process, and as good friends. The inclusion process is also viewed as an opportunity for improvement in classroom behaviors, with special education students motivated and able to learn though peer modeling from their socially more effective peers.

Kornhaber, M.L. (1999). Multiple intelligence theory in practice. In J. H. Block, S.T. Everson & T.R. Guske, In Comprehensive school reform: A program perspective, (pp.179-191).

    In this chapter within a textbook on school reform, Mindy Korhaber, a researcher at Harvard University involved in Project Sumit (Schools Using Multiple Intelligence Theory), documents her research on applications of multiple intelligence theory.  Kornhaber is admittedly intrigued by the fact that educators throughout the world, have readily engaged in the process of implementing MI theory. MI theory is not specifically designed for the purposes of educational reform, lacking the traditional components of organization, structure, and curriculum design and implementation strategies, fundamental to the process of educational change.  Kornhaber refers to Project Zero, a "research and development group" spearheaded by Howard Gardner for the last three decades, and indicates that no member of this staff is involved in the implementation of MI theory.

     Kornhaber first addresses the issue of MI theory in relation to educational reform; secondly, she considers the practices used to implement MI theory and the efficacy of these practices as characterized by positive outcomes.  Korhaber presents two studies, utilizing interview and observation data.  The first study, conducted in 1994, involves educators from two elementary schools and one middle school.  The second study, conducted in 1995, utilizes a more heterogeneous population, interviewing approximately ninety educators from eleven schools, primarily involving the public elementary school system, within urban, suburban, and rural communities. All of the teachers involved in the study utilized MI practices for at least two years, and no stress factors could be identified with the schools. Information gathered from the two studies offer implications that can be globally applied to the process of educational reform.

    Findings here suggest that educators who perceive that the philosophy and principles of MI theory, are consistent with existing philosophies readily adopt MI theory.  Practices considered in line with MI thinking include "constructivism" and "holistic" approaches. Additionally, for these teachers, MI theory encompasses and validates thinking and practices that are familiar to these teachers, that address and respect diversity, and that offer a variety of approaches for students to access the curriculum and express knowledge.  In general, teachers who successfully apply MI theory, believe that this approach offers a systematic, organizational framework, providing structure for content, activities, materials and assessment measures utilized. Furthermore, Mi theory, by providing this structure, enables teachers to identify gaps in educational practice and allows them to seek strategies for improvement.  Finally, MI theory, by providing a common vocabulary, facilitates the process of communication among teachers, administrators and parents. MI theory offers teachers and parents a tool for understanding their youngsters well beyond the profiles offered in traditional standardized measures.

    In addition to considering the question of successful implementation and changes in educational practice, Kornhaber's studies also address the impact of MI theory on specific outcomes. Results indicate that MI theory has a dramatic impact on educational practice. Many of the traditional schools involved in the study, moved from singular, text book, curriculum driven approaches, to programs that embrace initiatives such as interdisciplinary and project based curriculum, and alternative modes of assessment. Further analysis reveals that the degree of change, is dependent upon the extent to which the staff is already engaged in educational practice that addresses diversity. Extension and integration of existing practices, occurs far more frequently than outright change in practice. In addition to examining the issue of MI theory as a catalyst for educational reform, Kornhaber also studied its impact on specific outcomes. While the majority of reported results, obtained through interviews with students, parents, administrators and teachers, indicate improvement in student achievement, a number of reports suggest that MI theory undermines teaching and learning. The disparity of practice also accounts for the disparity in results. Since MI theory does not offer specific strategies for implementation, the success of the program depends strongly on staff interpretation and application of theoretical constructs.

    Kornhaber refers to the development of project SUMIT (Schools Using MI Theory) with the intent of providing support to educators in ways that more systematically support student learning. Project SUMIT is designed to investigate and identify educational practices that can be directly associated with positive outcomes. Data gathered is from forty-one schools practicing MI theory over a three-year period, and includes site visitations, interview reports, and supplemented documentation of assessment, curriculum, and student work.
Results of this investigation, which are encouraging, indicate that four fifths of the schools report improvement in achievement scores and student discipline, with approximately half of those schools attributing the success to MI practice. Eighty percent of the schools indicate improvement in parent participation, with sixty percent of those results attributed to MI practice. Finally, the most dramatic result relates to MI applications for special education students. Eighty percent of the schools report improvements among students with learning disabilities. There are no specific practices limited to LD students. Rather, practices serving the greater majority of the students, reflecting MI theory, are applied to the special needs population. Implications for inclusive practices are strong.

    The research conducted by project SUMIT over the course of the three-year investigation also reveals six basic practices that are central to schools associated with successful implementation of MI practice.  These practices, coined "Compass Point Practices", offer global implications for educational reform. Kornhaber presents a detailed description of each compass point. In summary, schools associated with successful MI implementation reflect a "culture" that addresses diversity, inculcates a strong work ethic in all staff, and provides the necessary readiness steps crucial to successful implementation of educational initiatives.  Additionally, success is also associated with schools whose existing philosophies and practices are consistent with MI theory, as well as the provision of opportunities for on site visitations and "collaboration" among peers. Successful outcomes are also associated with the use of MI theory as a "tool" for fostering "high quality work" and offering a balance of "student choice with meaningful curriculum and assessment options." Finally, schools achieving success with this initiative reflect a significant infusion of the"arts" within the curriculum and  the total school community.

      SUMIT findings support Gardener's belief that MI theory simply reflects educational practice at its best.  The six compass points, which indicate that success is dependent on collaboration, respect for diversity, high expectations and hard work, are far from unusual. They can easily be utilized as a tool for reflection, for the identification of individual school needs, and as a starting point for staff development. The SUMIT project, headed by Mindy Korhnhaber, is currently involved in the development of a handbook of detailed curriculum that highlight how the compass points can be integrated into educational systems.

 Mahony, M. (1997), Small Victories in an inclusive classroom. Educational Leadership. 54 (7).59-62

     This article once again highlights the need for differentiated instruction, using a variety of approaches, including cooperative learning and responsive teaching strategies. The author, an English teacher at Hastings High School, chronicles his experiences in the 93-94 school year, with twenty students in an inclusive High School English class. The class was co-taught by a Special Education teacher, using the collaborative model. Three students with severe learning, social/emotional and attentional difficulties, among other special needs and regular education students, are illustrated. Significant weaknesses in social skills are considered the greatest impediments in this inclusion process. Using a combination of customized instruction and group interactions, strong improvement in academic as well as intra and interpersonal skills are noted. Specific gains include the ability to comprehend and analyze literature, greater fluidity in legibility and overall expressive writing skills, student attitude, motivation, and participation.
 This study once again highlights the crucial role of differentiated instruction and assessment within the inclusive classroom.

    The"responsive" teaching approach , which focuses on the identification of  individual strengths, and building upon those strengths through direct teacher instruction, as well as opportunities for peer interactions, is far more effective than the deficit model of traditional special education. Within this paradigm, individual talents and competencies are celebrated and each child is given the opportunity to "show off" what he can do.  Success  here serves to empower students with the ability to achieve a greater comfort level and acceptance of weaknesses. An additional facilitating factor in this program includes alternative assessment models. In a heterogeneous class, success cannot be measured in the same way for all children. Teachers need to consider a continuum, and success is measured by progress within that continuum. Narrative evaluations, conferencing, self-evaluations and authentic assessment are additional approaches that are utilized within the evaluation model. The opportunity for shared expertise, greater flexibility and increased teacher-student contact, with all students as beneficiaries, are additional positive outcomes noted by the teachers using  this approach. At the end of the year, all students with the exception of one, "could boast of success". Teachers credited the program with increased self-knowledge and a fuller understanding of all students, particularly those with special needs.

Merrefield, G. E. (1997). Three Billy Goats and Gardner. Edcational Leardership,55 . 58-61

     In this article, a collaborative team, consisting of a speech pathologist, and a special education teacher, illustrate successful application of  MI theory in a pre-school setting with language and learning disabled youngsters. The qualitative study was conducted at the First Forward Program, operated by the Jewish Community Center of Staten Island. Students range from two and half to five years of age, with a diverse range of speech, language, attention, sensory-integration, and motor and social/emotional issues. A non- traditional approach is used which involves activity-based learning. Students are given tasks that indirectly address their language skills, while focusing on their identified strengths and intelligences. In application of MI theory, students are also encouraged to work through all the intelligences, and thereby develop numerous competencies.

    The study involved twelve, four and five year olds in Ms. Merrefield's 1994-1995 caseload. Students were gradually introduced to a less traditional, collaborative approach to skills development, based on Howard Gardner's multiple intelligence theory. For example, action words were taught through making mud out of potting soil, and spatial concepts were introduced by moving through, in and out of a hoola hoop.
The essential question framing this study was, "Could the collaborative team (teacher and speech pathologist) improve the educational outcomes for their pre-school students by structuring language lessons around multiple intelligence theory?"   A literature review conducted by the teachers yielded little application of this process and so the team went about seeking the answer through action research. The first step in the process involved the decision to de-emphasize language, the identified weakness, and to teach "to" and "through" the student's more evident intelligences. While linguistic intelligence was not ignored, the team vowed never to present any concept solely in linguistic terms.

    Through MI theory, the team integrated many content areas around a single topic. For example, a unit on patterns was introduced involving contrasting colors, music, outdoor equipment, song and arts and crafts. In this way activities engaged musical, bodily-kinesthetic, linguistic, logical-mathematical, as well as intra and interpersonal intelligences. The next theme was more complex, involving measurement. To teach the concepts of "small", "medium", and "large", the fairy tale, "The Three Billy Goats Gruff" was used. The team wrote lyrics to support the narrative, and put the words to music, using a tune familiar to the students. In the introductory portion of the unit, magnetic figures were used to support the "linguistic" concepts, along with vocal variations to illustrate varying size concepts (musical). As each unit progressed, various intelligences were used to support the linguistic concepts, including crawling across a balance beam bridge (spatial, bodily-kinesthetic), making and eating different types of grass (interpersonal, spatial), making papier-mâché figures (spatial, bodily-kinesthetic) and working in small groups (interpersonal) in role playing , art projects and song (musical). The unit culminated with the acting out of the story once more using the completed figures. The presentation was videotaped and the artwork was displayed in case at the community center. It is important to note that all of these projects involved the development of language skills along with the expression of the various intelligences.

    At the completion of the unit the team found evidence of improvement in the children's ability to transfer content learning to novel situations and to communicate about critical elements of an event. Language was an area where students made the greatest strides; but improvement was noted in attention, group interaction and self-esteem, which the team attributed to the application of linguistic, interpersonal and intra personal intelligences to support concepts taught. Assessment results indicated that students also demonstrated a more solid grasp of basic concepts, with the lower functioning students now able to describe the location of objects and the higher function students able to use size vocabulary, transfer concepts to new vocabulary and transfer the information to learning their middle names. The most dramatic result involved the uniformly enthusiastic interest in learning and singing the "Billy Goats Gruff" song. Even a student who could only speak in three word phrases was now able to perform the entire song for the class without assistance. Other students were now able to more spontaneously use pronouns and contractions, and auditory memory skills were much improved. An additional gain was noted in stronger intra and interpersonal skills as a result of the role-playing component of the unit. Each child was also able to derive some meaning from the story, and could transfer at least one skill to another area of learning. An informal observation indicated that musical and bodily kinesthetic activities most strongly facilitated the development of language skills. The authors conclude that Gardner's approach simply reflects good teaching and that by demonstrating its efficacy with special needs students, the least capable learners, and its universal application to all learners is apparent.

Moody, S.W., Schumn, J.S. Vaughn, S. (1998). Broken promises: Reading instruction in the resource room. Journal of Exceptional Children, 64. 211-225

      This article deals with application of differentiated instructional strategies for reading instruction and grouping within a pull-out, resource center for learning disabled students. The rationale for maintaining students within a pull-out program, in the face of overwhelming evidence for the greater efficacy of inclusive settings, has been the specialized treatment they would receive in that setting. This study involved fourteen special education teachers, within thirteen schools over the course of a school year. Observations and teacher interviews were used to determine results. The study hoped to find evidence to support the hypothesis that a greater incidence of individualized instruction, or small group work, existed within the pull-out model, and that differentiated strategies would be employed. Findings would be compared with comparable studies conducted by these and other researchers (1996, 1997), which demonstrated little evidence of differentiated instruction or grouping in the twenty-nine third grade teachers observed. Teachers in the mainstream classes, that included at least one learning disabled student, indicated that they provided primarily whole group, undifferentiated instruction, even for students who had little or no reading skills. Overall students made less than one year progress, and students with special needs, made little or no gains.

    Conclusions of these and others studies suggest that learning disabled students made unacceptable progress in reading instruction in full-time special education placement. Findings from three indicators including teacher's interviews, comments, and observational records from the Classroom Climate Scale, were reviewed independently and summarized. Results were noted with regard to grouping practices, individualized instruction, overall approach to reading, and the teaching of word recognition, decoding and comprehension skills. Results were disappointing at all levels. In the light of educational reforms in both general and special education, the expectations that special education, resource room teachers would provide differentiated instruction, was not supported. The expectation that a range of grouping practices would be implemented, including individual one-on-one instruction, small group instruction, paired learning, and less frequently whole group instruction, was refuted. Furthermore, the expectation that within a small group, replacement program,, students would be reading instructional materials at their developmental levels, using strategies prescribed in IEPs, was  invalidated as well.

    Overall, the interview and observation results of the special education teachers were remarkably similar to the regular education teachers. Even within the pull-out model, teachers implemented primarily whole-group instruction, using the same materials for all students, and providing little differentiated instruction. Students in the resource room did not receive an individualized reading program, nor were they provided with reading materials that corresponded with their instructional level.  When questioned about these practices, rationales included large class sizes, ranging from 5-19 students, lack of professional readiness for differentiated instruction, and stigma associated with differentiated materials. Additionally, teacher beliefs regarding the efficacy of specialized materials and strategies, as well as commitment to the whole language approach, at the exclusion of all competing approaches, contributed to these practices.

    The authors conclude that these findings "reveal a series of broken promises", including the promise to students and parents that the students would receive a specialized program as mandated in the student's IEP, the promise of small group instructional settings, and the promise that special education teachers would have the time and resources to provide an appropriate education to students with learning disabilities. Implications here suggest that there is little that is special about special education, when specific programs, strategies and materials are not differentiated to meet the varying needs of learning disabled students.  Finally, pulling students out of the mainstream, with the inherent negative implications for self-esteem, and the loss of the positive effects of inclusion, requires strong positive components to override these negative effects. Failure to make good on the aforementioned promises, speaks to the need for educational reform in both the special education and regular education settings.

Snyder, Rebecca Finley (2000). The relationship between learning Styles/multiple intelligences and academic achievement in high school students. High School Journal, 83(2). 11-20

    The strong high school drop out rate in our country suggests that the traditional "chalk and talk" model of teaching has not been successful for all students. The author of this study notes that over the past two decades, cognitive and educational psychologists have conducted research in the areas of multiple intelligences and learning styles as alternative models.  The implications of this research have provided educators with additional insights into how to work with the diverse population of learners. The authors cite Silver, Strong ,Perini and Guild (1997) with stating that integrating the two theories allow teachers to implement strategies that benefit all students. "Teachers that are concerned with learning styles and multiple intelligences bring an approach and attitude to their teaching of focusing on how students learn and the unique quality of all students" (p.30). Instruments that enable teachers to identify student learning styles, have facilitated implementation of these strategies in the classroom and have enabled researchers to study academic implications; however, the authors find that most of these instruments are time consuming, difficult to score and not practical for classroom use.

    The first intent of this study was to construct an instrument that would provide classroom teachers with a concise, time efficient tool for determining more about learning styles and multiple intelligences. Using this instrument, students were asked questions to determine how they perceived themselves as Auditory, Visual, Tactile/Kinesthetic, Analytical or Global Learners. Additional learning preferences, such as "motivated by self or others"," works by self or with others"," prefers formal, informal, quiet or noisy settings", were considered as well. The students were also questioned regarding self-perceptions in the areas of persistence, accountability, and the degree of structure they required in the learning situation. Additionally, the instrument measured intellectual competencies in the eight intelligences designated by Gardner (1999). The validity of this instrument was compared with previous measures.  The authors then made use of this data, along with academic results based on standardized test scores (Metropolitan Achievement Test, Basic Skill Assessment Test) and grade point averages to analyze the relationships between learning styles, multiple intelligences and academic achievement. The student population examined in this study, included a random sample of students enrolled in ten section of United States History at a high school whose student body was similar to the country at large. Seven university mathematics/secondary education majors participated in administering the instrument. The investigation was concerned only with existing conditions, and no interventions were considered. Correlations therefore considered only the relationship between learning styles, multiple intelligences and academic achievement.

    Results of the study indicated that when comparing student Grade Point Averages with learning style and multiple intelligence indicators, some positive correlations were noted. Positive correlations were seen between GPA's and the categories of persistence, visual learning styles, self-motivation, responsibility and preferences for working alone and with sound. For the male students, positive relationships were noted between GPA's and the categories of spatial, visual, logical and self-motivated, and the preference for working alone. A negative relationship was indicated between GPA's and preferences for working with others and with sound. For the female students, there was a positive correlation between GPA's and the categories of global and tactile/kinesthetic learning styles, and bodily/kinesthetic intelligence. Overall, stronger GPA's tended to correlate positively with students who were self-motivated, persistent and liked to work alone.

    When observing correlations between standardized test scores and instrument categories, additional correlations were indicated as well. Stronger MAT total scores were associated with the categories of logical and linguistic intelligences, and visual learning styles. Negative correlations were indicated between MAT scores and the preferences for structure and the analytical learning style. For reading, there was a positive correlation between linguistic intelligence and the visual learning style, and a negative correlation between MAT scores and the preference for structure. For math, there was a positive correlation between scores and the logical intelligence and a negative correlation between scores and the category of preferring structure. For the BSAP reading scores a positive correlation was noted between linguistic intelligences and the preference for working alone. A negative correlation was seen between scores and the preference for working with other students and the preference for structure. For the BSAP math tests a positive correlation existed between mathematical intelligence and a negative correlation was indicated in comparison with musical intelligence. The correlations between reading scores and linguistic intelligence, and math scores and mathematical intelligence, were expected.

    An unusual, but interesting result, was the fact that for the most part, successful students did not perceive themselves as dependent on direct instruction and outside structures for learning. Thus, independence in thinking and learning appears to correlate with success on achievement test scores. Results here offer some suggestions of dependency among learning styles and achievement. As would be expected, success was associated with the characteristics of persistence and responsibility as learners. Interestingly, the GPA's and standardized test scores were independent of learning styles. The observation of learning styles independent of achievement indicates that sixty-four percent of the students were global learners, and that eighteen percent were kinesthetic learners. The conclusion here is that the majority of high school students are tactile/kinesthetic, learning best by actually doing things in the class rather than just listening to lectures or watching.  Consistent with Learning Style and Multiple Intelligence theory, they need to be actively involved in the construction of knowledge about the subject they are learning. Additionally, since the majority of students are global learners, they learn best by seeing the whole picture of what they are trying to learn.

    Gender differences noted in this study include, strengths in intra personal, inter-personal, linguistic, musical, and visual intellectual preferences, and learning style preferences for women. Bodily/kinesthetic, logical, and spatial preferences are indicated for men. Additionally, women prefer working alone, while men prefer the peer-to-peer interactions reflected in group work. The authors successfully met the first intent of this study by providing teachers, with what appears to be an efficient instrument for measuring student learning and intellectual preferences. The second intent, which was the identification of relationships between learning styles, intellectual preferences and achievement, indicated weaker associations than were expected. The most obvious and strongest result is that high school students are primarily tactile-kinesthetic and global learners. In light of our basically traditional mode of instruction at the secondary level, this is an important finding, which supports research evidence in brain-compatible learning (Jensen, 1999). Consideration of these results needs to be addressed in our moves towards educational reform.

Tomlinson, C. A. , (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners . Alexandria, Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development

    Carol Ann Tomlinson, in her work on "Differentiated Instruction", addresses the notion that the traditional, "one size fits all" model of education is inconsistent with current educational theory and research, particularly knowledge gained in the area of brain-based learning.  This book includes a sound theoretical framework, derived principles, and a wealth of instructional models and educational strategies that address diversity. Differentiated instruction deals with differences in cognitive readiness, motivation, interest, intellectual preference and learning style. Differentiation is applied at all levels of learning (factual knowledge, concepts, principles, and theories), and addresses all areas of the curriculum (content, skills, process and product/assessment).  Educators are challenged to address diversity by using methodology and educational techniques that are varied, and allow students to access information and express knowledge in ways that are consistent with individual preferences and capabilities. Differentiated instruction is similar in concept to Gardner's "individually configured education" and is an umbrella term that integrates current knowledge and encompasses the theoretical constructs developed in the breadth section of this work.    Differentiated Instruction, as presented in this work, offers strong implications for educational reform, particularly in addressing the issue of diversity.
 

Villa, W. (1997). In Australia: Multiple intelligences in multiple settings.  Educational Leadership, 55. 65-69

     In this article, Wilma Villa demonstrates how the successful application of MI theory has revolutionized teaching in Australia, particularly among pre-school, primary school and special education settings. Schools such as the Cook Primary School in Canberra, and the Sacred Heart Catholic School in Cabramatta are cited to illustrate the successful implementation of MI theory. Prior to adopting MI practice both schools were strongly at risk due to low enrolment figures and school populations primarily consisting of low socio-economic and non-English speaking students. After five years of implementing Gardner's multiple intelligence practices, school enrolment increased dramatically, along with achievement scores and a high demand for placement in these schools. An additional positive effect involved changes in the parent-school relationship, with parents being given a more active voice. Parents at both schools are frequently invited in to share expertise with students and teachers, to express their observations of student development, and to participate in celebrations of student work and intelligences.  Communication is facilitated through a regular newsletter. Parents have also been involved in redesigning assessment procedures to include a greater emphasis on authentic assessment.

    These two schools reflect the influence that MI theory has had on a wide range of educational settings in Australia. Teaching approaches based on multiple intelligences have been implemented from pre-school through the university levels. In addition to its application in regular education settings, MI theory has also revolutionized special education practices in Australia, as well. Past practices in special education focused on the deficit model; yet, the MI approach has allowed teachers to acknowledge that individual strengths can coexist with learning disabilities.  MI theory has also positively influenced gifted education by broadening views of giftedness and by leading teachers to more frequently identify giftedness in students from disadvantaged or learning disabled groups. On a more global level, the most significant change noted as result of MI practice is seen in the shift from teacher centered to student centered teaching and learning. Through the use of MI theory, a more dynamic model has replaced the linear process of learning from teacher to student through cycles of planning, implementing, and evaluating. Using MI theory, teachers and students are mutually involved in planning, implementing, observing, and reflecting on their mutual work.

    To address the question of how MI theory is implemented, 150 teachers were interviewed within thirty schools across the country. Two basic approaches were identified, which included "teaching to" and "teaching through" multiple intelligences. The best teachers were identified as utilizing a combination of both approaches. When teaching to intelligences the teacher recognizes her obligation to develop each child's skills in each intelligence area. Contrastingly, when teaching through the intelligence the intellectual domain is used to promote skill development in a different domain. Thus, students can learn to play an instrument, or they can use a musical activity to facilitate the memorization of math facts. The use of integrated units, was found to be the most successful method for integrating MI theory in the classroom. This approach appears to offer a broad range of classroom activities while promoting connectedness across disciplines, which make learning more meaningful. Learning centers, based on different intelligences, is another method that this study successfully identifies as an approach that serves to facilitate the implementation of  MI practice. These centers range from special interest areas that are changed often to supplement regular teaching activities, to more permanent structures that a number of classes share. Students are encouraged to share the responsibility of designing and maintaining the materials and activities for the learning centers.

    This exhaustive study, reflecting the successful application of MI theory on national basis in Australia, offers strong support for the efficacy of this program when applied appropriately. It confirms that while good teachers have always recognized the differences among their students and nurtured this diversity, MI practice provides a framework that empowers them to identify strengths and learning styles, and to develop a full range of intelligences. Teacher comments also support findings in Kornhaber's study that a major of strength of MI theory lies in its compatibility with other educational philosophies and innovations that teachers are expected to embrace.
 

Inclusion/Implementation Issues: The following section includes literature selections and journal articles that deal with inclusion practices within today's schools. The selections highlight implementation issues, as well as barriers and facilitators of successful implementation.

Conderman, G. (Winter, 1998). How are we practicing inclusion? Kappa Delta Pi Record: An International Honor Society in Education Vol. 34 (2) 52-55

    Gregory Colderman, Associate Professor of Special Education at the University of Wisconsin, in his article on the implementation of inclusion in today's schools, addresses the pitfalls of inclusion when practiced in an irresponsible manner. Conderman provides the reader with numerous true-to life scenarios that support the idea that poor implementation practices "contaminate a potentially powerful tool" of educating the special needs youngster. Conderman identifies specific variables that are associated with irresponsible practice, that serve to undermine the disabled student's progress in school and later in life. An area of great concern lies in the inconsistency of implementation practices. According to Conderman, this variation results primarily from the fact that "inclusion means different things to different people who wish different things from it". Differing philosophies, attitudes, and perspectives, and the ambiguity surrounding the interpretation of special education law, add to the confusion associated with the implementation process. On the one hand, some political groups view inclusion from a civil rights perspective, charging society with the moral obligation of providing special needs students with an education within the regular education setting. Conversely, other groups believe that" advocates of full inclusion have mistakenly pursued equal treatment instead of equal opportunity and that inclusion may actually deny the rights of children with disabilities to alternative placements".

    Conderman points out that even professional organizations differ in their perspectives on inclusion. Thus, for example, The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, and the Association of Retarded Citizens, support full- inclusion, while the Learning Disabilities Association of America, The Council for Exceptional Children, and The Council for Children with Behavioral Disorders, do not uphold the notion of a "one-option" service delivery model. Conderman, as Pitasky, considers the import of such landmark judicial decisions as Oberti v. Board of Education of the Borough of Clementine and Mavis ex rel. Mavis v. Sobol on the rise in popular opinion regarding inclusion. The ruling in these cases demonstrate that "inclusive education offers substantial benefits to all students and communities, that inclusion is a right, not a privilege, and that success in a separate setting does not negate successful functioning in an integrated setting". Furthermore, the judicial decisions in these cases rule that"school districts must demonstrate that a student cannot be satisfactorily educated in a general education classroom with appropriate supplementary aids and services before that student is removed to a more restrictive setting.

    Conderman also points to the flip side of the inclusion coin, noting the critique that special needs students most often require specialized services from specifically trained teachers, that extend beyond the capabilities of regular education teachers. Furthermore, inclusion mandates, and teacher competency, do not insure a positive attitude towards special needs students. In fact, inclusion, practiced to its fullest extent may actually limit the options available to the special needs student, by eliminating the cascade of services that is an integral component of IDEA. Critics also note the lack of empirical support for this model of education. Conderman cautions the reader stating that assumptions about inclusion that do not always stand up to close scrutiny. For example, the notion that integration facilitates acceptance, is found to be erroneous in studies such as those conducted by Matter and Roberts (1995). Citing the findings of these studies, Colderman, notes the lack of social acceptance of special needs students by their regular education peers and their rejection by teachers who are threatened by the burden of individualization or the lack of support. It is thus apparent that inclusion must be responsibly and discriminately applied. The goal of educating special needs students should never veer far from the standard of providing an appropriate and challenging program geared to the needs and capabilities of  each youngster.

    With this goal in mind, Conderman offers the practitioner five principles that are intended to serve as guidelines for responsible inclusion. The most important of these guidelines is maintaining the commitment that placement  decisions are always based on individual needs rather than existing programs, district preferences and funding.  Additionally, responsible inclusion practices always reflect adequate planning, preparation, and support for students in regular education placements and during transitional stages, a high level of accountability, protection of parental rights, and provisions of a rigorous, challenging curriculum. Conderman strongly believes that adherence to these guidelines fosters responsible inclusion practices that enable all children to grow intellectually, as well as socially. The author fully agrees with Conderman's thesis regarding responsible versus irresponsible inclusion practices. The educational community must take full ownership of this effective tool for the actualization of special education goals set forth in IDEA and Goals: 2000. Inclusion , at its finest, fosters the respect for diversity that is the foundation for community building, and  for the development of collaborative partnerships with teacher and parents, while also fulfilling the legal mandates of special education law. Most importantly, responsible inclusion, facilitated through these guidelines, may go a long way in meeting the challenges, and preventing the pitfalls of inclusion noted in this article.

Cooper, M., J. & Ringlaben, R. (1998) Caring as an essential element of inclusion. Kappa Delta Pi Record: An international honor society in education. Vol. 54 (2). 56-59

    The contributors in this article , address the issue of the preparation of regular education students for the process of inclusion. Cooper and Ringlaben, professors in the department of pedagogy at Lamar University, as Conderman, note the continued controversy and pitfalls surrounding the implementation process. Acknowledging that if practiced responsibly, inclusion can benefit both the regular education and special education population, they suggest that an over emphasis has been placed on the preparation of the special education population for an environment of inclusion to the neglect of the second segment of this population. The authors suggest a review of current best practices in this area, as a tool for modelling effective application, and highlight one such program in Southeast Texas.

    Jeremy, a severely autistic youngster, began his educational experience in a self-contained program, with brief outings through the cafeteria and down the hallway that allowed him minimal interaction with his non-disabled peers. Within this context, Jeremy was viewed as"different", a"threat" to the safety of the other students, and remained distanced from their "personal concerns". They wondered at his lack of communicative ability, and were put off by his strange behaviors. Jeremy's parents faced the proposal for including Jeremy in the social studies program at the start of his fourth grade year, with mixed feelings of joy and trepidation, and this fear was reinforced by the reticence with which the school principal approached this process. Furthermore they hoped that Jeremy's increased exposure to the mainstream and the opportunity for more appropriate imitative learning would  reduce his autistic symptomotology and would allow him to become" more responsive and obedient". The long-range goal for this journey would be to achieve sustained results with the hope that Jeremy would some day be more like his mainstream classmates. In order to facilitate this process, a five week plan was developed to prepare the social studies class for Jeremy's inclusion with the hope of" opening the minds and the hearts of the other twenty-two students in the class". The program developer felt strongly that a cursory focus on the students without disabilities would be detrimental, and that they needed a comprehensive program that placed primary emphasis on the sensitivity and understanding they would need in order to meet the challenges of inclusion. While there was no immediate objective of developing caring behaviors, the developer felt that by engaging the youngsters in activities that would promote the personal levels of caring and role taking, their skills for including disabled students would automatically increase.

    The initial goal in this process was the preparation of the class by sensitizing the students to becoming more caring and nurturing.  A by-product of this caring would be the successful inclusion of Jeremy. The authors illustrate numerous"caring" promoting activities such as"The Making of a Hero","Puncturing Negative Peer Pressure","Children's Need to Belong","Good Ideas and Bad Deeds", and the"Introduction of a New Friend", that were included in this program. The specific target goals of these activities were to teach students to develop the perception that those who care are heroes, to overcome the temptation to refuse caring because of peer pressure, to develop sensitivity for the need of students to belong and feel part of a group, to discriminate between good and bad deeds demonstrated towards their classmates, and to familiarize the students with Jeremy". The authors note that following this five week program, Jeremy who had been virtually isolated from the school population, became an integral part of the student body in the fourth grade social studies class. As an additional benefit, a ripple affect was achieved as more students outside of the social studies class expressed ease with Jeremy. The initial reticence, fear and trepidation was transformed into feelings of"excitement" and"pride", and most importantly, students began to take pride in Jeremy's improved chances for the future, as well as their own ability to"to care like true heroes".     The success of this program led to its expansion in the following year, and to the genuine excitement about the prospect of developing many more heroes in the following year.

Crockett, J. B. & Kaufman, James. M. Taking Inclusion Back to its roots. Educational Leadership. 56 (2). Pp. 74-78).

     This article describes the dilemma associated with the multiple interpretations of inclusion. As Conderman notes in an earlier article, the variation in services is rooted in the ambiguity of its interpretation. Since inclusion means different things to different individuals, implementation will vary as well.  Controversy in the field of special education since the re-authorization of IDEA (1990) has not been"how special education students should be taught, but where?" Crockett notes that while inclusion as a political concept,"captures the moral high ground by signifying something more desirable than the symbolically bereft notion of exclusion", as a legal concept it falls short of the true intent of IDEA. From an educational perspective it fails to"describe concretely the instructional supports and strategies that facilitate the relationship between a student's specific learning needs and the classroom elements required to address those needs".The variation in the implementation and practice of inclusion has been a source of frustration for parents, educators and students.

    Interpretations and implementation practices vary along the continuum and range from the full inclusion of all students with disabilities all of the time, to placement in the mainstream on a part-time basis. to consideration of inclusion  when appropriate, with even the notion of separate school placement as part of an inclusion plan. The authors cite Edward Martin, former director of the Bureau for the Education of Handicapped, who suggests that" as a matter of public policy a federal or state government, even a local school system, cannot responsibly adopt inclusion without defining its proposed program." Crockett and his co-author, also point to the controversy over the"continuum of services provision" which is deemed inconsistent with the intent of inclusion by those who adhere to the"full inclusion" concept of this movement. In order to get at the root of this dilemma, the authors, explore the literature, including case law, and legislative decisions, to determine whether,"support for general inclusion, rather than the individual determinants of LRE, represents changes in cultural values, more precise implementation of law, or greater readiness of general education to meet the needs of exceptional children". The authors note justifiable parental concern over the ability of regular education's capability of providing appropriate learning experiences, despite the well meaning intentions of the"supplementary aides and services" provision of the IDEA.  Many parents believe that the payoff for"segregation" is in the progress some students make in the separate class or school placements.

    The inconsistency of methodology and practice of regular education programming with the needs of severely disabled youngsters, speaks to its violation of the FAPE component of IDEA."Can a program be appropriate if teachers use ineffective methods?" is a question asked by parents and educators alike. The impassioned testimony of parents representing both points of view and the conflicting profiles of what constitutes meaningful education for children with diverse learning needs has led to the preservation of the continuum of services and the individualized principles of LRE in the 1997 amendments. Crockett, as Idol, notes that the statute is not"insensitive" to the perspectives and concerns of parents and educators involved in the process and calls for the participation of parents in the decision making process. Research indicates that legislation, case law and practice has come full circle, and now recognizes that the intent of LRE was never been an"immutable rule of placement in regular classes". In an effort to synthesize the various frameworks and guide professionals and parents through the decision making process, Yell and others have established a set of guidelines which charge school district to make good faith efforts to maintain students in regular classrooms, but not to the point that they set them up for failure before recommending separate placement. The continuum of service and program options, is thus of great import to the success of any educational program for special needs students. Professionals must go back to the recognition that congress, in developing the original 1975 Act, viewed the regular classroom as the optimal setting, but recognized that schools must offer multiple environments. The reauthorization of this law, in 1997, and its amendments, reflects a similar recognition by Congress, and focuses on a key point, the necessity of demonstrating what"appropriateness" means.

    At the  root of inclusion issues is the fact that"we haven't followed what kids have done". There has been more of a focus on where education should take place, at the expense of including student outcomes in the decision making process."The term inclusion has become almost synonymous with special education, threatening to place an overemphasis on the schools and classrooms that students should attend, rather than on the instruction they should receive". Crockett and Kaufman cite recent research that calls for a return to"the roots of special education" in order to gain clarification of specialized instruction. Unless this special instruction and assistance, is provided for students with disabilities, their"futures are in danger of being handicapped by these disabilities". Specialized targeted instruction, according to these authors, means different things for different students. The authors provide three principles intended to guide administrators in the development of effective programming and in restructuring for"responsible" inclusion, with an emphasis on reinforcing the relationship between effective special education and effective general education. These principles include, high expectations for all students, valid accountability systems, and the implementation of best instructional practices". Thus viewed, educational leadership on behalf of exceptional children extends well beyond"facilitating inclusive schools.  Rather, it recognizes the need for multiple perspectives and options, and a firm understanding of specialized instruction. Responsible inclusion, like responsible education , reflects"skilled practitioners at work in an array of instructional settings, including separate classes, and schools, in order to ensure educational benefits to students with

    Hartz, G., (2000), Inclusion or exclusion? It all depends. Christian Science Monitor. 92 (34). Pp. 13-14

    The author here has an interesting view, in identifying one of the major pitfalls of inclusion, the unilateral placements of all students, disabled, and gifted in a"one size fits all model" of regular class placement.  The practice of inclusion has come to be favored by parents and educators alike as an educational ideal. Inclusion, as the notion that all"students can lean together and benefit from their mutual interactions" however, was never meant to be the final word in inclusion (p. 13). Yet, since the idea of exclusion, the valuing of certain students over others, has come to be intolerable from philosophical, moral and political perspectives, inclusion, its converse, is the fad of the day. The tendency now is to place all students together to demonstrate"that every child is of equal moral worth... but equal moral worth should not be equated with identical classroom experience". The author justifiably argues that unilateral inclusion is not always in the special needs youngster's best interest.

    Therapies and direct skills instruction, administered in pullout programs, as well as separate class or school placements, may be in the best interest of specific youngsters. This type of programming should not be lost as a result of misguided attempts to do what is morally or politically correct. The author presents various true-to- life scenarios demonstrating where full inclusion was not in the best interest of special needs, including gifted youngsters. While the author agrees with the overall gains of inclusion, he aptly concludes,"The biggest mistake is made by those who adopt inclusion as an exceptionless principle-and who thus ignore cases where exclusion is clearly preferable. That is as unwise as adopting exclusion across the board" (p. 13). The inclusion/exclusion controversy thus viewed reflects the notion that at times, the method of providing a youngster with equal opportunity is to treat him differently. A system of education, particularly special education, that neglects the unique and special needs of youngsters, gifted and disabled alike, is as unjust as one that denies them"deserved opportunities because of their differences" (p.13).

Idol, L., (1997). Key questions related to building collaborative and inclusive schools . Journal of Learning Disabilities 30 4).  Pp. 384-395

     The intent of this article is to offer professionals involved in restructuring for inclusion, a format to facilitate collaborative and inclusive schooling. The author provides the reader with fifteen questions, organized into three categories. The first category speaks to the fundamental philosophical beliefs undergirding the inclusion movement,; the second category addresses such basic mechanics of  restructuring as parental support, funding, adequate teacher support, and a review of various program options. The third category deals with such issues surrounding the implementation process, as providing common planning time, clarifying roles, facilitating the collaborative relationship, assuring competency, delineating disciplinary practices, addressing resistance, preparing all students for the inclusion process, and monitoring programs..

    The authors believe that provisions for a"modified continuum of services", by allowing for varied strategies in the support of teachers, serves to facilitate the inclusion process. The authors further contend that responsible inclusion involves the dual principles of "inclusivity" and"collaboration". Through this combined process of"education for all", via the provisions of modifications and adaptations customized to meet the individual academic and behavioral needs, is made possible.  The questions offered in this document, which bear strong parallels to McLesky's work, evolved through the author's experiences as a consultant in four countries, including the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Despite some of the regional variations, they are pertinent to all professionals involved in restructuring for inclusion through collaboration. The authors conclude that "responsible and effective inclusion does not occur because it is right or because it costs less. Pressures from interest groups cannot mandate effective inclusion. It results only when people collaborate and build a collective vision of what they want from inclusion."

Leal D., Shank, M. Turnbull, A. & Turnbull, R. (1999) Implementing IDEA's principles.In Exceptional lives: Special education in today's schools  (pp. 40-76)

    In this section the authors focus on two components of the IDEA, the provision for "on-discriminatory" evaluations and the provision of an"appropriate" education. As a result of these components of special education law, all students must be evaluated with regard to their"strengths"and "needs" in a manner that does not discriminate against them, from both cultural and economic perspectives. As is evidenced in the story of Danny Ramirez, whose personal story is chronicled in every chapter of this book, educational handicaps are not the only barriers, which some special needs students are required to overcome. Danny's parents poignantly state: "Many of our teachers appear to have low expectations of Mexican American students" (p. 41). The law however, mandates that schools must address diversity and "develop the strengths in all children". The second provision, "an appropriate education" ensures that the special needs youngster benefits from his educational experience, an experience that at once builds on his strengths and at the same time,, addresses his unique educational, social and behavioral needs. Thus, the law mandates that each and every child is entitled to a customized education that focuses on needs as well as present and future outcomes. Current needs include a curriculum based on individual and high expectations, and future outcomes speak to the expectations of independent living, civic responsibility and gainful employment.

    As mandated by law, the implementation of IDEA principles begins with the team, which includes the parents, responsible for evaluating the student and developing his Individualized Educational Plan. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the existence of a disabling condition that impacts on his educational experience, and to develop the customized program of education and related services that address the handicapping condition.  A process of pre-referral and referral typically precedes the evaluation. The purpose of the pre-referral process is to provide teachers with strategies for dealing with students who appear to be at risk, and who may eventually come to evaluation. The members of the evaluation team, along with colleagues and support personal, are sources of assistance at this level of the process. The authors offer a multi-step problem solving strategy including identifying the nature of the problem, generating a range of alternatives and analyzing them, developing an action plan, taking action, and evaluating the action, as an effective, systematic process that can be employed at this level. An additional intent of the pre-referral process is to distinguish students who present with learning differences as a result of cognitive readiness, cultural or socio-economic factors, from those who may be potentially disabled by a handicapping condition. Thus, at the pre-referral stage, the avoidance of unnecessary labeling and classification, coupled with genuine assistance to teachers in dealing with these educational challenges, can be effectively accomplished. The pre-referral process is often sufficient to help students overcome learning challenges. At other times, the process continues to the next level, which involves the formal request for evaluation by a member of the pre-referral team, or the parent.

    The purpose of the evaluation, as mandated by law, is to determine the existence of a disability and to specify the nature of instruction and related services. The procedures and standards followed in the evaluation are specific in nature, in order to ensure the safeguards that protect the rights of parents and students. The provisions in IDEA also specify the members of the team and the levels of expertise they possess, in order to facilitate the efficacy of the evaluation. Based on 1997 IDEA specifications, the team consists of the parents, a minimum of one regular education teacher, a minimum of one special education teacher if applicable, other individuals who have knowledge of the student, the curriculum and expertise relevant to the program of the student, and the team members conducting the evaluation. The core team members may include a psychologist, a social worker and a learning consultant. The evaluation team may request additional assessments, such as a neurological, speech/language, or psychiatric assessment.  The evaluation must consist of formal as well as informal measures and should address cultural and linguistic bias. Parent and teacher input is considered as well. Professionals submit written reports of their assessments and all team members review the findings.

    Following the consideration of all the information, the team determines if the student is eligible for special education and related services, and provides parents with the required notice of eligibility or ineligibility. If the student is eligible, the next step in decisions regarding the nature of the program and related services are determined. The program is based on special education mandates, which require the school to provide an appropriate education specified to the individual needs of the student and which allow him access to the regular education curriculum It is thus,"the non discriminatory" evaluation that leads to and is the very foundation of the student's appropriate education...guiding educators in developing the individualized appropriate educational plans" (p. 61)... An effective plan maximizes the extent to which a special needs student moves towards the attainment of outcomes towards which every child strives, "independence, productivity, and inclusion in society" (p. 61).

    As a final step in this process, the Individualized Educational Plan (IEP for ages 3-5)) or (ISFP for ages 0-3)) are developed by the evaluation team, and are "outcome oriented".  The content of the IEP/ISFP is specified by IDEA and it ensures that the students will benefit from special education, and will "have real opportunities for the outcomes of independence, productivity and inclusion" (p.65). The law further mandates the consideration of student's strengths, parental concerns, behavioral factors, language proficiency, communication or assistive technology services or devices, and transitional services. Post High School transition provisions consider post secondary education, vocational training, employment, continuing education, independent living and community participation..  Both evaluations and IEP/ISFPs are completed within a time-line to assure efficacy of implementation. IDEA specifies that IEPs/ISFPs must be developed for all students ages Zero to twenty-one and must be reviewed and revised each year. Conferences are conducted to ensure collaborative decision- making.  The annual reviews are designed to assess progress towards specified goals and address any lack of progress, results of any evaluations, new information, and the student's anticipated needs.

 Leal, D., Shank, M., Turnbull, A., & Aturnbull, R.  (1999). Special education today: Inclusion and Collaboration. In Exceptional lives: Special education in today's schools. (Pp. 78-119).

     In this section, Turnbull and his co-authors present a comprehensive overview of the literature highlighting issues and concerns associated with the implementation of inclusion. They chronicle the historical development of this initiative, through the "first generation" and "second generation phases" and offer conclusions and implications for future planning. Through a comprehensive comparative analysis of varying inclusion models, the authors conclude that there is no "model of whole sale" inclusive programming. They caution the practitioner against unilateral implementation of full-inclusion at the expensive of an appropriate individualized program. The authors advise individuals responsible for placement to consider the importance of specific skill development, and advise against disregarding those opportunities for the sake of inclusionary model of wholesale inclusive programming that is superior to more traditional special education service delivery models does not exist at the present....collectively, these studies highlight the importance of maintaining  the opportunity for direct services by a specialist....Results suggest that specialized programming should be expanded to maintain opportunities for intensive, individualized instruction that may prove beneficial to students with special needs, particularly on basic skills" (Turnbull et. al. 1999, p. 99)

Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A.(1998). Taking inclusion into the future. Educational Leadership . 56(2). Pp., 78-82

     The authors of this article present a review of inclusion from a historical perspective and address current and future implementation issues. Even with the reauthorization of IDEA, which reinforces the view inclusion is the best way to educate the special needs student, educators and parents are still involved in advocating to ensure that students are given "air opportunities to learn." Research over the past two decades, indicates that students in the U.S. have been provided with access to regular education experiences in a manner unparalleled anywhere in the world. This research marks what schools have accomplished as well as what still needs to be done in order to ensure educational outcomes of high quality for all students.

    A review of the literature highlights the failure for all students of a dual system of education, where special education and regular education are isolated from one another, The greatest losers are those confined primarily to special placement, as is evidenced in student learning outcomes, graduation rates, participation in post secondary education and training, and community living.  The authors cite evidence of longitudinal studies that illustrate the experiences of students, parents, and teachers, and confirm the contention that the separate system is flawed and unequal. This failure has led to a model of inclusion guided by several principles. These principles support the ideas that students are more alike than different, that with effective practices, schools can "educate well and together" a wide range of students with better outcomes for all, and that separation is a civil rights violation and a cause for limited outcomes for student with disabilities. While acknowledging the greater efficacy of the inclusive model, as is evidenced in research, the authors also note the challenges inherent in the implementation process. Professional organizations including the National Center on Educational restructuring and Inclusion and the Council for Exceptional Children, have surveyed thousands of schools involved in restructuring for inclusion, and have identified numerous factors associated with successful implementations. These include visionary leadership, collaboration, refocused use of assessment, adequate support for staff and students, appropriate levels of funding formulas, parental involvement, effective program models, curriculum adaptations, and instructional practices.

    The authors aptly conclude, that inclusion goes beyond "returning students who have separate placements to general education classroom "It incorporates an end to labeling students and shunting them out of the classroom to obtain needed services. It responds to Slavin's call for never streaming" by a refashioned mainstream, a restructured unified school system that serves all students together. The continued success of inclusion is dependent not only upon school wide change, but the systemic restructuring of district and integration with broad level school reform. Changes need to occur not only in the school, but must occur in the universities, the workplace, and the community. It is through this integration that special needs students can be assured of high quality education that prepares them to participate as full and contributing members of an inclusive society
.
Meadows, N. B. (1996). Meeting the challenges of responsible inclusion. Preventing School Failure. 40 (3). Pp. 139-139-142)

    The authors, using a "Case Study" format, present a compelling review of the issues and challenges surrounding the referral, evaluation and placement process of special needs students. Beginning with referral to the IEP, as per IDEA mandates, the case of "Charlie" a  disabled youngster, presenting with significant learning and  behavioral issues, is reviewed, analyzed and critiqued. The efficacy of the non-discriminatory evaluation,  program selection and implementation process is considered, and pitfalls are noted.. Intervention strategies, consideration of alternative program options, and implementation practices are presented as well. Recommendations for modifications and change within the implementation process, following a period of monitoring and re-evaluation, are explored.  This author, as a member of a Child Study Team at the Middle School level, responsible for pre-referral interventions, evaluations, program development, and implementation, on a daily basis, can most certainly identify with the important issues highlighted by the author, and commends the clarity and comprehensiveness with which this case is presented.

McLesky,J. & Waldren, N.L..(1996, October).Responses to questions teachers and administrators frequently ask about inclusive school programs. [11 pages].Phi Delta Kappan [Articles On Line] 78 (2). Available: www.pdkintl..org/kappan/kmc19610.htm

    This article is intended to serve as "first stop" for professionals seeking clarification on inclusion issues, concerns and challenges. The authors address important recurring concerns voiced by parents, administrators and teachers involved in the placement of students, as well as development, planning and implementation of inclusive programs. Specific concerns involve the effectiveness of inclusive placement over separate class placement, the difficulty inherent in meeting the needs of the typical student in an inclusive classroom, the controversy over "full-inclusion" and maintaining the continuum of services,  determining eligibility criteria for inclusion, the inclusion of students with severe behavioral problems, staff resistance to implementation practices, and the challenges special needs students face in meeting curriculum demands within the regular education setting.

    The authors' thesis throughout the article is the need for practicing "responsible inclusion" on a case-by-case basis, rather than providing blanket responses. The authors conclude with the presentation of a model for "responsible" inclusion that reflects the balance this author has expressed in the present work and in past Knowledge Modules. As educators it is our charge to meet the unique and diverse needs of all students while considering the more global school wide, communal and societal goals.

Weir, R., M. (Winter, 1998). Preparing for inclusion. Kappa Delta Pi Record: An International Honor Society in Education, Vol. 34 (8). 44-48

    Robert Weir, Assistant Professor of School Administration and Program Director for Graduate Education at the University of Pennsylvania, in his article, charges administrators with the responsibility of advocating for educational reform, in this case inclusive education. According to Weir, current research suggests that inclusion "provides a service delivery model that addresses a wide continuum of options that constitutes school culture in the United States today". Speaking to the issue of "change" consistent within the systems approach, Weir contends that it is imperative to consider the values, philosophies and belief systems of all the members of the organization, and therefore administrators need to implement this process early on, beginning with the transition of students from early intervention through the grades. Weir recommends that this process can only be accomplished by providing the necessary information to districts and schools. He notes the changes in special education law and its provisions, indicating that while FAPE ("free, appropriate public education") opened up the doors to public school for many children, the focus today is on