An increase in the percent of students with intellectual disability who are placed in regular classes , as measured by the federal definition which is 80% or more of the school day with non-disabled peers.
A reduction in the disparate identification of students with intellectual disability by LEA, by racial group, by ethnic group, or by gender group. Statewide, African-American and Hispanic students are more than twice as likely to be identified with intellectual and emotional disabilities than their Caucasian peers. African-American males are five times more likely.
An increase in the percent of students with intellectual disability who attend the school they would attend if not disabled. Therefore, schools districts need to reduce outplacement and district-wide programs.
The Expert Advisory Panel and the State of Connecticut agree that this is not a “Special Education issue”! To be successful this will take teamwork amongst district leadership, special education and general education teachers.
It must especially be a joint commitment between general and special education.
“ If principal attention is not shifted from the exclusive purview of special educators to BOTH general and special educators, with general educators taking the lead, we project little sustainable progress across all five goals…”
“ Since general education is the base for education of all children…it is logical that significant movement on the five goals of P.J. will not be accomplished without the involvement of district as well as school level leadership and general education teachers.”
Placement in inclusive programs led to academic gains for students with disabilities, including improved performance on standardized tests, mastery of IEP goals, grades, on-task behaviors and motivation to learn. (National Center for Education Restructuring and Inclusion, 1995)
Placement in inclusive classrooms does not interfere with the academic performance of students without disabilities with respect to the amount of allocated time and engaged instructional time, the rate of interruption to planned activities and students’ achievement on test scores and report card grades. (York, Vandercook, MacDonald, Heise-Neff, & Caughey, 1992)