This document discusses issues with traditional models of inclusion and special education that can increase labeling of students and limit outcomes. It proposes an alternative model called "Beyond Inclusion" that focuses on meeting the needs of all learners through principles like: placing students of varied abilities together in small classes; special and general educators collaborating using a rigorous curriculum differentiated for all; and individualizing instruction based on how each student learns. The document suggests data shows current approaches may increase disability identification and advocates for systems aligned under principles of teaching and learning for all students.

1. Elise Frattura, Ph.D
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
United States

2. 
Our educational goals and legislation are
based on:
A. educational history
B. data
C. best practice

Common Principles of Practice to Lead
Beyond Inclusion for Universities, Ministries,
Schools

3. 
Inclusion
 Inclusion or no inclusion?
 Who can be included
and who cannot be
included?
 How much time and for
what subjects?
 What teachers can teach
what children?
 How do I remediate?

Beyond Inclusion:
 How do we meet the needs of
all our learners, including
students with disabilities in
small and large mixed-ability
instructional formats?
 How do we begin our
instruction with how a each
child learns?
 How do we keep general
education class sizes small?
 How do we assist special and
general educators in sharing
expertise to better collaborate
around the needs of all
learners as individual learners?

4. Defining a normed
group of students. …
A. Educational history -
 Assumed a norm
group of students
Diagnosed those
who did not meet the
norm criteria

Created separate
programs

Deaf and Hard of
Hearing
Learning
Disabilities
Orthopedically
Impaired
Cognitive
Disabilities
General
Education
Visually
Impaired
Gifted
Autism
Behavioral
Disabilities
Frattura, 2012

5. Over Time We Create More Labeled
Students and a Smaller Normed Group

Learning Disabilities
Cognitive
Disabilities
Orthopedically
Impaired
Deaf and Hard of
Hearing
Programs for
Students with ADHD
The populations of
disabilities
increasing are
those that are not
medically
diagnosed. …

but educationally
diagnosed.
Autism
General
Education
Early Childhood
Programs
Visually
Impaired
Gifted
Behavioral Disabilities
Frattura, 2012

6. Response to Intervention
Reading
Intervention
Cognitive
Disabilities
Orthopedically
Impaired
Deaf and Hard of
Hearing
Programs for
Students with ADHD
Tier 3
RtITier 2
Autism
Gifted
Response to Intervention
is legislation that was
intended to provide
assistance to students
prior to special education
services – but it has
unintentionally created
more labeled groups
Tier 1
We have found that an
Behavioral Disabilities
increase in removal from
general education – and a
Math
decrease in achievement
Intervention

Early Childhood
Programs
Visually
Impaired
Remediation

Learning Disabilities
Frattura, 2012

7. Outcomes of such practices:

Students with disabilities are placed in remedial or low
grouping in classrooms or schools away from their
nondisabled peers. Often receiving substandard educational
access – thus limiting outcomes to be productive members
of society.

Students with disabilities or those who are struggling often
receive the most fragmented education and often those
children who need the most cohesive education.

Create a model that students typically experience failure
before they experience any success.

8. 
Prevent special and general educators from sharing
expertise and developing proactive instructional
opportunities for all learners.

Support a parallel system with general education
which becomes costly at all levels, universities, state
departments, ministries, etc.

9. 1.
Varied achievement within
student groupings positively
impacts student achievement.
2.
The students who are isolated
the most in ability groupings
often are the furthest behind.
1.
Our approach and pedagogical
practices may be increasing
the identification of
disabilities.
Hnushek, E.,Klin, J., Markman, M., Rivkin, S. (2003)
Does Peer Ability affect student achievement?
Journal of Applied Econometrics
Oakes, 1985,Yonezawa, Wells, and Serna, 2002).

10. Inclusion

RtI

11. 
RtI
Inclusion

12. 
Inclusion
RtI

13. 
Inclusion
RtI

14. All Pull Out Instructional Format

15. All Pull Out Instructional Format

16. 


All instruction for all learners, including
students with disabilities, is premised on a
rigorous core curriculum for all students
Students with and without disabilities are
placed in regular classrooms using
principles of natural proportions – small
group spaces are available to all students
The continuum of services allows for large
group, small group, and 1:1 instruction
based on “how” each child learns.

17. 
Special and general educators are
aligned to specific grade levels to share
knowledge and expertise with each
other and across all abilities and
disabilities.

Class sizes for all learners are no larger
than 25 to 30 students.

Special and general educators co-plan
and co-serve through proactive
instructional practices for each and every
learner - based on the principles of
universal instruction, curriculum, and

18. 
Using principles of universal access—
curriculum is differentiated for needs
of students with and without
disabilities the first time the concept
is taught versus taught to a normed
group and then adapted after the
fact (which often occurs in an
inclusion model).

Personalized learning plans are used
for all learners to assist educators in
determining appropriate instructional
practices.

All educators and all administrators
support the education of all students

19. 19
2010-11 - TBD

20. 20
20.0%
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%
18.7%
17.6%
15.8%
14.3%
11.8%
10.8%
9.1%
6.0%
4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
05-2004 06-2005 07-2006 08-2007 09-2008 10-2009 11-2010

21. Leaders Beyond Inclusion :
 Define/clarify Principles of Practice under one system.
 Align College, State Department/Ministry, School Goals to the
Principles of Practice.
 Collect and analyze data by “how” students are served to determine
progress of models of service delivery.
 Develop a unified infrastructure at all levels under “Teaching and
Learning for All Learners” Versus separate special education
departments.
 Realign funding and legislation to support teaching and learning of
all learners.
 Human Resource practices aligned to Principles of Practice.
 Technology to support teaching and learning for all learners.