An Open Letter to the Field: Contemplating Special Education's Collaborative Role in Developing Inclusive Education
Saved in:
| Title: | An Open Letter to the Field: Contemplating Special Education's Collaborative Role in Developing Inclusive Education |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | David J. Connor (ORCID |
| Source: | Exceptional Children. 2025 91(3):236-259. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 24 |
| Publication Date: | 2025 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Descriptive |
| Descriptors: | Special Education, Inclusion, Students with Disabilities, Activism, Intersectionality, Civil Rights, Regular and Special Education Relationship |
| DOI: | 10.1177/00144029241303051 |
| ISSN: | 0014-4029 2163-5560 |
| Abstract: | The inclusion of students with disabilities with special education services into general education classes has been an integral part of education for over 3 decades. It is a worldwide movement that continues to grow. Yet, some Special Education researchers remain highly critical, even cynical, of inclusion, despite decades of research that have refined school and classroom-based practices so that the majority of students with disabilities, with few exceptions, can achieve inclusion. In this paper we emphasize the importance of maintaining an optimistic focus on inclusive education by (1) foregrounding the thinking of activists within the Disability Rights Movement and more recent disability collectives that undergird theories of disability justice and inclusion; (2) centering intersectional experiences of disability; (3) clarifying the intentions of inclusion and dispelling some lingering myths; and (4) describing ways that inclusive classrooms can best serve students with mild to complex and multiple support needs. We conclude with a request to our field to reflect upon and consider Special Education's evolving role in ongoing collaborative development of inclusive education. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2025 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1466468 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwHbsD3hfEDuE5R4lASgxVI8AAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDLs4TK7_IKj-cau27QIBEICBmk8hwFy8CivvaplqCYq-pJCCtMungFwvLuS-WzoFCeI9o10Qy6LLAGkdPgSZNdqe_Qf3bxD2TWgHTg8MNTqMXU9G8Ycej56U-E1I_COFWHmRSJcPxGkXtwwteiHIQD3IYi2KOQTtZJ5NvKfEk_kgWkUypHwVggfBvOnX9AqtymI-xzngo8IpfhsFHWZRgwIQxRu5Bu9p5Q9OTl8= Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0183813416;exc01apr.25;2025Mar20.05:29;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0183813416-1">An Open Letter to the Field: Contemplating Special Education's Collaborative Role in Developing Inclusive Education </title> <p>The inclusion of students with disabilities with special education services into general education classes has been an integral part of education for over 3 decades. It is a worldwide movement that continues to grow. Yet, some Special Education researchers remain highly critical, even cynical, of inclusion, despite decades of research that have refined school and classroom-based practices so that the majority of students with disabilities, with few exceptions, can achieve inclusion. In this paper we emphasize the importance of maintaining an optimistic focus on inclusive education by (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref1">1</reflink>) foregrounding the thinking of activists within the Disability Rights Movement and more recent disability collectives that undergird theories of disability justice and inclusion; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref2">2</reflink>) centering intersectional experiences of disability; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref3">3</reflink>) clarifying the intentions of inclusion and dispelling some lingering myths; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref4">4</reflink>) describing ways that inclusive classrooms can best serve students with mild to complex and multiple support needs. We conclude with a request to our field to reflect upon and consider Special Education's evolving role in ongoing collaborative development of inclusive education.</p> <p>Keywords: inclusion; co-teaching and collaboration; teacher education; school personnel; access to the general education curriculum; multicultural education; equity issues</p> <p>Inclusive education has been with us for over 30 years, and is here to stay. As with most aspects of schooling, it can be improved; there is no panacea for how best to educate all children with disabilities. However, inclusion consists of an array of well-respected professional practices countering the historical tendency to place students with disabilities in segregated settings. Inclusion is also a democratic ideal that supports general participation of people with disabilities (PWD) in all aspects of society. Because it is a democratic ideal, over time, conceptualizations of inclusive education have developed to consider broader implications for minoritized groups that have been historically segregated (e.g., Black, Indigenous, and People of Color [BIPOC], immigrants/emerging bilingual students), or omitted in curricula because of cultural mores (e.g., LGBTQIA + students). Also, there is an increased understanding of intersectionality ([<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref5">45</reflink>])—how multiple aspects of identity (e.g., disability, race, gender) combine to impact and shape lived experiences of individuals in different ways—challenging the notion that a single marker of identity, such as disability, is universal or generalizable. These developments have both complicated and enriched understanding of inclusive education as an ideal. Accordingly, we acknowledge that while challenges exist for researchers and practitioners, the fields of special and general education should maintain a stalwart focus on improvement, building on over 3 decades of sustained progress toward the communities of diversity and belonging.</p> <p>In this letter, we encourage our field's ongoing role in developing and achieving inclusive education. We present new perspectives, engaging readers' values and assumptions about disability, teaching, research, the purpose of schools, and how teacher education programs can best engage inclusive practices. We structure the letter into four sections: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref6">1</reflink>) foregrounding the work of activists within the Disability Rights Movement (DRM) and recent disability collectives that undergird and expand theories of disability justice and inclusion; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>) centering intersectional experiences of disability; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref8">3</reflink>) clarifying intentions of inclusion, dispelling lingering myths by focusing on (i) the right to belong, (ii) historically excluded students, and (iii) decentering the norms of general education; and (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref9">4</reflink>) how inclusive classrooms can best serve students with mild to complex and multiple support needs.</p> <p>We are three White, able-bodied, middle-class-of-working-class-origins, career-long critical special educators, who also have family members with disabilities, including the Author 2 having an autistic son. We have consistently challenged the status quo within our field in terms of theory (Connor &amp; Valle, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref10">41</reflink>]; Gabel &amp; Danforth, [<reflink idref="bib63" id="ref11">63</reflink>]; Gallagher et al., [<reflink idref="bib66" id="ref12">66</reflink>]), research (Gallagher, [<reflink idref="bib64" id="ref13">64</reflink>]; Gallagher et al, [<reflink idref="bib67" id="ref14">67</reflink>]), practices (Valle &amp; Connor, [<reflink idref="bib125" id="ref15">125</reflink>]; Danforth, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref16">46</reflink>]) policy (Connor, [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref17">39</reflink>]), history (Danforth, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref18">47</reflink>]; Ferri &amp; Connor, [<reflink idref="bib58" id="ref19">58</reflink>]), philosophy (Danforth &amp; Rhodes, [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref20">48</reflink>]; Gallagher, [<reflink idref="bib65" id="ref21">65</reflink>]), and intersectional understandings of disability (Connor, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref22">38</reflink>])—toward cultivating more inclusive practices. We are mindful that our intersectional positionality affords us privileges inside and outside of academia, and that we must be accountable in our commitments ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref23">23</reflink>]), acknowledge humility within academic allyship, and be cognizant of who is speaking about disability and race to whom and in what contexts ([<reflink idref="bib109" id="ref24">109</reflink>]). We are works in progress as we continue our commitment to inclusive education and its attendant complexities.</p> <p>During our careers, we have advocated for inclusive classrooms based upon numerous experiences including: teaching and supervising inclusive teachers; interviewing students with disabilities both formally and informally about their preferences; extensively studying the DRM and the desires of PWD to be included in all aspects of society; supporting parents pursuing quality inclusive learning environments for their children, and responding to the challenges of improving education systems for all students. Subsequently, we advocate that any pull-out arrangements for students be kept to an <emph>absolute minimum</emph> by devising practical supports and accommodations within the general education classroom.</p> <p>Within the field of Special Education, it is usually recognized that the U.S. inclusive education movement started in the mid 1980s when Madeleine Will, Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, created the Regular Education Initiative (REI) for students identified with mild disabilities to re-enter general education classrooms with supports. The REI was motivated, in part, to stem the growth of pull-out programs that had proliferated over 2 decades, address concerns about low expectations for students with disabilities, and provide greater readiness for employment ([<reflink idref="bib131" id="ref25">131</reflink>]). Immediately, the [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref26">42</reflink>] issued a statement that revealed their apprehension about potentially losing special education services for children with disabilities and—although that never occurred—such fears continue ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref27">3</reflink>]). Instead, with the support of parents, researchers, and innovative practitioners, the inclusion of U.S. students with disabilities in general education classes took root as part of a flourishing global movement.</p> <p>In 1990, the World Bank committed to a policy of Education for All (EFA), with the goal of bringing the benefits of education to every citizen in every society. Soon after, the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released The Salamanca Statement, calling on the international community to recognize that:</p> <p>regular schools with this inclusive orientation are the most effective means of combating discriminatory attitudes, creating welcoming communities, building an inclusive society and achieving education for all; moreover, they provide an effective education to the majority of children and improve the efficiency and ultimately cost-effectiveness of the entire education system ([<reflink idref="bib121" id="ref28">121</reflink>], p. 8).</p> <p>The Salamanca Statement illustrated how the politics of disability and education had significantly changed, giving rise to new conversations worldwide (Author 2), the establishment of <emph>The International Journal of Inclusive Education</emph> in 1997, the development of inclusive theory, policy, research, and pedagogy across nations ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref29">2</reflink>]), and the forging of Disability Studies in Education (DSE) as an academic discipline advocating for inclusive practices ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref30">12</reflink>]). Simultaneously, the rights of PWD became an integral part of ongoing missions in multiple global organizations, for example, the United Nations conventions in 2006 and 2016 (United Nations, n.d.).</p> <p>In UNESCO's Sustainable Developmental Goals that encompass indivisible economic, social, and environmental dimensions, Goal Number 4 seeks to "ensure inclusive an equitable education and promote lifelong learning opportunities for all" ([<reflink idref="bib123" id="ref31">123</reflink>]). A similar stance towards pro-inclusivity undergirds organizations such as The European Agency for Special Needs and Inclusive Education, an independent entity that serves as a platform for collaboration among member countries, stating, "Inclusive education systems are a vital component of more socially inclusive societies, an ideal which all Agency member countries align themselves with, both ethically and politically" ([<reflink idref="bib57" id="ref32">57</reflink>], Para 1).</p> <p>We share these selected elements to foreground the importance of inclusive education as an ongoing global commitment, while acknowledging that our field of Special Education has always been divided about inclusion, including the field's role and responsibility in developing and achieving it ([<reflink idref="bib69" id="ref33">69</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref34">88</reflink>]). Scholars within our field have been highly critical toward inclusion (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref35">85</reflink>]), despite decades of research refining inclusive school and classroom-based practices (Ainscow, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref36">1</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-2">Complicating the Past and Present: Inclusion in the Disability Rights and Disability Justice...</hd> <p>Before we address contemporary issues related to Special Education's role in developing and sustaining inclusive practices, we contemplate inclusion as a primary concern of people with disabilities—both historically and contemporarily. We do this by discussing the DRM during the 1960s and 1970s, and the more recent Disability Justice Movement that has evolved over the last decade. In doing so, we seek to emphasize the role of grass roots activism in forging ideals of equality, illustrating the ongoing fundamental desire of people with disabilities to be included in all aspects of society. At the same time, we call attention to the limitations of a single axis of analysis for disability when considering inclusive education in its broadest sense.</p> <p>Inclusion, in schools and the community, is the heart of the American DRM. Our work in schools supporting inclusion draws heavily from the movement's priority to fight against segregation. Leaders of the DRM—such Judy Heumann, Brad Lomax, Ed Roberts, Don Galloway—experienced disability exclusion and segregation, in schooling, housing, careers, and social opportunities, and, unlike their White counterparts, Lomax and Galloway experienced disability discrimination simultaneously with racial discrimination. Drawing from their own pain of social rejection, they spent their lives fighting for the inclusion of PWD. In April 1977, Heumann, Lomax, and others led over 100 persons with different disabilities to occupy the San Francisco Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) offices for 26 days, protesting because, for almost 4 years, government officials refused to sign the landmark Section 504 regulations outlawing discrimination against PWD in federally-funded programs and activities.</p> <p>It was widely known that Secretary Joseph Califano had a task force working behind closed doors to weaken the proposed 504 regulations, leaving federal bureaucrat Gene Eidenberg with the unenviable assignment of reassuring the angry protesters to trust Califano. Eidenberg admitted that the HEW Task Force reviewing the 504 regulations had devised a plan to educate public school students with disabilities in segregated programs and buildings. Using the ugly Jim Crow phrase from the 1896 <emph>Supreme Court Plessy vs. Ferguson</emph> case, he promised that these classrooms and schools would be "separate but equal." Over 100 activists in the building, as well as the protest rally of 800 strong in the parking lot outside, exploded in angry opposition to the government's proposed anti-inclusion policy. Heumann believed that the goal of educational inclusion for PWD in public schools was not open to compromise or negotiation, her view arising directly from her own experience as a person with disabilities in the American educational system, and her long legal struggle—ultimately ending in victory—to become a state certified teacher. Of note here is that Brad Lomax, who developed multiple sclerosis, was a founding member of the Black Panthers' Washington chapter, and coordinated the Panthers to provide food and drink in an act of solidarity, recognizing systemic oppression. Their support was featured in their newspaper, and a public statement:</p> <p>Along with all fair and good-thinking people, The Black Panther Party gives its full support to Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act and calls for President Carter and HEW Secretary Califano to sign guidelines for its implementation as negotiated and agreed to on January 21 of this year. The issue here is human rights—rights of meaningful employment, of education, of basic human survival—of an oppressed minority, the disabled and handicapped. Further, we deplore the treatment accorded to the occupants of the fourth floor and join with them in full solidarity (Disability Social History Project, 2021, para. 4).</p> <p>(https://disabilityhistory.org/2021/12/19/the-504-protests-and-the-black-panther-party/)</p> <p>Participants of the sit-in believe that the Black Panthers saved it from failing ([<reflink idref="bib107" id="ref37">107</reflink>]).</p> <p>Part of Heumann's 504 testimony can be seen in the Netflix documentary <emph>Crip Camp: A Disability Revolution</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib93" id="ref38">93</reflink>]). In sum, she lambasted Eidenberg, stating, "We will no longer allow the government to oppress disabled individuals. We want the law enforced! We want no more segregation! We will accept no more discussions of segregation."</p> <p>Likewise, Ed Roberts believed inclusion into education should neither be compromised nor negotiated. Paralyzed from the neck down by polio, Ed attended his neighborhood public high school in Burlingame, California in the late 1950s. When he finished 12th grade with top grades, district administrators informed his mother that he could not graduate. He had not completed two required courses: Physical Education and Driver's Education. A school administrator coldly told Ed and his mother Zona, "You wouldn't want a cheap diploma, now, would you?" Zona appealed to the School Board who granted Ed his diploma (Roberts, [<reflink idref="bib110" id="ref39">110</reflink>]).</p> <p>When admitted to the University of California, Berkeley, Roberts sought support from the state Department of Rehabilitation but was deemed "infeasible;" too-angry, paralyzed; not worth the investment. Again, Ed appealed, and the rejection was overturned with support from faculty at the community college where Ed had succeeded. At UC Berkeley, Roberts and his friends fought the first battles of the DRM, from housing to unfair academic requirements, by forming an activist coalition—the Rolling Quads (quadriplegics)—with Ed as the leader.</p> <p>Both Lomax and Galloway worked closely with Roberts to build bridges between the CIL and the local African-American community. In 1975, Lomax pitched a proposal to Black Panthers executive Elaine Brown to sponsor an Oakland branch of the Berkeley CIL. Galloway became its director for services for blind people, and active in advocating for the independent living movement to be more inclusive of People of Color ([<reflink idref="bib71" id="ref40">71</reflink>]), including the provision of peer counseling, attendant referrals, and housing assistance. Galloway later went on to have a distinguished international career advocating for disabled people.</p> <p>Let us pause for a moment and take stock. Before the inclusion movement existed within education, the DRM provided the desire, reasons, rationale, and impetus to include disabled people. During the 1970s and 1980s, the decades leading up to the successful 1990 passage of the <emph>Americans with Disabilities</emph> Act, the DRM challenged stubborn cultural barriers of disability stereotypes to build a more diverse community of social progress. Battling the historical tendency of different disability groups to maintain their own advocacy organizations, the CIL united blind, deaf, and developmentally disabled activists in a potent cross-disability alliance. At the same time, the DRM, has been critiqued for insufficient simultaneous engagement with race to challenge the existing norms of society ([<reflink idref="bib114" id="ref41">114</reflink>]). As Ellis ([<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref42">55</reflink>]) notes, Black people are "the forgotten activists," a notion that echoed in The <emph>New York Times</emph>' obituary of Lomax in the "Overlooked" feature, calling him "A bridge between civil rights movements" ([<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref43">37</reflink>]).</p> <p>We bring these issues up to emphasize ways in which the DRM advanced understandings of disability without considering its racialization ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref44">10</reflink>]). Regrettably, the field of Special Education has traditionally eschewed the importance of intersectional identities, downplaying the importance of sociocultural historical contexts ([<reflink idref="bib84" id="ref45">84</reflink>]).</p> <p>In the spirit of wishing to complicate and expand understandings of inclusion, we transition here from the DRM of the 1970s and 1980s, to a lesser-known grass roots activist movement, known as Disability Justice (DJ). Developed by Sins Invalid, DJ is an arts-based organization led by disabled People of Color with "An unashamed claim to beauty in the face of invisibility" (https://<ulink href="http://www.sinsinvalid.org/">www.sinsinvalid.org/</ulink>). Disability justice is composed of 10 principles and defined as "an honoring of the longstanding legacies of resilience and resistance which are the inheritance of all of us whose bodies or minds will not conform" ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref46">20</reflink>], p. 229). In brief, the 10 principles that serve to potentially continue developing a movement are: (<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref47">1</reflink>) intersectionality; (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref48">2</reflink>) leadership of the most impacted; (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref49">3</reflink>) anti-capitalist politics; (<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref50">4</reflink>) cross-movement solidarity; (<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref51">5</reflink>) recognizing wholeness; (<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref52">6</reflink>) sustainability; (<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref53">7</reflink>) commitment to cross-disability solidarity; (<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref54">8</reflink>) interdependence: (<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref55">9</reflink>) collective access; and (<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref56">10</reflink>) collective liberation.</p> <p>We invoke DJ to show ways in which its values and concerns are like those expressed by the 504 coalition. For example, Principle #2 emphasizes how those most impacted by the issues should be heard, stating, "we are not looking to academics and experts to tell us what's what—we are lifting up, listening to, reading, following, and highlighting the perspectives of those who are most impacted by the systems we fight against" (p. 227). Likewise, Principle #4's concern with cross-movement solidarity, recognizes that DJ "can only grow into its potential as a movement by aligning itself with racial justice" and other movements, through "challenging white disability communities around racism and challenging other movements to confront ableism" (p. 227). Likewise, Principle #6 commits to cross-disability solidarity and the ideal of excluding no one. Principle #8 focuses on interdependence, and how the connectedness of a community is superior to culturally-ingrained notions of individuality. Principle #9 centers on embracing human differences, while being proud about claiming access needs.</p> <p>In addition, remaining principles resonate in terms of educational inclusion. Principle #3 on anti-capitalist politics challenges the cultural practice of "competition as a means of survival," (p. 227), and the normative standards imposed upon all bodyminds. Principle #5 embraces assets-based understandings of disability rather than deficit based foundational thinking within Special Education, by simply stating "Disabled people are whole people" (p. 228). Principle #10 of collective liberation includes everyone—encompassing all markers of identity—moving together towards social justice through disability justice.</p> <p>Provocative, and providing much food for thought, DJ has implications for the field of Special Education which is, among other things, a legal, academic, historical, social, and cultural outcome of disability activism by people with disabilities, their family members, and allies. Bearing in mind the forces that advocate for inclusion, we believe it worthwhile to foreground a concept that DJ has prioritized in Principle #1—Intersectionality. As the founders of DJ note,</p> <p>We are not only disabled, we are also each coming from a specific experience of race, class, sexuality, age, religious background, geographical location, immigrant status, and more. Depending on context, we all have areas where we experience privilege, as well as areas of oppression (p. 227).</p> <p>In the following section, we look at how being knowledgeable about, grounded in, and centering intersectionality can help develop better understandings of inclusive education.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-3">Intersectional Experiences of Disability</hd> <p>Kimberlé [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref57">44</reflink>] originated the term "intersectionality" to address the marginalization of Black women within antidiscrimination law, feminist theory, anti-racist theory, and politics. She used this concept to theorize how the position and unique lived experiences of Women of Color located at the interstices of race and gender are subject to and a product of "intersecting patterns of racism and sexism" ([<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref58">45</reflink>], p. 1243) that function within the historical, social, cultural, and political structures in our society. Crenshaw explains:</p> <p>[intersectionality as]...a lens, a prism, for seeing the way in which various forms of inequality often operate together and exacerbate each other. We tend to talk about race inequality as separate from inequality based on gender, class, sexuality or immigrant status. What's often missing is how some people are subject to all of these, and the experiences is not just the sum of its parts (in [<reflink idref="bib115" id="ref59">115</reflink>]).</p> <p>Intersectionality has also been described as "a method and a disposition, a heuristic and analytical tool" ([<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref60">29</reflink>], p. 303) to inform our world view and research choices to better understand inequalities and work toward social change.</p> <p>While the field of special education has always acknowledged race, it has done so in significantly limited ways without deeply theorizing about the history of race, structural racism within society, and education—including special education—along with potential implications for our field. Some scholars have argued that the high numbers of students of color with disabilities excluded from general education classrooms continue forms of segregation ([<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref61">75</reflink>]), perpetuating racial inequalities ([<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref62">95</reflink>]). There have been ongoing debates for decades about disproportionate overrepresentation of Students of Color in special education ([<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref63">9</reflink>]), including more recent and highly contested claims that they are underrepresented ([<reflink idref="bib102" id="ref64">102</reflink>]), raising concerns of potential resegregation in schools when the efficacy of separate programs as experienced by African American students—among others—has been challenged (see, for example, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref65">43</reflink>]).</p> <p>A point we wish to emphasize here is our field's traditionally limited ways of conceiving of race if solely considered as a variable within quantitative research. As [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref66">7</reflink>] describes, "Race is not a stable category. ... 'It' is not a thing, a reified object that can be measured as if it were a simple biological entity. Race is a <emph>construction,</emph> a set of fully social <emph>relationships</emph>" (p. 204, emphasis in original). When race is ascribed to a number, it removes the unacknowledged complexities of racialized existence within our history, society, and culture(s). Furthermore, researchers privileging a purely numerical approach may have no contact with the people they are researching; their positivist-based methodology grants a belief that their adopted scientific methods allow cultural transcendence. Such a perspective can be interpreted as elitism within our field, adhering to defining disability in medicalized, deficit-based framings, while dismissing how PWD wish to self-define in more positive, holistic ways ([<reflink idref="bib87" id="ref67">87</reflink>]).</p> <p>Critical scholars in Special Education have taken up the premise—and promise—of using intersectionality. For example, [<reflink idref="bib56" id="ref68">56</reflink>] powerfully illustrate how "individuals located perilously at the intersections of race, class, gender, <emph>and</emph> disability are constituted as non-citizens and (no) bodies by the very social institutions (legal, educational, and rehabilitational) that are designed to protect, nurture, and empower them" (p. 127, emphasis in original). In <emph>Untangling the Racialization of Disabilities: An Intersectionality Critique Across Disability Models</emph>, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref69">11</reflink>] affirms that "intersectionality's explicit attention to how the complexity of people's everyday experiences is connected to larger historical processes could offer key insights" (p. 329) into researching longstanding inequalities within education, suggesting ways to cultivate this approach. Reviewing the research on teachers' professional development of inclusion, [<reflink idref="bib129" id="ref70">129</reflink>] found that the majority used a unitary approach to difference and exclusion, leading them to conclude that "teacher learning for inclusive education is undertheorized" (p. 319), meriting an intersectional approach to help professionals better understand difference, exclusion, and boundary practices. In a guest edited volume of <emph>Review of Educational Research</emph> dedicated to intersectionality, [<reflink idref="bib117" id="ref71">117</reflink>] also recognized its promise, describing it as "a conceptual aspiration and research imperative" (p. vii).</p> <p>Scholars have engaged the concept of intersectionality and disability in many ways. Some examples include: affirming the value of researching intersectional disability experiences ([<reflink idref="bib77" id="ref72">77</reflink>]); integrating intersectional consciousness into teacher education ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref73">24</reflink>]); illustrating disparities in researching disability, gender, and discipline (Annamma et al., [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref74">5</reflink>]); calling attention to the exclusion of bilingual students with disabilities ([<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref75">35</reflink>]); and recognizing potential ways to transform special education's restricted engagement with cultural contexts (Garcia &amp; Ortiz, 2013). Intersectional awareness is also imperative in cultivating strong, mutually respectful school–home partnerships, embedded within culturally conscious work with families from diverse backgrounds (see, for example, Harry &amp; Ocasio-Stoutenburg, 2019).</p> <p>In another example, drawing from Disability Studies and Critical Race Theory, Author 1 and colleagues (Annamma et al., [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref76">6</reflink>]) developed Disability Critical Race Theory (DisCrit) as a theoretical tool to specifically explore the intersections of disability and race, along with other markers of identity. DisCrit has been utilized in a variety of ways, from rendering color evasiveness within education ([<reflink idref="bib132" id="ref77">132</reflink>]) to rethinking administrative leadership ([<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref78">49</reflink>]), and from countering-deficit based understandings of students with disabilities ([<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref79">18</reflink>]) to engaging with inclusive education at an international level ([<reflink idref="bib100" id="ref80">100</reflink>]).</p> <p>Among other things, DisCrit seeks to privilege the voices of marginalized populations traditionally insufficiently acknowledged within research. As disability activist [<reflink idref="bib105" id="ref81">105</reflink>] notes, the academy trivializes knowledge developed outside of itself, dismissing it as "folk knowledge." Such a narrow definition of disability knowledge, including ways it can be expressed, "contributes to a knowledge hierarchy marginalizing the wisdom of those with disabilities and many others. ... On the contrary, mainstream university education cannot substitute the wisdom and knowledge that come from direct lived experiences" (p. 242). The value of lived, layered intersectional experiences by people in their communities can be seen in organizations such as the National Black Disability Coalition who assert that "Black disabled lives are a priority in all spaces. ... By dismantling ableist beliefs and perceptions about disabled people, we believe we fulfil our vision of seeing black people participating as full members of our own communities" ([<reflink idref="bib104" id="ref82">104</reflink>]). In sum, the concept of intersectionality and disability has gained modest, but growing traction within the field of Special Education, offering important insights about inclusivity in schools and society. In the spirit of cultivating both interdisciplinary and intra-disciplinary alliances, our field has much to learn about the disability experience from multiply marginalized voices outside of the academy ([<reflink idref="bib133" id="ref83">133</reflink>])—as well as those within in it ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref84">15</reflink>]). It is therefore crucial to keep centering the experiences of people with disabilities, acknowledging their desires for inclusion in all aspects of society.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-4">Clarifying the Intentions of Inclusion and Dispelling Lingering Myths</hd> <p>For over 50 years, special education has grappled with its professional identity—particularly what distinguishes it from general education—traditionally defining itself as a distinct and separate system of education in purpose, research, and pedagogy ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref85">3</reflink>]). Much has been written, in many scholarly formats, about inclusion by special education scholars. In engaging with these artifacts, we often have been struck by misunderstandings about inclusive practices. As our school systems have been permanently changed by inclusive approaches that are now integral to them, it is important to engage with some consistent mischaracterizations within our field about inclusive education. We therefore foreground a number of these issues grouped into three broad, interconnected areas—(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref86">1</reflink>) the right to belong, (<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref87">2</reflink>) historically excluded students, and (<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref88">3</reflink>) decentering the norms in general education—to illustrate the value of inclusive education in history, theory, research, practice, and policy.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-5">The Right to Belong</hd> <p>Authentic inclusion is far more than merely gaining access to general education; it involves feeling a sense of belonging ([<reflink idref="bib116" id="ref89">116</reflink>]). Research has emphasized how crucial it is for students with disabilities, many of whom have experienced social ostracism, to have a sense of connection and value in inclusive classrooms ([<reflink idref="bib113" id="ref90">113</reflink>]). To achieve this, educators must be willing to be flexible in their teaching practices, providing varied opportunities for students to engage and contribute academically and socially to experience a level of success.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-6">Inclusive Placement Means Inclusive Instruction, Not Just a Change of Physical Space</hd> <p>We start by stating the difference between "responsible inclusion" and "irresponsible inclusion" ([<reflink idref="bib127" id="ref91">127</reflink>], p. 264), that is, what is done "in the name of inclusion" (which we view as inauthentic). Responsible inclusive education involves creating classrooms that are welcoming and support students with disabilities (academically, socially, and emotionally). Students with disabilities in inclusive placements receive instruction designed to engage them based upon their current levels of academic performance and interests. Teachers do this in various ways, planning within a framework of Universal Design for Leaning (UDL; Meyer et al., [<reflink idref="bib99" id="ref92">99</reflink>]) employing culturally responsive pedagogy ([<reflink idref="bib94" id="ref93">94</reflink>]) and expanding the possibilities of both ([<reflink idref="bib130" id="ref94">130</reflink>]). Inclusive educators feature differentiated instruction as needed ([<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref95">96</reflink>]), adapt methods and modify curricula as documented on Individualized Education Programs (IEPs), and use assistive technology ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref96">34</reflink>]). Instruction is co-planned and manifests as whole group, small group, or individualized instruction ([<reflink idref="bib103" id="ref97">103</reflink>]). In contrast, "irresponsible inclusion" is the inverse of all these actions.</p> <p>Notably, inclusion advocates are not indifferent or casual about academic progress, as they are often portrayed in critical commentaries. Not only does academic, social, and emotional growth increase students' agency in the world, but it also affords them the deep satisfaction of understanding and thinking deeply about things that matter to them. We very much want them to have an intellectual life, knowing that each person's intellectual life is unique. For that reason, we avoid normative comparisons that do nothing to enhance and much to diminish.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-7">Inclusive Education Pro-Actively Integrates Children, Not "Dumps" Them</hd> <p>Inclusion is both an ethical and legal responsibility that encompasses educators consciously planning for, and monitoring, the integration of students with disabilities. All the considerations listed above, along with others such as culturally responsive teaching ([<reflink idref="bib70" id="ref98">70</reflink>]) and culturally sustaining pedagogy ([<reflink idref="bib108" id="ref99">108</reflink>]), are encompassed in a framework of critical consciousness and pedagogical flexibility, including customized assistance where and when needed. Inclusion that is primarily viewed as a technical endeavor neglects necessary social and cultural considerations. Consider the landmark ruling <emph>Brown v. Board of Education</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref100">27</reflink>]), decreeing the need to end racial segregation. While the ruling was morally, ethically, and legally justified, Black and Brown students nonetheless still faced—and many would argue are still likely to face—hostile environments, racist attitudes, low expectations, and disability labeling. Students with disabilities also face hostile environments, ableist attitudes, and low expectations, often compounded at the intersection of race and social class. Special Education can take a leading role in addressing these areas for many reasons, including creating inclusive Pre K-12 experiences with non-disabled peers as a form of community integration ([<reflink idref="bib81" id="ref101">81</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-8">Inclusion Is Rarely "Full Inclusion," But It Is an Ideal Worth Striving For</hd> <p>The inclusion movement is based in a philosophy of equity and is antithetical to being conceived of as a specific program. It is context-specific, rooted in the premise of creating educational environments that maximize learning for all students. There are schools who are fully inclusive and, because it is a complex endeavor, always are a work in progress, and are still in the minority ([<reflink idref="bib72" id="ref102">72</reflink>]). The National Center for Education Statistics (2024) revealed that inclusive education has yielded mixed placements over the past decade:</p> <p>Between fall 2012 and fall 2022, among all school-age students served under IDEA, the percentage who were in regular schools and spent various amounts of time in general classes changed as follows: The percentage who spent 80 percent or more of their time in general classes increased from 61 to 67 percent; The percentage who spent 40 to 79 percent of their time in general classes decreased from 20 to 16 percent; The percentage who spent less than 40 percent of their time in general classes decreased from 14 to 13 percent (Section 1, Para 2)</p> <p>Of note is that students who are more likely to be included for 80% of the day or more are those with speech and language impartments (89%), learning disabilities (76%), developmental delays (70%), other health impairments (e.g., attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], 71%), and visual impairments (69%). The least likely to be included for 80% or more of the day are students with deaf blindness (33%), intellectual disabilities (21%), and multiple disabilities (16%; NCES, 2022), suggesting that those with more complex needs are far less likely to be educated in integrated environments.</p> <p>For us, inclusion is an ideal and a commitment. We understand that there will always be circumstances that preclude this and result in some separate environments.[<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref103">4</reflink>] For example, a percentage of students who experience sensory overload, schizophrenia, and other mental health conditions, along with those demonstrating significantly challenging behaviors, need supportive spaces. When such spaces are outside general classrooms, the goal is for such arrangements to be temporary rather than lasting into years of isolation, as has happened to many children ([<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref104">97</reflink>]). Of note, too, is that there will always be segregated schools that specific students (with the support of their families) may <emph>elect</emph> to attend, such as those who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing—claiming their differences are not disabilities but, rather, cultural practices ([<reflink idref="bib79" id="ref105">79</reflink>]).</p> <p>Steadfast critiques over the years target the idea of full inclusion, using it synonymously with the idea of inclusion in general, variously describing it as an "illusion" ([<reflink idref="bib88" id="ref106">88</reflink>]) and "delusional" ([<reflink idref="bib89" id="ref107">89</reflink>]). When inclusion is criticized for its failures, sometimes illustrated by students who did not do well in an inclusive setting, doubts about its effectiveness are raised for all children with disabilities. In these cases, we must admit falling short; yet, considering the vast expenditures on researching the practice of teaching reading, no matter how reading is taught, some children do not learn to do it well. If we use the logic of anti-inclusionists, that means we should not be teaching reading because it fails <emph>some</emph> kids. Of course, no one would question the cultural value of literacy.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-9">Historically Excluded Students</hd> <p>Research has long substantiated that students have not been provided with equal access to inclusive classes variously based upon the type and complexity of their disability, often confounded with race, social class, and other factors ([<reflink idref="bib118" id="ref108">118</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-10">Inclusion Can Help, Rather Than Further Disadvantage, Multiply Minoritized Students</hd> <p>Providing equal access to a quality education for racially minoritized students remains a social equity concern ([<reflink idref="bib75" id="ref109">75</reflink>]). Multiply minoritized students often have been overrepresented in many of the "soft" disability categories—behavioral disorders, intellectual disability, learning disability ([<reflink idref="bib95" id="ref110">95</reflink>])—largely based on clinical judgement. Also, students with certain intersectional identities, such as African American males identified as disabled, have experienced multiple forms of exclusion, ranging from more segregated environments ([<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref111">36</reflink>]) to the number and type of suspensions ([<reflink idref="bib98" id="ref112">98</reflink>]) that contribute to the school to prison pipeline ([<reflink idref="bib111" id="ref113">111</reflink>]). Some scholars fear that students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms will be denied services, further disadvantaging them. In comparison, scholars supportive of inclusion perceive the educational environment as potentially more liberating in terms of providing access to sharing academic and social opportunities with non-disabled peers, while being more racially diverse. We believe it is important to foreground social class here, too. Middle-class White parents are far more likely to have the means to provide additional support for their children with disabilities, regardless of placement ([<reflink idref="bib106" id="ref114">106</reflink>]), whereas segregated special environments for minoritized students are linked to higher dropout/pushout rates, underemployment, unemployment, and incarceration ([<reflink idref="bib78" id="ref115">78</reflink>]), and have been linked to modern forms of state institutionalization (Ben Moshe, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref116">17</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-11">Inclusion Is Desirable, and Possible, for Children and Youth With Complex Support Needs</hd> <p>Students with different disabilities may arguably be easier than others to be in inclusive environments. Indeed, there remains deep differences among special educators about children who have complex support needs, reflected in questions like: Where is the best place? How do we know? Who gets to decide? What can be done otherwise? Each circumstance needs to be examined carefully and thoughtfully as there are examples of both successes and failures. For example, Author 1 is close to a family with a child given nine diagnoses, including autism, and who were given no choices—only very restrictive environments with other students with autism, in a system in which administrators and teachers held low expectations (Berman &amp; Connor, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref117">19</reflink>]). Had his parents not advocated for their son to be in an inclusive environment in another district, he would never have graduated high school and attended college. In contrast, there are instances of students who require toileting assistance and are being taught "advanced" concepts such as photosynthesis. In both examples, there is a need to adjust and re-invent expectations and assessments, emphasizing that students with complex support needs can feel that they belong, and can succeed—on their unique terms—with nondisabled peers ([<reflink idref="bib83" id="ref118">83</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-12">Inclusion Should Be for Children and Youth With Challenging Behaviors</hd> <p>This idea admittedly can be challenge, as teachers and other students fear potential disruption of teaching and learning; we agree that all teachers should be able to teach without disruption and all students should feel safe. Yet, we also acknowledge that professional responses to behavioral disruptions traditionally place "the problem" within the student before commonplace methods of control are employed wholesale, such as zero tolerance policies and Applied Behavioral Analysis. Such responses arguably avail themselves to the principle of LRE in reverse, creating some of the most separate environments, leading to the highest of drop out/push out rates ([<reflink idref="bib97" id="ref119">97</reflink>]). All three of us have taught students labeled "Behavior Disordered" and/or "Emotionally Disturbed" and know that mechanistic responses within rigid systems are often antithetical to helping them. Given the mental health needs of many students, as well as the often-insufficient mental health services available to students and families, we know that schools that are communities of support provide the most compassionate environments for students who struggle with disruptive behaviors ([<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref120">53</reflink>]). Furthermore, promising approaches have been developed to counter the racialization of school discipline through designing schoolwide culturally responsive behavioral support models (see, for example, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref121">13</reflink>]). In sum, teachers and other professionals understand themselves as problem-solvers, aware that their responses can be flawed, including periods of trial and error before success is achieved.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-13">Decentering the Norms in General Education</hd> <p>It is important to recognize that authentic inclusive education is not assimilationist. It is not about fitting into an environment of pedagogical practices and classroom culture that expect all students to conform to rigid, normative standards. Authentic inclusion is, rather, accepting the value of human differences, experiences, and knowledges.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-14">General Education Can Change. It Has Already, and Can Continue to Do So</hd> <p>General education is often viewed as the "default," with presumptions that it cannot or will not change. However, the growth of responsible inclusive education has meant a shift from traditionally structured general education classes, toward different ways of conceiving education. Reauthorizations of IDEA (https://sites.ed.gov/idea/regs/b/b/300.114) have consistently required schools to create learning environments that work well for students with disabilities <emph>before</emph> a separate placement is considered, stating:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> (i) To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are nondisabled; and (ii) Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities from the regular educational environment occurs only if the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily (Section 1, Para. 2).</item> </ulist> <p>Because "the nature or severity" of a disability is subjective to decision makers, as is language on "supplementary aids and services" to be provided <emph>within</emph> the general education setting, we can see how shifts in thinking about where and how students are supported have occurred. It is a simple fact that more special education teachers are now expected to work with general education teachers in professional partnerships ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref122">62</reflink>]). There also exists an acceptance of collaborating with multiple adults in the classroom ([<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref123">31</reflink>]), a greater awareness of assistive technology ([<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref124">34</reflink>]), and culturally relevant and sustaining pedagogy designed to connect with, and be inclusive of, students ([<reflink idref="bib90" id="ref125">90</reflink>]). These shifts within the culture of education have taken time, and teachers are subjected to all kinds of initiatives and regulations—federal, state, and local. Part of a teacher's challenge, we believe, is to become—and remain—critically reflective practitioners who examine their assumptions about the purpose and nature of classrooms, including who belongs within them. Much of the progress achieved in inclusive classrooms has been made by educators who question the value of envisioning them as competitive spaces with a one-size-fits-all approach to pedagogy, in favor of communities of inter-dependency where everyone belongs and can thrive ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref126">32</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-15">Inclusion Is About Expanding, Not Reducing Evidence-Based Pedagogies and Practices</hd> <p>Having taught graduate and undergraduate courses of teaching methods in inclusive and special education classes, we think the argument of either/or general or special pedagogies is artificial. The field of Special Education has developed many teaching methods that can be used in the inclusive classroom. That said, many approaches to instruction within traditional Special Education are the product of reductionist research that does not afford students much (or any) opportunity to use new knowledge to create meaningful learning; that is, they do not allow students to do or make something with the information, skills, and concepts that teachers introduce them to—be it developing a booklet, writing a poem, making a presentation, building a model, and so on. This lack of opportunity to "make sense of" new material in culturally significant ways, allowing them to make meaningful use of new knowledge/skills, hampers students' learning, actually creating learning difficulties that educators ironically chalk up to the students' limitations or "disabilities" ([<reflink idref="bib126" id="ref127">126</reflink>]). This pedagogical issue is difficult for many traditionalist special educators to understand, as it is part of the paradigmatic debates. However, this issue is one of the major obstacles to successful, effective inclusion.</p> <p>A fear that some people have within Special Education is whether direct instruction fits into an inclusive classroom. The answer is, it can, if that is what is needed. For example, teachers have the option of providing a mini-lesson using direct instruction to an entire class (often appropriate for teaching new material, re-teaching if most of the class is not yet grasping the concept or content), or in a small group that is part of the routines of the classroom to enrich, explore, re-teach, or customize instruction. As always, we are operating on the assumption that inclusive classes have more than one educator in the room. Regarding the often-asked question of whether or not inclusive classrooms teach struggling readers to read, individualization can occur in the same way it does in separate classrooms of students with IEPs, along with enriching activities experienced alongside peers. Inclusive education is not about everyone always "keeping up" with culturally determined milestones and standards—as that is illogical when all human diversity is considered, and punitive for those who do not or cannot meet metrics.</p> <p>Much has been written in anti-inclusion rhetoric about a lack of "evidence based" practices. We agree that the notion of evidence-based is important. At the same time, it is equally important to describe what constitutes evidence based, according to whom, and in what context. In other words, the "gold standard" within traditional quantitative research of replicability is too narrow an idea, and therefore incompatible to individual responses to successful inclusive practices (Boyle et. al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref128">25</reflink>]). There have always been inclusion-compatible practices described extensively in course-based textbooks that incorporate scholars' published work in peer-reviewed journals (see, for example, [<reflink idref="bib96" id="ref129">96</reflink>]). In contrast, an analysis of Special Education's What Work's Clearinghouse yielded surprisingly modest evidence-based findings (Ferri et al., [<reflink idref="bib59" id="ref130">59</reflink>]). Furthermore, what are claimed to be evidence-based practices—for example, in researching reading methods—have often been conducted outside of classrooms in lab-like settings unrepresentative of teaching environments.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-16">Special Educators Can Still Be Special Educators, Expanding and Redefining "The Role"</hd> <p>We realize that school systems have developed inclusive education in good faith, resulting in many successes (Danforth, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref131">46</reflink>]). Meanwhile, others have struggled with partial successes and some failures due to a variety of reasons, including the very real challenges of social attitudes and how schools are organized ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref132">32</reflink>]). The move toward inclusion has occurred with options on a continuum for education to still place students in self-contained and special settings, albeit in smaller percentages. The reality of our current situation is that teacher education programs must prepare special educators to work in both integrated and segregated settings. The skills that special educators are currently taught about individualizing instruction are potentially valuable in all environments where they may teach. Nevertheless, crafting instructional plans for inclusive classes is different from self-contained placements, as all aspects of planning, pedagogy, and assessment are shared responsibilities by special and general education professionals ([<reflink idref="bib62" id="ref133">62</reflink>]). Moreover, a Special Education teacher's role has shifted out of necessity because the majority support students in inclusive classrooms for part of—or all of—their day. This reality has required education programs to currently cultivate teachers who are skilled and flexible in terms of working in various settings throughout their careers—inclusive classrooms, resource-room services, self-contained classes, and more restrictive environments.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-17">The Relationship of Science and Culture to Inclusion</hd> <p>If Special Education unquestioningly applies its version of science to disability in relation to instruction, and this undergirding principle is invoked in its stance toward inclusive education, deep divisions will remain. There has been a call by some to (re) define Special Education as a discipline driven by its version of science (see, for example, [<reflink idref="bib91" id="ref134">91</reflink>]), something we believe is fundamentally at odds with the vision of inclusive education. Indeed, Special Education has been described as experiencing an "identity crisis," portraying it as shrinking, increasingly undervalued, irrelevant, grossly misunderstood, and in need of revitalization ([<reflink idref="bib86" id="ref135">86</reflink>]). Many of the works cited in making points or defending arguments for an acritical version of a science-only grounding are from the 1970s and 1980s. Since then, there have been numerous developments that have influenced thinking around disability and education—including the DRM ([<reflink idref="bib60" id="ref136">60</reflink>]), the international inclusive education movement ([<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref137">14</reflink>]), broadening conceptualizations of research and methodologies (Connor et al., [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref138">40</reflink>]), and an acknowledgment of intersectional experiences ([<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref139">33</reflink>]), all of which the canon of Special Education has seen as largely incompatible with their original vision—placing it in the awkward position of defending the benefits of being segregated, rebranding special education as "dedicated" ([<reflink idref="bib85" id="ref140">85</reflink>], p. 7). Recently, intersectional thinking such DisCrit has been termed "the destruction of special education in the name of ideology" ([<reflink idref="bib74" id="ref141">74</reflink>], p. 1). Tellingly, the author's own ideology, located in scientism—an unquestioned, excessive belief in the power of scientific knowledge and techniques—remains unacknowledged ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref142">26</reflink>]). Enlightenment Science has profoundly shaped research practices that have dominated traditional special education, providing the field with a rationale for not deeply engaging with complex issues of race and culture. Such ideological denial is a typical example of whiteness as property ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref143">4</reflink>]), in this case, "owning knowledge rights" by claiming that a particular world view is culture free, neutral, and superior over all other ways of knowing ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref144">3</reflink>]). However, as science journalist Angela Saini notes, "Science is always shaped by the time and place it is carried out in. ... [I]t is at the mercy of the personal and political beliefs of those carrying it out" (Saini, [<reflink idref="bib112" id="ref145">112</reflink>], p. 41).</p> <p>At the heart of the matter lies long standing paradigmatic debates about the unquestioned supremacy of objective scientific thinking versus science viewed as a human invention, a discipline located within, inextricable from, and constantly subjected to, cultural forces. There is a notion, we believe, that if Special Education is kept as an entirely separate discipline, the settings can stay more "scientific" —that is, controllable—a problematic assumption, given the nature of classrooms replete with countless variations of teacher dispositions, pedagogies, student abilities, and cultural and social norms. Our contention here is that nothing can be culture free, including teaching and learning—or the field of Special Education itself. If we view classrooms primarily as social spaces that are culturally situated, our instructional lens is not reduced to deficit-thinking and remediation, but, rather, learning about the whole child, their overall general wellbeing, abilities, struggles, and how we engage them to develop their potential to reach the next level—in academic, social, and emotional realms—always developing as critical thinkers. What is defined as water-tight "scientific control" is incompatible with many evidence-based pedagogical practices, such as project-based learning, that factor in the academic skills along with interests, social dynamics, and backgrounds of students ([<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref146">22</reflink>]). Usually, teaching involves a mixture of evidence-based practices that are adapted, modified, extended, reinterpreted, or reinvented, improvised in creative ways that blur lines to build the support needed for a particular student at that moment.</p> <p>For some readers, Scientific and Cultural considerations of teaching and learning invoke the debates about Medical versus Social models of disability (Connor &amp; Valle, [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref147">41</reflink>]). [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref148">28</reflink>] notes that the law "has based the definition of disability on the medical model and suggests that this may strengthen some of the underlying factors that contribute to segregation and discrimination of disabled people" (p. 26). At this point, we must ask whether Special Education cannot imagine different kinds of learning environments other than the traditional "sit and get" classrooms of an earlier era and which still often prevails—despite social, cultural, historical, political and technological changes in the world. There is a primary assumption in much of the anti-inclusion literature that there is no alternative. If that is the case, then we must ask why. Is creating alternative ways of understanding and operating too much of a risk for some fundamental values behind a rigid commitment to the traditional classroom? [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref149">52</reflink>] has discussed this dilemma within our field. Such values include: our culture's worship of "rugged individualism," competition (the reason that schools sort, select, and stratify students), educators' penchant for locating the "problem" within the "failing" students, and so on. We contend that the commitment to these values in a canonical field of special education actually inhibits envisioning, developing, and supporting collaboration and commonplace community activities that reflect interdependence within inclusive classrooms. Subsequently, in the next section, we feature ways in which inclusive classrooms can best serve students with mild to multiple support needs.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-18">Reimagining the Inclusive General Education Classroom</hd> <p>Some of the most intractable obstacles facing inclusive education reforms can largely be attributed to what are often referred to as the "the realities" of the general education classroom. We are all deeply familiar with these so-called realities, and it is often asserted that they are the reason that educational segregation seems necessary for those students who "can't keep up" or "fit in." They consist of a constellation of historical, taken-for-granted commitments shaping the way that classrooms function. These commitments impoverish the educational experiences of all students but are particularly detrimental to the possibility of inclusive education.</p> <p>First, classrooms continue to be predicated on what Paulo Freire ([<reflink idref="bib61" id="ref150">61</reflink>]) famously dubbed the "banking concept of learning," or what we earlier referred to as the "sit-and-get" approach. This approach is informed by the deeply persistent conception that teaching and learning are all about the cognitive accumulation of information. Regrettably overlooked is the fact that we live in an age of instant access to information. Almost anything one might want to know in any given moment can be located through a google search, a perusal of Wikipedia, or, for more esoteric information, through an incredibly extensive online collection of journals, data bases, and websites. More recently, OpenAI stunned the educational world by releasing ChatGPT, a text-based artificial intelligence tool that can answer questions and write essays on endless topics.</p> <p>Information is readily available in ways that it has never before been in human history; however, how children and youth might distinguish reliable information from misinformation and then use that more valuable information to work to solve local and global problems is not. As we are all excruciatingly aware, there are existential problems ahead. The world of tomorrow is one in which the young people of today will urgently need to become adept problem-solvers. What is needed are classrooms that actively prepare them to <emph>use</emph> their minds to both create and harness knowledge toward forging novel solutions to problems and alternative ways of living.</p> <p>Second, student learning standards and assessments often enforce the commitment to chronological, statistically normative, information accumulation. Put in plainer terms, in most cases students of the same age must learn the same things on the same day and in the same way. Deviations from the norm are viewed, for better or worse, as aberrations and seem to require, in a seemingly commonsense kind of way, that educators must sort and select students into categories for either educational acceleration or remediation, and sometimes exclusion.</p> <p>A third commitment is that education must inevitably impose a competitive ethos lest student motivation falters, excellence goes uncelebrated, or the talentless and mediocre end up in coveted universities or professions. The result is an individualistic chase where, as [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref151">52</reflink>] ruefully observed, everybody must be ahead of everyone else. What might the realities of the general education classroom look like in the absence of these commitments? What teaching methods, practices, and arrangements would make inclusive classrooms both educationally first-rate and practically feasible? First and foremost, they are classrooms in which students work collaboratively, interdependently—a highly valued skill in today's workplace—to both learn and <emph>use</emph> information to solve meaningful problems (see [<reflink idref="bib128" id="ref152">128</reflink>]).</p> <p>Well-known and well-researched approaches include Project-Based Learning ([<reflink idref="bib92" id="ref153">92</reflink>]), problem-based learning ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref154">16</reflink>]), Cooperative Learning ([<reflink idref="bib82" id="ref155">82</reflink>]), Universal Design for Learning (see the CAST website), Differentiated Instruction (Tomlinson, [<reflink idref="bib119" id="ref156">119</reflink>]), Readers' and Writers' Workshops ([<reflink idref="bib120" id="ref157">120</reflink>]), and peer-mediated instruction ([<reflink idref="bib73" id="ref158">73</reflink>]). In classrooms that employ these approaches, students of highly diverse stages of achievement and capability work collaboratively in heterogeneous groups where the learning activities for each student can be assigned according to individual learning readiness and goals (including formalized IEP goals, and more challenging goals for accelerated students—and for every other student, for that matter). When needed, small group direct instruction can be integrated by teachers while other students are working collaboratively or individually. When well-planned and executed, they provide teachers with the flexibility needed to address on-the-spot learning needs without holding up the learning of other students.</p> <p>Having used these approaches in highly diverse classrooms from pre K-12, we can attest that many students with and without disabilities regularly surprised us by demonstrating previously hidden competency and creativity. (For example, Author 3 had a fourth-grade student with specific learning disabilities and literacy challenges enthusiastically explain to the school's principal, who had dropped by the classroom unannounced, that he was editing his third draft of a story he had written for Writers' Workshop, and was using the word processor's thesaurus to meet his goal of using more descriptive language.) Students also had remarkably increased motivation when engaged in meaningful learning endeavors and, importantly, because these approaches <emph>are</emph> highly engaging, we have witnessed dramatic reductions in challenging behaviors. Put differently, a teacher who is well-versed in disability rights and disability justice reduces student behaviors deemed to be "problematic" through developing strong relationships with them—validating who they are and can become—in ways that undergird their inclusive practice.</p> <p>Also, because these teaching arrangements are collaborative and distinctly noncompetitive, they lend themselves to social emotional learning that teachers can readily incorporate into the learning environment. Project-based learning also easily lends itself to culturally responsive teaching. Imagine, for example, a high school history class studying the civil rights movement interviewing members of their own community to learn about the lived experiences during that era; or students studying the assigned history textbook who write their own addendum to the text using original sources to document the history missing from the textbook. In another example, in teaching science it is vital to connect to students' backgrounds, interests, and "funds of knowledge" ([<reflink idref="bib101" id="ref159">101</reflink>]), and be "relatable" in order to counter the phenomenon of "Latinx, Black, Native American, and first-generation backgrounds, as well as students with disabilities ... [continuously being] underrepresented in STEM fields" ([<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref160">50</reflink>], p. 71). For example, secondary level students could explore common diseases (e.g., high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes, sickle cell, Tay Sachs, cystic fibrosis, asthma, and so on), analyzing YouTube recordings of individuals or communities facing a specific health problem, and talking with family members about their knowledge, along with studying local hospital/clinic statistics. Similarly, people's real life, everyday application of mathematics must make sense to students. For example, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref161">54</reflink>] narrates a project created by six teachers serving a predominantly Latine community who sought ways to authentically engage parents in their child's learning. During back-to-school night, students were asked to make a 2-minute recording in which they asked their parents, "How do you use math in your job or everyday life?" This resulted in a plethora of information that teachers then used to create lessons. For example, one parent who worked in a shipping company, using measures and weights for packages, provided an opportunity for integrating surface and volume into everyday situations, and the basis for hypothetical "real life" problem solving. In sum, regardless of content area, projects can involve interdisciplinary work that includes music, the visual and performing arts, literacy, science, and mathematics. Opportunities for showcasing the talents of students who rarely—if ever—have the chance to stand out, also emerge in such settings.</p> <p>Importantly, these examples clearly demonstrate that it is not only possible, but even natural, to implement culturally relevant and culturally sustaining pedagogy ([<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref162">8</reflink>]). Integrating students' cultural identities, histories, and lived experiences using these pedagogical practices and teaching arrangements creates classrooms where they know themselves to be valued and capable: where they belong in the deepest sense. In short, general education classrooms free from the time-worn commitments cited earlier are places where instruction is designed for inherently inclusive flexibility. There, students attain new knowledge through meaningful application of that knowledge, and a sense of belonging replaces invidious comparisons: Mutual regard replaces competitive structures that isolate and divide.</p> <p>Although it is increasingly common for scholars to recognize that disability is a cultural construct, it is not enough to concede this point without taking responsibility for how our teaching arrangements and assessment practices make the construction of disability appear seemingly inevitable, objective, culture- and values-free, race and social class-neutral, and so on. While we are not asserting that learning differences and needs are nonexistent, we are asking that educators employ methods, arrangements, and practices that do not make those differences a problem. We strongly contend that our traditional practices do exactly that, as do our habits of sorting and selecting, our hegemonic commitment to an individualistic/competitive ethos, and our fixation on students "keeping up" with their peers, based on a narrow prescriptive and culturally loaded standards.</p> <p>As noted previously, we are not asserting that there is never a situation where a student may not be better off in a general education classroom. Undoubtedly, general education classrooms vary greatly in terms of how well they support the learning and growth of a diversity of learners. Why is it that almost 5 decades since the inception of Special Education we are still in a position to "hope" for flexible, innovative, highly supportive general education learning environments or else risk disability-based segregation? Given over 3 decades of improvement of inclusive practices based on contributions from researchers and practitioners, such segregation should become vanishingly rare. To make it thus, with the thoughtful support of special educators, general education classrooms must be designed so that expected student differences are integrated into the teaching methods/arrangement and assessment practices. Such methods, arrangements, and practices are fully available, and evidence based.</p> <hd id="AN0183813416-19">Conclusion</hd> <p>As inclusive education has always been debated and contended within traditional Special Education ideology ([<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref163">26</reflink>]), we must maintain a focus that supports the growth of responsible inclusive practices. We end this letter by asking some of our many questions relating to history, theory, research, practice, policy, and teacher education, for the field to consider as we move forward. Because inclusive education is a global movement, fueled by the DRM's demands for inclusion, we hope these questions are springboards to all educators about where they stand and what they do to improve inclusive education for students with disabilities.</p> <p>History:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> To what degree is the DRM, DJ, and voices of disability activists centered in our teaching and research?</item> <p></p> <item> How are discussions of ethics about inclusion, incorporating intersectionality, explored in our classes and research?</item> <p></p> <item> In addition to successful inclusion, what lessons can we learn from in-name-only/"irresponsible"/inauthentic inclusion to inform our classes and research?</item> </ulist> <p>Theory:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How do we <emph>all</emph> make our ideology transparent regarding inclusive education?</item> <p></p> <item> What informs our theoretical frameworks for understanding, teaching about, and practicing inclusive education?</item> <p></p> <item> How can we incorporate intersectional considerations in terms of disability experiences and inclusive education?</item> </ulist> <p>Research:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How can our knowledge about inclusive classrooms be informed by being in them, being creative, being problem-solvers?</item> <p></p> <item> What can we do in terms of action research, by working with schools to seek to improve their inclusive practices? How can we participate in building inclusive communities?</item> <p></p> <item> In what ways can we continue to diversify our research questions, methodologies, analyses, discussions and recommendations to support inclusive education?</item> </ulist> <p>Teacher Education:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> What can be done in <emph>all</emph> teacher education programs to support inclusive practices<emph>?</emph></item> <p></p> <item> How can teachers be prepared to become inclusive advocates, collaborative educators, and problem-solvers who are adept in many kinds of instructional practices?</item> <p></p> <item> How can educators be prepared to understand, and respond to, sociocultural differences between teachers and students (and students and students)?</item> </ulist> <p>Classroom Practice:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> In what ways is it beneficial to primarily see teaching as building and maintaining relationships with students, and forging an interdependent community of learners?</item> <p></p> <item> How can we help teachers focus on the removal of physical, attitudinal, and curriculum barriers that inhibit inclusive practices?</item> <p></p> <item> How can we maximize technology so that we attempt to close the digital divide?</item> </ulist> <p>Policy:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> How can funding that has long been funneled into traditional special education be used to engage with and support authentic inclusion?</item> <p></p> <item> Given that IDEIA emphasizes the importance of general education setting, how can we emphasize the benefits and possibilities of inclusive education in districts and schools?</item> <p></p> <item> What are some ways to assess inclusive practices that incorporate the culture of inclusion? (See, for example, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref164">21</reflink>]). How might we develop and refine others?</item> </ulist> <p>These questions only scratch the surface of topics needing to be explored, discussed, and debated. We know there are no scientific blueprints for inclusive education; nor can there be. However, this open letter is intended for our field to reflect upon how it engages with the concept—and realities—of inclusive education, evaluate where it stands and why, and to continually move forward in creating and refining inclusive classrooms. Finally, we reiterate the need to always acknowledge that inclusive education is an ideal, and one that—like world peace—if we think in terms of achieving 100%, will always be somewhat elusive. Nevertheless, that should not prevent us from striving. It is important that teachers understand <emph>why</emph> inclusion matters and that they develop a deep understanding and commitment to disability rights and disability justice.</p> <ref id="AN0183813416-20"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref1" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Ainscow M. (2013). From special education to effective schools for all: Widening the agenda. In Florian L. (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of special education (2nd ed, pp. 171–186). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Ainscow M., Booth T. (2005). From them to US: an international study of inclusion and education. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref3" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Anastasiou D., Burke M., Wiley A., Kauffman J. (2024). The telos of special education: A tripartite approach. Exceptionality, 32(2), 90–108. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2024.2301819</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref4" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Annamma S. A. (2015). Whiteness as property: Innocence and ability in teacher education. The Urban Review, 47(2), 293–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-014-0293-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref51" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Annamma S. A., Anyon Y., Joseph N. M., Farrar J., Greer E., Downing B., Simmons J. (2019). Black girls and school discipline: The complexities of being overrepresented and understudied. Urban Education, 54(2), 211–242. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042085916646610</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref52" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Annamma S., Connor D. J., Ferri B. A. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and disability. Ethnicity, and Education, 16(1), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/13613324.2012.730511</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref53" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Apple M. (2001). Educating the 'right' way: Markets, standards, God, and inequality. Routledge Falmer.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref54" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Aronson B., Laughter J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across content areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–206. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315582066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref55" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Artiles A. J. (1998). The dilemma of difference: Enriching the disproportionality discourse with theory and context. Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466998032001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Artiles A. J. (2011). Toward an interdisciplinary understanding of educational equity and difference: The case of the racialization of ability. Educational Researcher, 40(9), 431–445. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11429391</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Artiles A. J. (2013). Untangling the racialization of disabilities: An intersectionality critique across disability models. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race, 10(2), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X13000271</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Baglieri S. (2017). Disability studies and the inclusive classroom: Critical practices for embracing diversity in education (2<sups>nd</sups> edition). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bal A., Afacan K., Cakir H. I. (2018). Culturally responsive school discipline: Implementing learning lab at a high school for systemic transformation. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1007–1050. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831218768796</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ballad K. (1999). Inclusive education: International voices on disability and justice. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Banks J., Smith P., Neal D. C. (2022). Identity politics, exploring DisCrit's potential to empower activism and collective resistance. In Annamma S., Ferri B., Connor D. (Eds.), DisCrit expanded. (pp. 97–111). Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Barell J. F. (2006). Problem-based learning: An inquiry approach. Corwin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ben-Moshe L. (2020). Decarcerating disability: Deinstitutionalization and prison abolition. University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Beneke M. R., Love H. R. (2022). A DisCrit analysis of quality in early childhood: Toward pedagogies of wholeness, access, and interdependence. Teachers College Record, 124(12), 192–219. https://doi.org/10.1177/01614681221147348</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berman D. L., Connor D. J. (2017). A child, a family, a school, a community: A tale of inclusive education. Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Berne P., Morales A. L., Langstaff D. (2018). Ten principles of disability justice. Women's Studies Quarterly, 46(1-2), 227–230. https://doi.org/10.1353/wsq.2018.0003</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Booth T., Ainscow M. (2002). Index for inclusion; Developing learning and participation in schools. Center for Studies on Inclusive Education. https://<ulink href="http://www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Index%20English.pdf">www.eenet.org.uk/resources/docs/Index%20English.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boss S., Larmer J. (2018). Project based teaching: How to create rigorous and engaging learning experiences. ASCD.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boveda M., Annamma S. A. (2023). Beyond making a statement: An intersectional framing of the power and possibilities of positioning. Educational Researcher, 52(5), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X231167149</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boveda M., Weinberg A. E. (2022). Centering racialized educators in collaborative teacher education: The development of the intersectionally conscious collaboration protocol. Teacher Education and Special Education, 45(1), 8–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/08884064211062874</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Boyle C., Koutsouris G., Mateu A. S., Anderson J. (2020). The matter of 'evidence' in the inclusion education debate. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Retrieved 30 November 2024, from https://oxfordre.com/education/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-1019</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brantlinger E. (1997). Using ideologies: Cases of non-recognition of the politics of research and practice in special education. Review of Educational Research, 67(4), 425–459. https://doi.org/10.2307/1170517</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Brown v. Board of Education, 347 U.S. 483. (1954).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Bunbury S. (2019). Unconscious bias and the medical model: How the social model may hold the key to transformative thinking about disability discrimination. International Journal of Discrimination and the Law, 19(1), 26–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1358229118820742</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Carabado D. W., Crenshaw K., Mays V. M., Tomlinson B. (2014). Intersectionality: Mapping the movements of a theory. The DuBois Review, 303. https://doi.org/10.10170S1742058X13000349</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> CAST https://<ulink href="http://www.cast.org/">www.cast.org/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Causton J., McLeod K. (2020). The paraprofessional's handbook for effective support in inclusive classrooms. Brookes.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Causton J., McLeod K., Pretti-Frontczack K., Rufo J., Gordon P. (2023). The way to inclusion: How leaders create schools where every student belongs. ASCD.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cavendish W., Samson J. (2021). Intersectionality in education: Toward more equitable policy, research, and practice. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Chambers D. (2020). Assistive technology to support inclusive education. Emerald.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Cioè-Peña M. (2017). The intersectional gap: How bilingual students in the United States are excluded from inclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(9), 906–919. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2017.1296032</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Codrington J., Fairchild H. H. (2012). Special education and the mis-education of African American children: A call to action. The Association of Black Psychologists.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connelly E. A. J. (2020, July 8). Overlooked no more: Brad Lomax, a bridge between civil rights movements. New York Times. https://<ulink href="http://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/obituaries/brad-lomax-overlooked.html">www.nytimes.com/2020/07/08/obituaries/brad-lomax-overlooked.html</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. J. (2006). Michael's story: "I get into so much trouble just by walking": Narrative knowing and life at the intersections of learning disability, race, and class. Equity and Excellence in Education, 39, 154–165. https://doi.org/10.1080/10665680500533942</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. J. (2012). Suspended in liminal space: Special education administrators and the decade of educational reform within the NYC school system. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 25(1), 25–37.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. J., Gallagher D., Ferri B. (2011). Broadening our horizons: Toward a plurality of methodologies in learning disability research. Learning Disability Quarterly, 32(2), 107–121. https://doi.org/10.1177/073194871103400201</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Connor D. J., Valle J. W. (2015). A socio-cultural reframing of science and dis/ability in education: Past problems, current concerns, and future possibilities. Journal of Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10(2), 1103–1112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-015-9712-6</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Council for Exceptional Children. (1987). The regular education initiative: A statement by the teacher education division. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20(5), 289–292. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221948702000508</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Craft E., Howley A. (2018). African American students' experiences in special education programs. Teachers College Record, 120(10), 1–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811812001001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw K. (1989). Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory, and ant-racist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum, 1, Article 8. <ulink href="http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8">http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Crenshaw K. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. Stanford Law Review, 43(6), 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Danforth S (2017a). Becoming a great inclusive educator (2nd ed.). Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Danforth S. (2017b). The incomplete child: An intellectual history of learning disabilities. Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Danforth S., Rhodes W. C. (1997). Deconstructing disability: A philosophy for inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 18(6), 357–366. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259701800605</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> DeMatthews D. (2020). Addressing racism and ableism in schools: A DisCrit leadership framework for principals. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 93(1), 27–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098655.2019.1690419</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Denton M., Borrego M. (2021). Funds of knowledge in STEM education: A scoping review. Studies in Engineering Education, 1(2), 71–92. https://doi.org/10.21061/see.19</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Disability Social History Project. (2021, December 19). The 504 protests and the black panther party. https://disabilityhistory.org/2021/12/19/the-504-protests-and-the-black-panther-party/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dudley-Marling C. (2004). The social construction of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37(6), 482–489. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194040370060201</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Dutro E. (2019). The vulnerable heart of literacy: Centering trauma as powerful pedagogy. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ellis M. (2019). Knowing and valuing every learner: Culturally responsive mathematics teaching. Curriculum Associates.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ellis K. (2023). The forgotten activists: Black people in the disability rights movement. Race &amp; Social Justice Law Review, 14(1), 57–80.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erevelles N., Minear A. (2010). Unspeakable offenses: Untangling race and disability in discourses of intersectionality. Journal of Literary &amp; Cultural Disability Studies, 4(2), 127–145. https://doi.org/10.3828/jlcds.2010.11</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> European Agency on Special Needs and Inclusive Education (n.d.). https://<ulink href="http://www.european-agency.org/">www.european-agency.org/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferri B. A., Connor D. J. (2005). Tools of exclusion: Race, disability, and (Re)Segregated education. Teachers College Record, 107(3), 453–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9620.2005.0048</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ferri B., Gallagher D., Connor D. J. (2011). Pluralizing methodologies in the field of LD: From "what works" to what matters. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34(3), 222–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/07319487114192</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Fleischer D. Z., Zames F. (2011). The disability rights movement: From charity to confrontation (2<sups>nd</sups> ed.). Temple University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Freire P. ((2006) [1970]). The banking model of education. In Provenzo E. F. (Ed.), Critical issues in education: An anthology of readings (pp. 105–117). Sage.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Friend M. (2020). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. Pearson.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gabel S. L., Danforth S. (2008). Disability and the politics of education: An international Reader. Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallagher D. J. (1998). The scientific knowledge base of special education: Do we know what we think we know? Exceptional Children, 64(4), 493–502. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440299806400405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallagher D. J. (2015). Exploring some moral dimensions of the social model of disability. In Connor D., Valle J., Hale C. (Eds.), Practicing disability studies in education: Acting toward social change (pp. 19–34). Peter Lang.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallagher D., Connor D. J., Ferri B. A. (2014). Beyond the far too incessant schism: Special education and the social model of disability. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(11), 1120–1142. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2013.875599</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gallagher D. J., Heshusius L., Iano P., Skrtic T. M. (2003). Challenging orthodoxy in special education. Love Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garcia S. B., Ortiz A. A. (2014). Intersectionality as a framework for transformative research in special education. Multiple Voices, 13(2), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.56829/muvo.13.1.x2u036p588087pu0</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gardner A., Lipsky D. K. (1987). Beyond special education toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Education Review, 57, 367–395. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.4.kj517305m7761218</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gay G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice (3<sups>rd</sups> ed.). Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> H A. (2020). The global legacy of black disabled activist Don Galloway. Mobility International USA. https://<ulink href="http://www.miusa.org/blog/galloway/">www.miusa.org/blog/galloway/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Habib D. (2008). Including Samuel [Film]. LikeRightNow Films.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall T., Stegila A. (2003). Peer mediated instruction and intervention. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hallahan D. (2024). Welcome to the destruction of special education in the name of ideology. Exceptionality, 32(2), 71–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2024.2300192</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harry B., Klingner J. (2014). Why are so many minority students in special education?Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harry B., Ocasio-Stoutenburg L. (2020). Meeting families where they are: Building equity through advocacy with diverse schools and communities. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hernández-Saca D. I., Gutmann Kahn L., Cannon M. A. (2018). Intersectionality dis/ability research: How dis/ability research in education engages intersectionality to uncover the multidimensional construction of dis/abled experiences. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), 286–311. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18762439</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hines D. E., Boveda M., Lindo E. J. (2021). Racism by another name: Black students, overrepresentation, and the carceral state in special education. Information Age.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Holcomb T. (2012). Introduction to American Deaf Culture. Oxford University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics. (2024). Inclusion of Students with Disabilities. https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=59</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400. (2004).</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson D. W., Johnson R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jorgensen C. M. (2018). It's more than "just being in." Creating authentic inclusion for students with complex support needs. Brookes.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J. M., Anastasiou D. (2019). On cultural politics in special education: Is much of it justifiable? Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 30(2), 78–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207318822262</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J. M., Anastasiou D., Hornby G., Lopes J., Burke M. D., Felder M., Ahrbeck B., Wiley A. (2022). Imagining and reimagining the future of special education and inclusive education. Education Sciences, 12(12), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci12120903</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J., Anastasiou D., Maag J. W. (2017). Special education at the crossroad: An identity crisis and the need for a scientific reconstruction. Exceptionality, 25(2), 139–155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2016.1238380</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J., Badar J. (2018). Extremism and disability chic. Exceptionality, 26(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2017.1283632</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J., Hallahan D. P. (1995). The illusion of full inclusion: A comprehensive critique of a current special education bandwagon. ProEd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kauffman J., Ward D. M., Badar J. (2015). The delusion of full inclusion. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ladson-Billings G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. https://doi.org/10.2307/1163320</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Landrum T. J. (2015). Science matters in special education. In Bateman B., Lloyd J. W., Tankersley M. (Eds.), Enduring issues in special education: Personal perspectives (pp. 429–440). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Larmer J. (2016). It's a project-based world. Educational Leadership, 73(6), 66–70. https://ascd.org/el/articles/its-a-project-based-world</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeBrecht J., Newnham N., Bolder S. (2020). Crip camp [Film]. Higher Ground Productions.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lindo E. J. (2020). Committed to advancing cultural competence and culturally sustaining pedagogy. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(1), 10–11. https://doi.org/10.1177/0040059920945644</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Losen D. J., Orfield G. (2002). Racial inequality in special education. Harvard Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mastropieri M., Scruggs T. (2018). The inclusive classroom. Pearson.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mayes K. (2023). The unteachables: Disability rights and the potential of black special education. University of Minnesota Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mccray C. R., Beachum F. D., Yawn C. D. (2015). Saving our future by reducing suspensions and expulsions among African American males. Journal of School Leadership, 25(2), 345–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/105268461502500206</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Meyer A., Rose D. H., Gordon D. (2023). Universal design for learning: Theory and Practice. CAST Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Migliarini V., Elder B. (2024). The future of inclusive education: intersectional perspectives. Palgrave MacMillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Moll L. C., Amanti C., Neff D., Gonzalez N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405849209543534</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morgan P. L., Farkas G., Hillemeier M., Mattison R., Maczuga S., Li H., Cook M. (2015). Minorities are disproportionately underrepresented in special education: Longitudinal evidence across five disability conditions. Educational Researcher, 44(5), 278–292. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X15591157</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Murawski W., Dieker L. (2008). 50 ways to keep your co-teacher: Strategies before, during, and after co-teaching. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(4), 40–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990804000405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Black Disability Coalition. (2023). https://<ulink href="http://www.blackdisability.org/">www.blackdisability.org/</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nishida A. (2019). Critical disability praxis. In Ellis K., Garland Thomson R., Kent M., Robertson R. (Eds.), Manifestos for the future of critical disability studies (pp. 239–247). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ong-Dean C. (2009). Distinguishing disability: Parents, privilege, and special education. University of Chicago Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> O'Toole C. (2015). Fading scars: My queer disability history. Autonomous Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Paris D., Alim H. S. (2017). Culturally sustaining pedagogies. Teachers College Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Price M. (2024, May). In service of thoughts on claiming disability justice. Disability Visibility Project. [Blog] https://disabilityvisibilityproject.com/2024/06/01/in-service-of-thoughts-on-claiming-disability-justice/.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Roberts Z. (2018, September 15). Personal communication.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sacks L. (2019). The school-to-prison pipeline: The plight of African American males in special education. In Halder S., Argyropolos V. (Eds.), Inclusion, equity and access for individuals with disabilities (pp. 67–87). Palgrave Macmillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Saini S. (2019). Superior: The return of race science. Beacon Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Slee R. (2019). Belonging in an age of exclusion. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 23(9), 909–922. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2019.1602366</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Smith P. (2004). Whiteness, normal theory, and disability studies. Disability Studies Quarterly, 24(2). https://ojs.library.osu.edu/index.php/dsq/article/view/491/668 https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v24i2.491</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Steinmetz K. (2020, February 20). She coined the term 'intersectionality' over 30 years ago. Here's what it means to her today. Time Magazine.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Swinton J. (2012). From inclusion to belonging: A practical theology of community, disability and humanness. Journal of Religion, Disability &amp; Health, 16(2), 172–190. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228967.2012.676243</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tefera A. A., Powers J. M., Fischman G. E. (2018). Intersectionality in education: A conceptual aspiration and research imperative. Review of Research in Education, 42(1), vii–xvii. https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18768504</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thomas G., Loxley A. (2022). Deconstructing special education and constructing inclusion. Open University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tomlinson C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms. In Classrooms (2 ed.). ASCD.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Troia G. A., Lin S. C., Monroe B. W., Cohen S. (2009). The effects of writing workshop instruction on the performance and motivation of good and poor writers. In Troia G. (Ed.), Instruction and assessment for struggling writers: Evidence-based practices (pp. 77–112). Guilford.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1994). The Salamanca Statement and framework for action on special needs education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.). Education 2030: Global Education Cooperation Mechanism. https://<ulink href="http://www.sdg4education2030.org/">www.sdg4education2030.org/</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.). Every learner matters: A renewed drive for inclusion in education in Cali. https://<ulink href="http://www.unesco.org/en/articles/every-learner-matters-renewed-drive-inclusion-education-cali">www.unesco.org/en/articles/every-learner-matters-renewed-drive-inclusion-education-cali</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations. (n.d.). Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. https://social.desa.un.org/issues/disability/crpd/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities-crpd.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Valle J., Connor D. J. (2019). Rethinking disability: A disability studies guide to inclusive practices (2nd ed.). Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Varenne H., McDermott R. (2018). Successful failure. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaughn S., Schumm J. S. (1995). Responsible inclusion for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(5), 264–270. https://doi.org/10.1177/002221949502800502</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vygotsky L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Waitoller F. R., Artiles A. J. (2013). A decade of professional development research for inclusive education: A critical review and notes for a research program. Review of Educational Research, 83(3), 319–356. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654313483905</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Waitoller F. R., Thorius K. A. K. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Toward an inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. https://doi.org/10.17763/1943-5045-86.3.366</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Will M. C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52(5), 411–415. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298605200502</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wilt C. L., Annamma S. A., Wilmot J. M., Nyegenye S. N., Miller A. L., Jackson E. E. (2022). Performing color-evasiveness: A DisCrit analysis of educators' discourse in the US. Teaching and Teacher Education, 117, 10376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2022.103761</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wong A. (2020). Disability visibility. Vintage.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0183813416-21"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> David J. Connor https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2886-8149</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> All three authors seek and support the absolute maximum inclusion of all students with disabilities. We also recognize that there are some instances in which a very small number of students may merit separate environments because of their disability, for example, students with mental health issues, students experiencing severe trauma, and so on. Let us be clear, the goal is to include all students, and segregation should be viewed as a temporary solution with the objective of returning to inclusive classrooms. We also recognize that this is a contentious issue within our field, and will likely remain so.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Manuscript received August 2024; accepted November 2024.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By David J. Connor; Scot Danforth and Deborah Gallagher</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib63" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib66" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib64" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib67" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib125" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib58" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib65" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib109" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib131" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib121" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib123" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib57" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib69" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib88" firstref="ref34"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib85" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib107" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib93" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib110" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib71" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib114" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib84" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib115" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib75" firstref="ref61"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib95" firstref="ref62"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib102" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib87" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib56" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref69"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib129" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl47" bibid="bib117" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl48" bibid="bib77" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl49" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref73"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl50" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref75"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl51" bibid="bib132" firstref="ref77"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl52" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref78"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl53" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref79"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl54" bibid="bib100" firstref="ref80"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl55" bibid="bib105" firstref="ref81"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl56" bibid="bib104" firstref="ref82"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl57" bibid="bib133" firstref="ref83"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl58" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref84"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl59" bibid="bib116" firstref="ref89"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl60" bibid="bib113" firstref="ref90"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl61" bibid="bib127" firstref="ref91"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl62" bibid="bib99" firstref="ref92"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl63" bibid="bib94" firstref="ref93"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl64" bibid="bib130" firstref="ref94"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl65" bibid="bib96" firstref="ref95"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl66" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref96"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl67" bibid="bib103" firstref="ref97"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl68" bibid="bib70" firstref="ref98"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl69" bibid="bib108" firstref="ref99"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl70" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref100"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl71" bibid="bib81" firstref="ref101"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl72" bibid="bib72" firstref="ref102"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl73" bibid="bib97" firstref="ref104"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl74" bibid="bib79" firstref="ref105"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl75" bibid="bib89" firstref="ref107"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl76" bibid="bib118" firstref="ref108"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl77" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref111"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl78" bibid="bib98" firstref="ref112"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl79" bibid="bib111" firstref="ref113"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl80" bibid="bib106" firstref="ref114"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl81" bibid="bib78" firstref="ref115"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl82" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref116"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl83" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref117"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl84" bibid="bib83" firstref="ref118"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl85" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref120"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl86" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref121"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl87" bibid="bib62" firstref="ref122"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl88" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref123"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl89" bibid="bib90" firstref="ref125"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl90" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref126"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl91" bibid="bib126" firstref="ref127"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl92" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref128"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl93" bibid="bib59" firstref="ref130"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl94" bibid="bib91" firstref="ref134"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl95" bibid="bib86" firstref="ref135"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl96" bibid="bib60" firstref="ref136"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl97" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref137"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl98" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref138"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl99" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref139"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl100" bibid="bib74" firstref="ref141"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl101" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref142"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl102" bibid="bib112" firstref="ref145"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl103" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref146"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl104" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref148"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl105" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref149"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl106" bibid="bib61" firstref="ref150"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl107" bibid="bib128" firstref="ref152"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl108" bibid="bib92" firstref="ref153"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl109" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref154"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl110" bibid="bib82" firstref="ref155"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl111" bibid="bib119" firstref="ref156"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl112" bibid="bib120" firstref="ref157"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl113" bibid="bib73" firstref="ref158"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl114" bibid="bib101" firstref="ref159"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl115" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref160"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl116" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref161"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl117" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref164"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1466468 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: An Open Letter to the Field: Contemplating Special Education's Collaborative Role in Developing Inclusive Education – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22David+J%2E+Connor%22">David J. Connor</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2886-8149">0000-0002-2886-8149</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Scot+Danforth%22">Scot Danforth</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Deborah+Gallagher%22">Deborah Gallagher</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Exceptional+Children%22"><i>Exceptional Children</i></searchLink>. 2025 91(3):236-259. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 24 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Education%22">Special Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Inclusion%22">Inclusion</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Students+with+Disabilities%22">Students with Disabilities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Activism%22">Activism</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Intersectionality%22">Intersectionality</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Civil+Rights%22">Civil Rights</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Regular+and+Special+Education+Relationship%22">Regular and Special Education Relationship</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1177/00144029241303051 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0014-4029<br />2163-5560 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: The inclusion of students with disabilities with special education services into general education classes has been an integral part of education for over 3 decades. It is a worldwide movement that continues to grow. Yet, some Special Education researchers remain highly critical, even cynical, of inclusion, despite decades of research that have refined school and classroom-based practices so that the majority of students with disabilities, with few exceptions, can achieve inclusion. In this paper we emphasize the importance of maintaining an optimistic focus on inclusive education by (1) foregrounding the thinking of activists within the Disability Rights Movement and more recent disability collectives that undergird theories of disability justice and inclusion; (2) centering intersectional experiences of disability; (3) clarifying the intentions of inclusion and dispelling some lingering myths; and (4) describing ways that inclusive classrooms can best serve students with mild to complex and multiple support needs. We conclude with a request to our field to reflect upon and consider Special Education's evolving role in ongoing collaborative development of inclusive education. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2025 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1466468 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1466468 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1177/00144029241303051 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 24 StartPage: 236 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Special Education Type: general – SubjectFull: Inclusion Type: general – SubjectFull: Students with Disabilities Type: general – SubjectFull: Activism Type: general – SubjectFull: Intersectionality Type: general – SubjectFull: Civil Rights Type: general – SubjectFull: Regular and Special Education Relationship Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: An Open Letter to the Field: Contemplating Special Education's Collaborative Role in Developing Inclusive Education Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: David J. Connor – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Scot Danforth – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Deborah Gallagher IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 04 Type: published Y: 2025 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0014-4029 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 2163-5560 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 91 – Type: issue Value: 3 Titles: – TitleFull: Exceptional Children Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
