The ABC’s of Inclusion: High School Lessons on Accountability, Budgets, and Collaborative Teaching

• In Event: What Does a District’s Commitment to “Inclusive Practices” Mean and How Does It Affect School Practices?

Abstract

This paper describes the vision, definition, and practices of inclusion in two schools with different histories, cultures and community contexts. We compare the school-based visions with the district vision to identify converges and diverges in philosophy and practice of inclusive education and leadership. We draw on Baker’s (2002) discussion of equality, sameness, difference, and democracy and recognition that inclusion is in tension with exclusion and Riehl’s (2000) notion of inclusive leadership as indicated by the task of promoting inclusive practices within schools.
The role of school leaders has been recognized as vitally important to the development of system-wide support for inclusive practice (Frattura & Capper, 2007; Mayrowetz & Weinstein, 1999; Rayner, 2009; Riehl, 2000). This paper contributes to the larger debate on what inclusive education means for students and how the role of school leaders figure in constructing the meaning and practice of inclusive education. More specifically, it provides recommendations to district and school level administrators and educators for enacting the overarching vision of inclusive education espoused.
Methods
The three member high school research team conducted on-site interviews with faculty and administrators and classroom observations. A priori codes were established from the purpose of the study and protocol. The researchers established additional codes through thematic analysis of observations of a district-wide meeting on inclusion and interviews with the district’s Director and Assistant Director of Special Education. We also used quantitative methods to compare student academic achievement on standardized tests in these schools.
Analysis
We conducted a qualitative analysis of the interviews using the codes generated. Using Shield’s review on inclusive leadership and Baker’s notion of the relationship between inclusion and exclusion of students labeled dis/abled, we proceeded to look for examples of compound themes and tensions in the discourses (i.e., mission, policy, vision) and practices (i.e., budget, preparation, scheduling) resulting in inclusive/exclusive education and leadership. Additionally, we conducted a two-level hierarchical linear model analysis to determine whether there are any differences in student achievement between these two schools. Specifically, the research team compared the achievement of students with high frequency disabilities, low frequency disabilities, no disabilities, and gifted. The research team also controlled for gender, language proficiency, and social economic status.
Findings
The preliminary finding of this study are: that classrooms of self-contained classrooms for special education students continue to exist in these schools and such classrooms are viewed comfortably within the schools’ and district’s vision of inclusion; the alignment and misalignment between the support provided to individuals with disabilities and the schools’ purpose and status; concerns about the impact of district budget cuts on special education services provided. For the results on student achievement see Table 1. We also discuss implications of these findings and offer recommendations to address constraints such as divergence of visions, reduction of services, ad balance and integration between equity and excellence in definitions, visions, and practices related to inclusion.

Authors

• Zorka Karanxha, University of South Florida

• Vonzell Agosto, University of South Florida

• Gregory Knollman, University of South Florida