The Regular Education Initiative: Educational Reorganization for Rural School Districts

Abstract

The purpose of this analysis is to explore how rural school administrators can implement educational processes to enable the full inclusion of students with disabilities into the general education program. First, we review related literature including the historical basis of inclusion, the limitations of traditional special education practices, arguments of those opposed to full inclusion, and the unique characteristics of rural communities. We ground our analysis in a theoretical framework comprised of a categorical description of organizational theories and behavior. We apply this framework to consider how rural community characteristics can enable or constrain the structural, human resource, political, and symbolic processes of restructuring schools to the benefit of all students. As the field of education moves into the twenty-first century, yet another challenge faces American educators. An issue, which both challenges and requires educational restructuring, is the full inclusion of students with disabilities in the general education program.

Determining Complements and Compromises for Inclusion

“…People must start with themselves and acknowledge the need to be a part of the collective development and implementation of inclusion (Capper & Larkin, 1992). Wolfensberger (1991) noted that "the overwhelming bulk of the improvements [for educating individuals with disabilities] all derived from two states of mind that are available anytime, anywhere to anybody: Imagination and a humane attitude [sensitivity]" (p. 9).…”

Classwide Peer Tutoring: Effects on the Spelling Performance and Social Interactions of Students With Mild Disabilities and Their Typical Peers in an Integrated Instructional Setting

“…One of several arguments in favor of inclusion has been that during the past 15 years special education programs have failed to provide effective instruction (Capper & Larkin, 1992;Lipsky & Gartner, 1989;Reynolds et al, 1987). Previous research has suggested that mainstreamed settings have not been more effective than segregated settings in educating students with mild disabilities.…”