The purpose of this study was to examine the experiences of students with and without disabilities being educated in inclusive schools, documenting their perceptions of the culture of their school, inclusion, and the practices that were implemented to support all students. Focus groups were conducted with 86 students with and without disabilities from six schools that were recognized as exemplars of inclusive schoolwide practices. Three major themes emerged: (a) students’ sense of belonging in their school culture, (b) inclusion and its impact on students, and (c) school and classroom practices, such as positive behavior support systems, co-teaching, and instructional practices related to student self-determination and direction, feedback and re-teaching, multiple means of representation and expression, and technology utilization. Implications of these findings for implementing inclusive practices in other schools are discussed.
CarterE. W.CushingL. S.ClarkN. M.KennedyC. H. (2005). Effects of peer support interventions on students’ access to the general curriculum and social interactions. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 30, 15-25.
2.
CarterE. W.KennedyC. H. (2006). Promoting access to the general curriculum using peer support strategies. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 31, 284-292.
3.
CookB. G.OdomS. (2013). Evidence-based practices and implementation science in special education. Exceptional Children, 79, 135-144.
4.
Cook-SatherA. (2002). Authorizing students’ perspectives: Toward trust, dialogue, and change in education. Educational Researcher, 31, 3-14.
5.
Cook-SatherA. (2013). Translating learners, researchers, and qualitative approaches through investigations of students’ experiences in school. Qualitative Research, 13, 352-367.
6.
FullanM. (Ed.). (2009). The challenge of change: Start school improvement now! (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
7.
GloverT. A.VaughnS. (2010). The promise of response to intervention: Evaluating current science and practice. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
8.
GreenwoodC. R.KratochwillT. R.ClementsM. (Eds.). (2008). Schoolwide prevention models: Lessons learned in elementary schools. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
9.
KeefeE. B.MooreV. M.DuffF. R. (2006). Listening to the experts: Students with disabilities speak out. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
10.
KruegerR. A.CaseyM. A. (2014). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
11.
KurthJ. A.LyonK. J.ShogrenK. A. (2015). Supporting students with severe disabilities in inclusive schools: A descriptive account from schools implementing inclusive practices. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 40, 261-274.
12.
LaneK. L.MenziesH. M.KalbergJ. R.OakesW. P. (2012). A comprehensive, integrated three-tier model to meet students’ academic, behavioral, and social needs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
13.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
14.
MorganM.GibbsS.MaxwellK.BrittenN. (2002). Hearing children’s voices: Methodological issues in conducting focus groups with children aged 7-11 years. Qualitative Research, 2, 5-20. doi:10.1177/1468794102002001636
15.
National School Climate Council (2007). The School Climate Challenge: Narrowing the Gap Between School Climate Research and School Climate Policy, Practice Guidelines and Teacher Education Policy. http://nscc.csee.net/ or http://www.ecs.org/school-climate
16.
NoletV.McLaughlinM. J. (2005). Accessing the general curriculum: Including students with disabilities in standards-based reform (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
17.
PattonM. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
18.
PivikJ. R. (2010). The perspective of children and youth: How different stakeholders identify architectural barriers for inclusion in schools. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, 510-517. doi:10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.02.005
19.
PorterA.McMakenJ.HwangJ.YangR. (2011). Common core standards: The new U.S. intended curriculum. Educational Researcher, 40, 103-116. doi:10.3102/0013189X11405038
20.
RoseC. A.AllisonS.SimpsonC. G. (2012). Addressing bullying among students with disabilities within a multi-tier educational environment. New York, NY: Springer.
21.
RoseC. A.EspelageD. L.Monda-AmayaL. E. (2009). Bullying and victimisation rates among students in general and special education: A comparative analysis. Educational Psychology, 29, 761-776. doi:10.1080/01443410903254864
22.
RoseC. A.EspelageD. L.Monda-AmayaL. E.ShogrenK. A.AragonS. R. (2015). Bullying and middle school students with and without specific learning disabilities: An examination of social-ecological predictors. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 239-254. doi:10.1177/0022219413496279
23.
RoseC. A.Monda-AmayaL. E.EspelageD. L. (2011). Bullying perpetration and victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 114-130. doi:10.1177/0741932510361247
24.
RyndakD.JacksonL. B.WhiteJ. M. (2013). Involvement and progress in the general curriculum for students with extensive support needs: K–12 inclusive-education research and implications for the future. Inclusion, 1, 28-49. doi:10.1352/2326-6988-1.1.028
25.
SailorW. (2008-2009). Access to the general curriculum: Systems change or tinker some more?Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 33-34, 249-257.
26.
SailorW. (2009). Making RTI work: How smart schools are reforming education through schoolwide response-to-intervention models. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
27.
SailorW.McCartA.ChoiH. (2012). A comparison of academic outcomes and implementation of the schoolwide applications model in Washington, DC. Lawrence: University of Kansas.
SchalockR. L.Borthwick-DuffyS.BradleyV.BuntixW. H. E.CoulterD. L.CraigE. P. M.. . . YeagerM. H. (2010). Intellectual disability: Definition, classification, and systems of support (11th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.
30.
ShogrenK. A. (2013). Self-determination and transition planning. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
31.
ShogrenK. A.McCartA. B.LyonK. J.SailorW. S. (2015). All means all: Building knowledge for inclusive schoolwide transformation. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 40, 173-191.
32.
SnellM. E. (2003). Applying research to practice: The more pervasive problem?Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 28, 143-147.
33.
SnellM. E.BrownF. (2010). Instruction of students with severe disabilities (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
34.
ThapaA.CohenJ.GuffeyS.Higgins-D’AlessandroA. (2013). A review of school climate research. Review of Educational Research, 83, 357-385. doi:10.3102/0034654313483907
35.
ThiessenD.Cook-SatherA. (Eds.). (2007). International handbook of student experience in elementary and secondary school. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
36.
TsangK. L. V. (2013). Secondary pupils’ perceptions and experiences towards studying in an inclusive classroom. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 9, 39-60.
37.
TurnbullH. R.TurnbullA. P.HuertaN. E.StoweM. J. (2006). Free appropriate public education (7th ed.). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
WehmeyerM. L.BuntixW. H. E.LachapelleY.LuckassonR. A.SchalockR. L.VerdugoM. A.. . . YeagerM. H. (2008). The intellectual disability construct and its relation to human functioning. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 46, 311-318. doi:10.1352/1934-9556(2008)46
