The purpose of this study was to better understand students' perceptions of and preferences for inclusion or pull-out service delivery models. Thirty-two students with and without learning disabilities who had participated in both models during the past 2 or 3 years were interviewed individually. Key questions assessed their perceptions of which model was most conducive to academic learning and which was most likely to yield social benefits, and the reasons for their beliefs. Results indicated that students' views varied. Overall, more children identified pull-out as the model of choice, but many children were confident that inclusion was meeting their academic and social needs. We interpret the results of this study as providing support for maintaining a continuum of service delivery options and for considering the placement of each child individually, based on his or her unique needs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baker, E. T., Wang, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (1994/1995). The effects of inclusion on learning. Educational Leadership, 52, 33–35.
2.
Baker, J. M., & Zigmond, N. (1990). Are regular education classes equipped to accommodate students with learning disabilities?Exceptional Children, 56, 515–526.
3.
Baker, J. M., & Zigmond, N. (1995). The meaning and practice of inclusion for students with learning disabilities: Themes and implications from the five cases. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 163–180.
4.
Banerji, M., & Dailey, R. A. (1995). A study of the effects of an inclusion model on students with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 511–522.
5.
Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
6.
Bryan, T. H., & Bryan, J. H. (1978). Social interactions of learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1, 33–38.
7.
Conway, R. N. F., & Gow, L. (1988). Mainstreaming special class students with mild handicaps through group instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 9, 34–40.
8.
Davis, W. E. (1989). The Regular Education Initiative debate: Its promises and problems. Exceptional Children, 55, 440–446.
9.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1994). Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60, 294–309.
10.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1995). What's “special” about special education?Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 522–530.
11.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L. S., & Fernstrom, P. (1993). A conservative approach to special education reform: Mainstreaming through transenvironmental programming and curriculum-based measurement. American Educational Research Journal, 30, 149–177.
12.
Gartner, A., & Lipsky, D. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367–395.
13.
Gersten, R., Walker, H., & Darch, C. (1988). Relationship between teachers' effectiveness and their tolerance for handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 54, 433–438.
14.
Gresham, F. M. (1984). Social skills and self-efficacy for exceptional children. Exceptional Children, 51, 253–261.
15.
Guterman, B. R. (1995). The validity of categorical learning disabilities services: The consumer's view. Exceptional Children, 62, 111–124.
16.
Jenkins, J. R., & Heinen, A. (1989). Students' preferences for service delivery: Pull-out, in-class, or integrated models. Exceptional Children, 55, 516–523.
17.
Kauffman, J. M. (1993). How we might achieve the radical reform of special education. Exceptional Children, 60, 6–16.
18.
Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1995). Changing roles and responsibilities of the LD specialist. Unpublished manuscript.
19.
Klingner, J. K., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Hughes, M. (in press). Academic outcomes for students with and without disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice.
20.
McIntosh, R., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Haager, D., & Lee, O. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60, 249–261.
21.
O'Neil, J. (1994/1995). Can inclusion work? A conversation with Jim Kauffman and Mara Sapon-Shevin. Education Leadership, 52, 7–11.
22.
Psychological Corp. (1991). Stanford achievenment test (8th ed.). San Antonio, TX: Author.
23.
Pugach, M., C., & Wesson, C., L. (1995). Teachers' and students' views of team teaching of general education and learning-disabled students in two fifth-grade classes. Elementary School Journal, 95, 279–295.
24.
Roberts, R., & Mather, N. (1995). The return of students with learning disabilities to regular classrooms: A sellout?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 10, 46–58.
25.
Salisbury, C. L., Gallucci, C., Palombaro, M. M., & Peck, C. A. (1995). Strategies that promote social relations among elementary students with and without severe disabilities in inclusive schools. Exceptional Children, 62, 125–138.
26.
Schumm, J. S., & Vaughn, S. (1992). Planning for mainstreamed special education students: Perceptions of general classroom teachers. Exceptionality, 3, 81–89.
27.
Schumm, J. S., Vaughn, S., Haager, D., McDowell, J., Rothlein, L., & Saumell, L. (1995). General education teacher planning: What can students with learning disabilities expect?Exceptional Children, 61, 335–352.
28.
Shanker, A. (1994/1995). Full inclusion is neither free nor appropriate. Educational Leadership, 52, 18–21.
29.
Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1992). Curriculum considerations in inclusive classrooms: Facilitating learning for all students. Baltimore: Brookes.
30.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
31.
Vaughn, S., & Bos, C. S. (1987). Knowledge and perception of the resource room: The students' perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 218–223.
32.
Vaughn, S., Elbaum, B., & Schumm, J. S. (in press). Are students with learning disabilities in inclusion classrooms better liked and less lonely?Journal of Learning Disabilities.
33.
Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., Schumm, J. S., & Klingner, J. K. (in press). A collaborative effort to enhance reading and writing instruction in inclusion classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly.
34.
Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S., (1995). Responsible inclusion for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 264–270, 290.
35.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Klingner, J. K., & Saumell, L. (1995). Students' views of instructional practices: Implications for inclusion. Learning Disability Quarterly, 18, 236–248.
36.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Niarhos, F., & Daugherty, T. (1993). What do students think when teachers make adaptations?Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 107–118.
37.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Niarhos, F., & Gordon, J. (1993). Students' perceptions of two hypothetical teachers' instructional adaptations for low achievers. The Elementary Journal, 94, 87–102.
38.
Wang, M. C., & Birch, J. W. (1984). Comparison of a full-time mainstreaming program and a resource room approach. Exceptional Children51, (1), 33–40.
39.
Wang, M. C., Reynolds, M. C., & Walberg, H. J. (1994/1995). Serving students at the margins. Educational Leadership, 52, 12–17.
40.
Zigmond, N. (1995). An exploration of the meaning and practice of speical education in the context of full inclusion of students with learning disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 109–115.
41.
Zigmond, N., & Baker, J. M. (1990). Mainstream experiences for learning disabled students (Project MELD): Preliminary report. Exceptional Children, 57, 176–185.
42.
Zigmond, N., & Baker, J. M. (1994). Is the mainstream a more appropriate educational setting for Randy? A case study of one student with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities & Practice, 9, 108–117.
43.
Zigmond, N., & Baker, J. M. (1995). Concluding comments: Current and future practices in inclusive schooling. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 245–250.
