School organization is a key driver for meaningful inclusion for students with disabilities. While there are promising examples of how schools organize for inclusion with intensive technical assistance, little is known about how high schools organize without such supports. In a case study of two high schools, we compare school organization by looking at their formal design and teachers’ daily routines. While both schools incorporated models for supporting students into their formal design, their daily routines revealed practices that were at odds with the spirit of inclusion. Routines involved special educators helping students pass their classes, though often not through meaningful learning opportunities. We offer insight into the affordances and constraints of school organization, revealing implications for meaningful inclusion.
AdlerP. S.KwonS.-W. (2002). Social capital: Prospects for a new concept. Academy of Management Review, 27, 17–40.
2.
Al-AzaweiA.SerenelliF.LundqvistK. (2016). Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A content analysis of peer reviewed journals from 2012 to 2015. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16, 39–56.
3.
American Institute for Research. (n.d.). Center on Response to Intervention. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://www.rti4success.org
4.
ArtilesA. J.KozleskiE. (2016). Inclusion’s promises and trajectories: Critical notes about future research on a venerable idea. Education Policy Analysis Annuals, 24(3), 1–29.
5.
ArtilesA.KozleskiE. B.DornS.ChristensenC. (2007). Learning in inclusive education research: Remediating theory and methods with a transformative agenda. Review of Research in Education, 30, 1–30.
6.
BettiniE. A.CrockettJ. B.BrownellM. T.MerrillK. L. (2016). Relationships between working conditions and special educators ‘ instruction. Journal of Special Education, 50, 178–190.
7.
BorgattiS. P.EverettM. G.FreemanL. (2002). UCINET for Windows: Software for social network analysis. Harvard, MA: Analytic Technologies.
8.
BorgattiS. P.EverettM. G.JohnsonJ. C. (2013). Analyzing social networks. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 195–207.
10.
BrayL. E.RussellJ. L. (2016). Going off script: Structure and agency in individualized education program meetings. American Journal of Education, 122, 367–398.
11.
ChoiJ. H.MeisenheimerJ. M.McCartA. B.SailorW. (2017). Improving learning for all students through equity-based inclusive reform practices: Effectiveness of a fully integrated schoolwide model on student reading and math achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 28–41.
12.
CoburnC. E.RussellJ. L.KaufmanJ. H.SteinM. K. (2012). Supporting sustainability: Teachers’ advice networks and ambitious instructional reform. American Journal of Education, 119, 137–182.
13.
CohenM. D.BacdayanP. (1996). Organizational routines are stored as procedural memory: Evidence from a laboratory study. Organizational Science, 5, 554–568.
14.
ColemanJ. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94(Suppl.), S95–S120.
15.
ConnorD. J.ValleJ. W. (2015). A socio-cultural reframing of science and dis/ability in education: Past problems, current concerns, and future possibilities. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 10, 1103–1122.
16.
CookB. G.McDuffie-LandrumK. A.OshitaL.CookS. C. (2011). Co-teaching for students with disabilities. In KauffmanM.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 147–159). New York, NY: Routledge.
17.
CoombsR.MetcalfeJ. S. (2002). Organizing for innovation: Co-ordinating distributed innovation capabilities. In FossN.MahnkeV. (Eds.), Competence, governance, and entrepreneurship: Advances in economic strategy research (pp. 209–223). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
18.
CosierM.Causton-TheoharisJ.TheoharisG. (2013). Does access matter? Time in general education and achievement for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 323–332.
19.
CummingsJ. N.CrossR. (2003). Structural properties of work groups and their consequences for performance. Social Networks, 25, 197–210.
20.
CyertR. M.MarchJ. G. (1963). A behavioral theory of the firm (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21.
DenoE. (1970). Special education as developmental capital. Exceptional children, 37, 229–237.
22.
DiekerL. A.MurawskiW. W. (2003). Co-teaching at the secondary level: Unique issues, current trends, and suggestions for success. High School Journal, 86(4), 1–13.
23.
DunnL. M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded: Is much of it justifiable?Exceptional Children, 35, 5–22.
24.
EisenmanL. T.PleetA. M.WandryD.McGinleyV. (2011). Voices of special education teachers in an inclusive high school: Redefining responsibilities. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 91–104.
25.
Endrew F., a Minor, by and Through His Parents and Next Friends, Joseph F. et al. v. Douglas County School District RE–1, 64 IDELR 38, (D., Co. 2014), 580 U.S. (2017).
26.
EplerP.RossR. (2014). Models for effective service delivery in special education programs. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
27.
EtscheidtS. (2012). Complacency with access and the aggregate? Affirming an individual determination of educational benefit under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 22, 195–207.
28.
FeldmanM. S.PentlandB. T. (2003). Reconceptualizing organizational routines as a source of flexibility and change. Administrative Science Quarterly, 48, 94–118.
29.
FeldmanM. S.RafaeliA. (2002). Organizational routines as sources of connections and understandings. Journal of Management Studies, 39, 309–331.
30.
FinniganK. S.DalyA. J. (2012). Mind the gap: Organizational learning and improvement in an underperforming urban system. American Journal of Education, 119, 41–71.
31.
FrankK. A.ZhaoY.BormanK. (2004). Social capital and the diffusion of innovations within organizations: The case of computer technology in schools. Sociology of Education, 77, 148–171.
32.
FriendM.CookL. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
33.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD. (2007). A model for implementing responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(5), 14–20.
34.
FuchsL. S.FuchsD.ComptonD. L.WehbyJ.SchumacherR. F.GerstenR.JordanN. C. (2015). Inclusion versus specialized intervention for very-low-performing students: What does access mean in an era of academic challenge?Exceptional Children, 81, 134–157.
35.
GartnerA.LipskyD. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367–396.
36.
Gaskinv.Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 389 F.Supp.2d 628 (2005)
37.
GilmourA. F. (2018). Has inclusion gone too far? Weighing its effects on students with disabilities, their peers, and teachers. Education Next, 18(4), 8–17.
38.
GilmourA. F.FuchsD.WehbyJ. H. (2018). Are students with disabilities accessing the curriculum? A meta-analysis of the reading achievement gap between students with and without disabilities. Exceptional Children, 85, 329–346. doi:10.1177/0014402918795830
39.
GlaserB. G.StraussA. L. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York, NY: Routledge.
40.
HansenM. T. (1999). The search–transfer problem: The role of weak ties in sharing knowledge across organization subunits. Administrative Science Quarterly, 44, 82–111.
41.
HarrisE. (2018, October4). Lost in special education’s labyrinth. The New York Times. pp. 6–7.
42.
HarryB.SturgesK. M.KlingnerJ. K. (2005). Mapping the process: An exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educational Researcher, 34(2), 3–13.
43.
HoppeyD.McLeskeyJ. (2014). What are qualities of effective inclusive schools. In McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L.SpoonerF.AlgozzineB. (Eds.), Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice (pp. 17–29). New York, NY: Routledge.
44.
JacksonL. B.RyndakD. L.WehmeyerM. L. (2008). The dynamic relationship between context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a research-based practice. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 34, 175–195.
45.
KauffmanJ. M.AnastasiouD.MaagJ. W. (2017). Special education at the crossroad: An identity crisis and the need for a scientific reconstruction. Exceptionality, 25, 139–155.
46.
KurthJ. A.BornK.LoveH. (2016). Ecobehavioral characteristics of self-contained high school classrooms for students with severe cognitive disability. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41, 227–243.
47.
KurthJ. A.MorningstarM. E.KozleskiE. B. (2014). The persistence of highly restrictive special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39, 227–239.
48.
KvaleS.BrinkmannS. (2009). Interviews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
49.
LinN. (2017). Building a network theory of social capital. In Social capital (pp. 3–28). New York, NY: Routledge.
50.
LipskyD. K. (2005). Are we there yet?Learning Disability Quarterly, 28, 156–158.
51.
MagieraK.ZigmondN. (2005). Co-teaching in middle school classrooms under routine conditions: Does the instructional experience differ for students with disabilities in co-taught and solo-taught classes?Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 79–85.
52.
MarchJ. G.SimonH. A. (1958). Organizations. Oxford, England: Wiley.
53.
MarksS. U.KurthJ. A. (2013). The wrong question, still: A response to “Is inclusivity an indicator of quality of care for children with autism in special education”. Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 38(4), 274–276.
54.
McCartA.McSheehanM.SailorW.MitchinerM.QuirkC. (2016). SWIFT differentiated technical assistance (White paper). Lawrence, KS: National Center on Schoolwide Inclusive School Reform, The SWIFT Center.
55.
McCartA. B.SailorW. S.BezdekJ. M.SatterA. L. (2014). A framework for inclusive educational delivery systems. Inclusion, 2, 252–264.
56.
McGhie-RichmondD.SungA. N. (2013). Applying universal design for learning to instructional lesson planning. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 9, 43–59.
57.
McLaughlinM. W.TalbertJ. E. (2001). Professional communities and the work of high school teaching. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
58.
McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L. (2006). Comprehensive school reform and inclusive schools. Theory Into Practice, 45, 269–278.
59.
McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L.ReddL. (2014). A case study of a highly effective, inclusive elementary school. Journal of Special Education, 48, 59–70.
60.
McLeskeyJ.WaldronN. L.SpoonerF.AlgozzineB. (2014). Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
61.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1978). The structure of educational organizations. In BallantineJ. H.SpadeJ. Z. (Eds.), Schools and society: A sociological approach to education (pp. 217–225). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
62.
MilesM. B.HubermanA. M.SaldanaJ. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
63.
MoolenaarN. M.SleegersP. J. C.DalyA. J. (2012). Teaming up: Linking collaboration networks, collective efficacy, and student achievement. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 251–262.
National Council on Disability. (2018). National disability policy: A progress report: Has the promise been kept? Federal Enforcement of Disability Rights Laws. Washington, DC: Author.
66.
NelsonR. R. (1994). The co-evolution of technology, industrial structure, and supporting institutions. Industrial and Corporate Change, 3, 47–63.
67.
NelsonR. R.WinterS. G. (2009). An evolutionary theory of economic change. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
68.
ObiakorF. E. (Ed.). (2016). General and special education inclusion in an age of change: Roles of professionals involved (1st ed.). Bingley, England: Emerald.
69.
PentlandB.RueterH. (1994). Organizational routines as grammars of action. Administrative Science Quarterly, 39, 484–510. doi:10.2307/2393300
70.
PenuelW. R.RielM.KrauseA. E.FrankK. A. (2009). Analyzing teachers’ professional interactions in a school as social capital: A social network approach. Teachers College Record, 111(1), 124–163.
71.
PowellW. W.ColyvasJ. A. (2008). Microfoundations of institutional theory. In GreenwoodR.OliverC.SuddabyR.SahlinK. (Eds.), The Sage handbook of organizational institutionalism (pp. 276–298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
72.
RaoK.OkM. W.BryantB. R. (2014). A review of research on universal design educational models. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 153–166.
73.
RuijsN. M.Van der VeenI.PeetsmaT. T. (2010). Inclusive education and students without special educational needs. Educational Research, 52, 351–390.
74.
RyndakD. L.TaubD.JorgensenC. M.Gonsier-gerdinJ.ArndtK.SauerJ.. . . AllcockH. (2014). Policy and the impact on placement, involvement, and progress in general education: Critical issues that require rectification. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39, 65–74.
75.
SailorW. (2015). Advances in schoolwide inclusive school reform. Remedial and Special Education, 36, 94–99.
76.
SailorW.McLeskeyJ.SatterA.WaldronN. L.WoodsK. (2017). School improvement through inclusive education. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
SaldañaJ. (2015). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
79.
SalendS. J.Garrick DuhaneyL. M. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without disabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 114–126.
80.
SchumakerJ. B.DeshlerD. D. (1988). Implementing the regular education initiative in secondary schools: A different ball game. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 36–42.
81.
ScottW. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
82.
ScruggsT. E.MastropieriM. A.McDuffieK. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73, 392–416.
83.
Sermier DessemontetR.BlessG. (2013). The impact of including children with intellectual disability in general education classrooms on the academic achievement of their low-, average-, and high-achieving peers. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 38, 23–30.
84.
ShererJ. Z.SpillaneJ. P. (2011). Constancy and change in work practice in schools: The role of organizational routines. Teachers College Record, 113, 611–657.
85.
SpillaneJ. P.GomezL. M.MeslerL. (2009). Notes on reframing the role of organizations in policy implementation. In SykesG.SchneiderB.PlankD. N. (Eds.), Handbook of education policy research (pp. 409–425). New York, NY: Routledge.
86.
SpillaneJ. P.PariseL. M.ShererJ. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 586–619. doi:10.3102/0002831210385102
87.
StainbackW.StainbackS. (1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51, 102–111.
88.
StelitanoL.PereraR.JohnstonW. R. (2019). Supporting students with high-incidence disabilities in U.S. Schools: National findings from the American Educator Panels. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.
89.
SugaiG.HornerR. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered system approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237
90.
SzumskiG.SmogorzewskaJ.KarwowskiM. (2017). Academic achievement of students without special educational needs in inclusive classrooms: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review, 21, 33–54.
91.
van AmsterdamN.KnoppersA.ClaringbouldI.JongmansM. (2012). “It’s just the way it is . . .” or not? How physical education teachers categorise and normalise differences. Gender and Education, 24, 783–798.
92.
VannestK. J.Hagan-BurkeS. (2010). Teacher time use in special education. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 126–142.
93.
WaldronN. L.McLeskeyJ. (2010). Establishing a collaborative school culture through comprehensive school reform. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20, 58-74.
WeickK. E. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. The Phi Delta Kappan, 63, 673–676.
96.
WeissM. P.LloydJ. W. (2002). Congruence between roles and actions of secondary special educators in co-taught and special education settings. Journal of Special Education, 36, 58–68.
97.
WillM. C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional children, 52, 411–415.
98.
WoulfinS. L. (2015). Highway to reform: The coupling of district reading policy and instructional practice. Journal of Educational Change, 16, 535–557.
99.
YinR. K. (2013). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
100.
ZigmondN. (2015). Where should students with disabilities recieve their education? In BatemanB.LloydJ. W.TankersleyM. (Eds.), Enduring issues in special education: Personal perspectives (3rd ed., pp. 198–211). Abingdon, England: Taylor & Francis.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
