# data[].attributes.headline
Roles of a School Leader in Inclusive Schools

# data[].attributes.subject
Roles of a School Leader in Inclusive Schools

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Collaboration Between General and Special Education Teachers

From: The ERIC Digests ERIC EC Digest #ED4093171997 by Suzanne Ripley

INTRODUCTION

Historically, teachers have worked in isolation--one teacher to a classroom. As children with disabilities entered the public schools in the 1970s, they were taught in separate classrooms with their own teachers. Over the past 25 years, these students have slowly moved into the flow of the regular classroom, thus the use of the term "mainstreaming." However, students were mainstreamed for selected subjects or parts of the day; they were not considered part of the typical class. Now the philosophy is to include all students in the same class, which has brought about teams of general education and special education teachers working collaboratively or cooperatively to combine their professional knowledge, perspectives, and skills.

The biggest change for educators is in deciding to share the role that has traditionally been individual: to share the goals, decisions, classroom instruction, responsibility for students, assessment of student learning, problem solving, and classroom management. The teachers must begin to think of it as "our" class. This Digest explores the facets of this new collaboration between general and special education teachers.
Return to Top
WHAT IS COOPERATIVE TEACHING?
Cooperative teaching was described in the late 1980s as "an educational approach in which general and special educators work in co-active and coordinated fashion to jointly teach heterogeneous groups of students in educationally integrated settings....In cooperative teaching both general and special educators are simultaneously present in the general classroom, maintaining joint responsibilities for specified education instruction that is to occur within that setting" (Bauwens, Hourcade, & Friend, 1989, p. 36).

The distinctive feature of cooperative teaching, which differs from earlier approaches, is that it is direct collaboration with the general education and special education teachers working together in the same classroom most of the day.

An effective team of teachers will work together as equal partners in interactive relationships, with both involved in all aspects of planning, teaching, and assessment. Areas for this collaboration will include curricula and instruction, assessment and evaluation, and classroom management and behavior. As one team teacher says, "the key to making co- teaching work is joint planning. You must both know all the curriculum so that you can switch back and forth and support each others efforts. If you don't know the curriculum you are not a co-teacher, you are just an assistant" (Crutchfield, M. in press).

"In developing and implementing cooperative teaching, school professionals experience great changes in the way they go about their daily work. To overcome the inevitable fears and stresses associated with change, the educators involved must feel that they are responsible for the change and that its success or failure lies directly with them" (Bauwens & Hourcade, 1995, p. 189).

WHAT ROLE DOES EACH TEACHER PLAY?
In a collaborative model the general education and special education teachers each bring their skills, training, and perspectives to the team. Resources are combined to strengthen teaching and learning opportunities, methods, and effectiveness. "The one point that clearly developed from this relationship was that both of us had expertise in many areas, and combining these skills made both teachers more effective in meeting the needs of all students" (Dieker & Barnett, 1996, p. 7).

Typically the primary responsibility of general education teachers is to use their skills to instruct students in curricula dictated by the school system. Typically the primary responsibility of special education teachers is to provide instruction by adapting and developing materials to match the learning styles, strengths, and special needs of each of their students. In special education situations, individual learners' needs often dictate the curricula.

General educators bring content specialization, special education teachers bring assessment and adaptation specializations. Both bring training and experience in teaching techniques and learning processes. Their collaborative goal is that all students in their class are provided with appropriate classroom and homework assignments so that each is learning, is challenged, and is participating in the classroom process.
Return to Top
PLANNING FOR EFFECTIVE COLLABORATION
Collaboration involves commitment by the teachers who will be working together, by their school administrators, by the school system, and by the community. It involves time, support, resources, monitoring, and, above all, persistence. However, the biggest issue is time--time for planning, time for development, and time for evaluating. Planning should take place at the district and the building levels, as well as at the classroom level.

District planning helps ensure that all resources will be available, including time, money, and professional assistance. District-level planning will take into consideration the effect change in one place will have on other settings. Building-level planning will assist the teams in being sure adequate support is in place to sustain new initiatives. Principals play an extremely important leadership role in facilitating collaborative efforts by instructional personnel.

Both district- and building-level planning should provide staff development opportunities to encourage teachers and administrators to participate in classes, workshops, seminars, and/or professional conferences on cooperative teaching. Motivation is an important ingredient for success, but additional skills will be needed to realize the goals teachers set for themselves and their classes.

Planning also is a factor in selecting the students who will be part of the collaborative process. It is important to keep natural proportions of typical students, students identified as being at risk, and students who have been found to have disabilities. Achieving a balanced classroom is easier at the elementary and middle school levels than at the secondary level, where a certain amount of grouping takes place with course selection.

A major consideration is in arranging planning times for co-teachers. Co- planning must take place at least once a week, according to studies. "Planning sessions were viewed as priorities by both teachers; they refused to let other competing responsibilities interfere with their planning sessions" (Walther-Thomas, Bryant, & Land, 1996, p. 260). The planning must be ongoing to allow teachers to review progress on a regular basis, make adjustments, evaluate students, and develop strategies to address problems either in discipline or learning.

Walther-Thomas and her colleagues (1996) found that five planning themes were identified by co-teachers who considered themselves to be effective co- planners:

*confidence in partner's skills;

*design of learning environments for both the educators and students that require active involvement;

*creation of learning and teaching environments in which each person's contributions are valued;

*development of effective routines to facilitate in-depth planning; and

*increased productivity, creativity, and collaboration over time. Participants in collaborative programs agreed that the time required for planning does not decrease during the year, but the quality of instruction continues to improve.

TEACHER EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
Collaboration should also be part of teacher preparation programs. This begins with the understanding that all teachers will be working with both typical and special needs students. Every teacher needs to study teaching techniques, subject area(s), disability, individualization, accommodation, and skills for collaboration in the classroom.

Time away from the classroom for consultation, professional conferences, and additional training is vital to the success of any program. Teachers, related service providers, and administrators will benefit from research findings on collaborative teaching, inclusion, and related subjects.
Return to Top
RESULTS
Research findings on schools where collaborative teaching has been practiced indicate student benefits for both special education students and their typical peers. Walther-Thomas and others conducted a study of inclusion and teaming in 1996 to assess collaboration between general education and special education staff. Improvements were attributed to more teacher time and attention, reduced pupil-teacher ratios generally, and more opportunities for individual assistance.

Students with disabilities developed better self images, became less critical and more motivated, and recognized their own academic and social strengths. Their social skills improved and positive peer relationships developed.

Low-achieving students showed academic and social skills improvements. All students gained a greater understanding of differences and acceptance of others. All developed a stronger sense of self, a new appreciation of their own skills and accomplishments, and all learned to value themselves and others as unique individuals.

Staff reported professional growth, personal support, and enhanced teaching motivation. Collaboration brought complementary professional skills to planning, preparation, and delivery of classroom instruction.

CONCLUSION
The concepts of individualized instruction, multiple learning styles, team teaching, weekly evaluation, and detailed planning are all of direct benefit to students. The purpose of the collaboration is to combine expertise and meet the needs of all learners.

It is important that teachers receive preparation and classroom support. It is also important that planning time continues to be available throughout the school year. "Most important, all students win by being challenged by collaborating teachers who believe that they are responsible for all children in the classroom" (Angle, 1996, p.10).
Return to Top
REFERENCES
References identified with an EJ or ED number have been abstracted and are in the ERIC database. Journal articles (EJ) should be available at most research libraries; most documents (ED) are available in microfiche collections at more than 900 locations. Documents can also be ordered through the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (800-443-ERIC).

Angle, B. (1996). Five steps to collaborative teaching and enrichment remediation. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 29(1), 8-10. EJ 529 434

Bauwens, J., & Hourcade, J. J. (1995). Cooperative teaching: Rebuilding the schoolhouse for all students. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. ED 383 130

Bauwens, J., Hourcade, J. J., & Friend, M. (1989). Cooperative teaching: A model for general and special education integration. Remedial and Special Education, 10(2), 17-22. EJ 390 640

Crutchfield, M. (in press). Who's teaching our children? NICHCY News Digest.

Dieker, L. A., & Barnett, C. A. (1996). Effective co-teaching. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 29(1), 5-7. EJ 529 433 Friend, M. & Cook, L. (1996). Interactions. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Walther-Thomas, C. S., Bryant, M., & Land, S. (1996). Planning for effective co-teaching: The key to successful inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 17(4), 255-264. EJ 527 660

----------

This publication was prepared with funding from the Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education, under contract number RR93002015. The opinions expressed in this report do not necessarily reflect the positions or policies of OERI or the Department
Return to Top

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collaboration Between General and Special Education Teachers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore the key elements in collaborations between general educators and special educators.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn about activities and support systems commonly found in successful inclusion programs.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Stella Young: I'm not your inspiration, thank you very much

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Stella Young is a comedian and journalist who happens to go about her day in a wheelchair - a fact that doesn't, she'd like to make clear, automatically turn her into a noble inspiration to all humanity. In this very funny talk, Young breaks down society's habit of turning disabled people into "inspiration porn."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Updated: Jul 7, 2021

PFL was adopted as a general linguistic rule, moving from use by the people who initiated the movement towards heavy use by those in professional spheres. It essentially became the law of the land. Teachers, doctors, nurses, social service professionals, government officials... everyone was told that they should use only PFL. Using a term such as "disabled person?" A cardinal sin.

I would be remiss if I didn't note that IFL comes with its own set of "rules" that perhaps make it more difficult for people to fully embrace or accept.

"Disability" and "disabled" are indicators of culture and identity. Thus, "disabled person" is an accepted term.

Within the Autistic community, IFL is widely preferred and often consciously chosen, because Autism is considered an identity. That is, you'd say "Autistic person" instead of "person with autism." In this way, being autistic is regarded as a facet of one's identity - a neurological state of being - and not as a source of shame.

A similar line of thinking is followed by many who are Deaf. While some people identify only as little-"d" deaf (referring to a physical state of being), others capitalize the "D" to indicate being Deaf as a culture and identity. So, using the principles of IFL, one would say "d/Deaf person.

These same concepts do not apply when it comes to the use of a term strictly for its medical definition. For instance, it is never okay to say something such as "Down syndrome person" or "cerebral palsy person." Here, you're referring to a person by diagnosis, which is perceived as dehumanizing.

Likewise when it comes to mobility equipment. It's completely inappropriate to call someone something such as "wheelchair person." (Sadly, I've been called this several times.) Instead, you would say "wheelchair user."

Emily Ladau is a passionate disability rights activist, writer, storyteller, and digital communications consultant whose career began at the age of 10, when she appeared on several episodes of Sesame Street to educate children about her life with a physical disability. She serves as the Editor in Chief of the Rooted in Rights Blog, a platform dedicated to amplifying authentic narratives on the disability experience through an intersectional lens. Her writing has been published in outlets including The New York Times, SELF, Salon, Vice, and HuffPost and her first book, Demystifying Disability, is being published by Ten Speed Press, an imprint of Penguin Random House, in fall 2021. Emily has spoken before numerous audiences, from the U.S. Department of Education to the United Nations. Central to all of her work is a focus on and harnessing the power of storytelling as a tool for people to become engaged in disability and social justice issues.

PFL was adopted as a general linguistic rule, moving from use by the people who initiated the movement towards heavy use by those in professional spheres. It essentially became the law of the land. Teachers, doctors, nurses, social service professionals, government officials... everyone was told that they should use only PFL. Using a term such as "disabled person?" A cardinal sin.

I would be remiss if I didn't note that IFL comes with its own set of "rules" that perhaps make it more difficult for people to fully embrace or accept.

"Disability" and "disabled" are indicators of culture and identity. Thus, "disabled person" is an accepted term.

Within the Autistic community, IFL is widely preferred and often consciously chosen, because Autism is considered an identity. That is, you'd say "Autistic person" instead of "person with autism." In this way, being autistic is regarded as a facet of one's identity - a neurological state of being - and not as a source of shame.

A similar line of thinking is followed by many who are Deaf. While some people identify only as little-"d" deaf (referring to a physical state of being), others capitalize the "D" to indicate being Deaf as a culture and identity. So, using the principles of IFL, one would say "d/Deaf person.

These same concepts do not apply when it comes to the use of a term strictly for its medical definition. For instance, it is never okay to say something such as "Down syndrome person" or "cerebral palsy person." Here, you're referring to a person by diagnosis, which is perceived as dehumanizing.

Likewise when it comes to mobility equipment. It's completely inappropriate to call someone something such as "wheelchair person." (Sadly, I've been called this several times.) Instead, you would say "wheelchair user."

Emily Ladau is a passionate disability rights activist, writer, storyteller, and digital communications consultant whose career began at the age of 10, when she appeared on several episodes of Sesame Street to educate children about her life with a physical disability. She serves as the Editor in Chief of the Rooted in Rights Blog, a platform dedicated to amplifying authentic narratives on the disability experience through an intersectional lens. Her writing has been published in outlets including The New York Times, SELF, Salon, Vice, and HuffPost and her first book, Demystifying Disability, is being published by Ten Speed Press, an imprint of Penguin Random House, in fall 2021. Emily has spoken before numerous audiences, from the U.S. Department of Education to the United Nations. Central to all of her work is a focus on and harnessing the power of storytelling as a tool for people to become engaged in disability and social justice issues.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Person-First Language Doesn't Always Put the Person First

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Emily Ladau shares why using person-first language does not always put the person with a disability first.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Neurodiversity is the variation in human brains.

neuro: relating to brains or neurology

diversity: the state of being diverse

diverse: showing a great deal of variety; very different

In our society, we tend to categorise diversity. We have labels for diversity of height, skin colour, gender, and many other things.

Some of the labels we use to categorize neurodiversity include ADHD, Bipolar, Depression, Autism, Epilepsy, Anxiety, Dyslexia, Aphasia,.... the list goes on. These categories are neurodivergences, and people who have these neurodivergences are neurodivergent. A person can be multiply neurodivergent.

The medical model our society employs to treat and manage neurodivergence calls these things disorders. The neurodiversity paradigm rejects the idea that being neurodivergent is inherently wrong or indictative of disorder. Neurodivergences can certainly be disabilities, but are not bad or symptoms of brokenness.

For more information about neurodiversity and neurodivergence, and for an explanation of some of the terms and definitions used within the Neurodiversity Movement, please visit Nick Walker's blog Neurocosmopolitanism.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Neurodiversity is the variation in human brains. neuro: relating to brains or neurology diversity: the state of being diverse diverse: showing a great deal of variety; very different In our society, we tend to categorise diversity. We have labels for diversity of height, skin colour, gender, and many other things.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CLICK HERE FOR PDF
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a federal law that created rules and guidelines for special education. The law gives eligible children with disabilities rights to the specially designed instruction and individualized services and supports they need to benefit from public education. The IDEA has six foundational principles, which are outlined below.

Principle 1: Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE)
The IDEA gives each eligible child with disabilities the right to a free appropriate public education. FAPE means educational services:

Provided at public expense under public supervision

Provided at no cost to the parents (other than ordinary costs charged to all students)

That meet the standards established by the state department of education

That are designed to meet the unique needs of each eligible student

Provided according to a written Individualized Education Program (IEP)

Provided to students from preschool through high school, ages 3 to 21

That continue to be provided to students who have been suspended or expelled

Special education programs must:

Be designed for the student to make progress in the general education curriculum (there is only one curriculum for all students)

Provide a chance for students to meet challenging goals

more than a minimal benefit but with no requirement to maximize potential (a serviceable Chevy vs. a brand new fully-loaded Cadillac)

Include related services and supports and provide for participation in extracurricular and other school activities

Include extended year services when necessary to provide FAPE

Principle 2: Appropriate Evaluation

The IDEA requires that a student must receive an evaluation before providing special education services to determine: (1) whether the student qualifies as "child with a disability" according to the IDEA definition, and if so, (2) to determine the educational needs of the student.

Parents must give permission for evaluation and for services

A student must be evaluated in all areas of suspected disability

The evaluation should include a variety of tools and strategies to gather functional, developmental, and academic information

An evaluation should never be based on a single measure or assessment

The instruments and methods used for the evaluation must be technically sound, not culturally discriminatory, and provided in the language the child uses

Administered by trained and knowledgeable personnel

A new or updated evaluation should be conducted if there is reason to suspect a need or if the parent requests one

An evaluation must be conducted within 60 calendar days of the parent giving permission

Re-evaluations may occur when:

Conditions warrant new information

The parent requests re-evaluation

A comprehensive re-evaluation must be completed every three years unless both the parent and educators agree it is not necessary

Every three years is the minimum requirement for a re-evaluation; it can be conducted more often if needed, but not more than once a year

Independent educational evaluations:

Parents have a right to request an independent evaluation at public expense if they disagree with the results of the school's evaluation.

Parents may seek an independent evaluation at their own expense at any time. The IEP team "must consider" any recommendations from outside sources but don't necessarily have to follow them.

Principle 3: Individualized Education Program (IEP)

An IEP is a written statement for each child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised at least once a year by a team including educators, parents, the student whenever appropriate, and others who have knowledge or expertise needed for the development of the student's special education program. The key word is individualized.

The IEP must contain measurable goals written for where we want a student's skills to be in a year. It must also be designed to offer meaningful progress in the general education curriculum and functional performance.

Special education is not a place. The goals and services should be designed without preset expectations for where the services will be provided. The educational program is determined first; the placement or educational setting is determined second:

Parents are involved in both program and placement decisions

Parents and the student need to be meaningfully involved in the development of the program and any periodic revisions

Principle 4: Least Restrictive Environment (LRE)

The IDEA requires that "...To the maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are educated with children who are not disabled." Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) means that:

Any placement outside the general education classroom must be justified by the child's individual disability-related needs

Students must have meaningful access to same age peers without disabilities, when appropriate.

Schools must consider providing any needed services in the general education classroom and other integrated settings

Involvement in music, art, physical education, school trips, clubs, extracurricular and other activities must be accommodated

Funding is never an appropriate reason for a more restrictive placement

States must maintain a full range of placement options to meet the needs of children who require specialized treatment programs.

Principle 5: Parent and student participation in decision making

The IDEA is very specific about what schools must do to ensure that parents have the opportunity to be active participants in each step of the special education process. Parents, and (whenever appropriate) the student, must be meaningfully involved in:

The development, review, and revision of the IEP

Educational placement decisions

Determining what data needs to be collected during evaluation

Reviewing evaluation data

Transition planning and services starting by age 14

Principle 6: Procedural Safeguards

The IDEA includes important procedural safeguards to ensure that the rights of children with disabilities and their parents are protected and that they have access to the information needed to effectively participate in the process.
Parents are entitled to notice in writing including:

A parental rights notice to provide information about special education, procedural safeguards, and student and parent rights

Notice in writing of IEP meetings

Prior written notice whenever the school proposes to change or refuses to change the educational programming or educational placement of their child

Parents are entitled to access student records:

They may review educational records for their child

They may obtain copies of educational records for their child

They may place a statement of correction or explanation in the student's record if it contains something they disagree with

Parents have a variety of procedural protections they can invoke when they disagree with educators:

The Resolution Facilitator Process

A Mediation Conference

A Formal Written Complaint

A Due Process Hearing

ASK Essential Questions

Is my child being provided access to FAPE, including meaningful and challenging IEP goals?

Has my input been considered by the IEP team?

Is my child learning in his/her least restrictive environment?

Related Resources

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The IDEA is a federal law that created rules and guidelines for special education; here, we outline the six foundational principles of this law.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Medical and Social Models of Disability | Office of Developmental Primary Care

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Leaders in the disability rights movement have constructed two distinct models of how society views disabilities: the Medical Model and the Social Model. These models provide a framework for how people perceive those of us with disabilities. While the Medical Model is a helpful way of understanding…

# data[].attributes.headline
Superintendent Alberto M. Carvalho 100 Day Plan

# data[].attributes.subject
Superintendent Alberto M. Carvalho 100 Day Plan

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Tips on How to Foster Self-Advocacy (Infographic)

We reached out to Sarah Heinzl, self-advocate and youth leader, and asked for her five tips on how to foster self-advocacy. Check them out below!

WELCOME BACK

Already a member? Sign in with your username.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Tips on How to Foster Self-Advocacy (Infographic)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We reached out to Sarah Heinzl, self-advocate and youth leader, and asked for her five tips on how to foster self-advocacy. Check them out below! Already a member? Sign in with your username.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students with disabilities have only had a legally protected right to attend public school since the passing of The Education for All Handicapped Children Act (PL 94-142) in 1975. Here is a look at some of the key legislation that set the stage for the special education system as we know it today.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is a law that makes available a free appropriate public education to eligible children with disabilities throughout the nation and ensures special education and related services to those children.

The IDEA governs how states and public agencies provide early intervention, special education, and related services to more than 8 million (as of school year 2022-23) eligible infants, toddlers, children, and youth with disabilities.

Infants and toddlers, birth through age 2, with disabilities and their families receive early intervention services under IDEA Part C. Children and youth ages 3 through 21 receive special education and related services under IDEA Part B.

Additionally, the IDEA authorizes:

Formula grants to states to support special education and related services and early intervention services.

Discretionary grants to state educational agencies, institutions of higher education, and other nonprofit organizations to support research, demonstrations, technical assistance and dissemination, technology development, personnel preparation and development, and parent-training and -information centers.

Congress reauthorized the IDEA in 2004 and most recently amended the IDEA through Public Law 114-95, the Every Student Succeeds Act, in December 2015.

In the law, Congress states:

Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the right of individuals to participate in or contribute to society. Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities.

Other Laws for Children with Disabilities

The U.S. Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights (OCR) provides additional resources of interest for individuals with disabilities and their families.

OCR does not enforce the IDEA; however, OCR does enforce the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 and Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Title II rights of IDEA-eligible students with disabilities.

To learn more, visit the OCR's Frequently Asked Questions About Section 504 and the Education of Children with Disabilities.

Visit OCR's website for additional resources.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
About IDEA - Individuals with Disabilities Education Act

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The IDEA is a law that makes available a free appropriate public education to eligible children with disabilities throughout the nation and ensures special education and related services to those children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ableism 101 - What is Ableism? What Does it Look Like?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As buzzwords like social justice, equity, and inclusion permeate our conversations, it’s essential for advocates of progress to remember another ‘ism.’

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
How can we improve collaboration between general and special education teachers? What are the benefits to this work? What are the key components of implementation?

These are timely questions as districts like mine seek to push special education students into core instruction with more frequency. Some educators are hesitant to dive into this model, but solid support and intentional steps make the process easier.

I was often frustrated as a special education teacher when I was expected to use parallel curriculum to teach students who had learning disabilities. I felt as though I didn't have permission to think like a general educator, even though I knew my students would benefit. At the time, our district mandated that special education teachers use separate curriculum, which excluded us from general education professional development (PD) opportunities. This situation left me feeling isolated and disconnected from general education standards and instruction.

That all changed when our district adopted the Common Core State Standards nearly a decade ago. I remember the sinking feeling in my stomach when a 5th grade student whom I had successfully taught to read (i.e., decode) sat in tears during the Smarter Balanced Assessment exam as he struggled to compose a written response to a prompt. His despair propelled me into action: I felt compelled from that day forward to give my special education students access to the same writing instruction as their peers.

Our district is in the early stages of inclusion, with leaders working to provide special education teachers access to PD tied to general education standards. Because I will move into an elementary principal role next school year, I have a newfound responsibility to support staff to use their talents in ways that honor all our learners. I recognize that traditional models of specially designed instruction have not helped our students with learning disabilities gain skills at the same rates as their peers.

We must create time for special educators and general educators to get to know each other's strengths and dispel the mysteries that lie behind their separate doors. Each discipline has strategies and practices that improve student learning.

Based on my experiences with colleagues, I see the following list as imperative to foster collaboration:

Trust: Building relational trust between teachers who share a physical classroom or responsibility for student learning is the first ingredient to a successful collaborative partnership. Our district uses the Dufour model of PLC work . Special educators are part of grade-level teams to share data and challenges. This approach creates safe space for staff to learn about each other beyond the classroom.

Vision: Any strong initiative needs a well-articulated vision that is clearly communicated to the school and community. Our district mission is "Developing Washington's Most Sought-After Graduates." Each school has its own vision statement related to this work.

Commitment to Staff Development: Inclusive schools are most successful when leaders show visible commitment to growing the skills of staff responsible for inclusive implementation. Leaders in our district spent time analyzing special education achievement data to determine the move toward inclusion. Next steps include identifying the PD both special and general education teachers need in order to ensure a sustainable inclusion model and hone teachers' skills over time. Ongoing collaboration between staff and leaders is also essential. As a new building leader, I plan to spend time in classrooms to determine which teachers need support and which teachers deserve recognition for their inclusion accomplishments.

Common Language: A common language is an essential component during implementation. When I taught in a resource room, the required math curriculum had strategies to solve story problems that were disconnected from the classroom instruction. My students grew minimally on grade-level benchmark assessments. Our schools are identifying essential standards and pre-teaching vocabulary in order to ensure all staff use the same language and terms about student achievement.

Routines: The general and special education teachers who work together must create classroom routines as one. Special educators are adept in understanding how routine prepares the brain to learn and reduces behavior concerns. General education teachers understand how to teach routines to larger groups of students to maximize instructional time. Put the two together, and you have a teaching powerhouse. Special educators and general educators should spend time together discussing student needs and their unique strategies for building upon student strengths and successes.

Learning Targets: General education teachers are masters at identifying learning targets that prepare students to advance and experts at differentiating instruction. On the other hand, special educators can identify how to break those targets into their component parts, provide necessary accommodations, and focus on student progress toward individualized goals and objectives. Our grade-level teams identify essential standards that we want all students to learn, then work together to provide the necessary scaffolds.

Remediation: Students with identified disabilities need dedicated time and specially designed instruction to close specific skills gaps. As they work, connect back to general education instruction with mnemonics, graphic organizers, and visual supports.

Technology: Though general education teachers often have many technology resources, special education teachers bring experience in assistive programs, devices, and tools. An important component of this work is normalizing the use of technology for all students, who should have access to individual devices to support communication and instruction access. For example, I have taught students to use text-to-speech and speech-to-text software on Chromebooks. When general education students take note of unfamiliar technology, explain the ways it helps other learners connect with the information.

Capitalize on Family Partnerships: As a special educator, I often taught the same students for multiple years and was able to develop deep connections with families that my general education colleagues-who had students for only one school year-were not always able to accomplish. We maximize opportunities for all students with increased partnerships and trust with families. Capitalize on those relationships in any classroom by sitting down as a team with parents and showing a vested interest from both general and special education lenses. Too often, special education focuses on deficits, pointing out to parents what their children cannot do. When we partner with general educators, the conversation shifts to what children can learn to do.

When a collaborative teaching model between special education and general education works, the benefits for our students are endless. We must act with intention and focus in order to capitalize on the skills of general and special educators. Our kids deserve nothing less.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
When Special and General Educators Collaborate, Everybody Wins

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
How can we improve collaboration between general and special education teachers? What are the benefits to this work? What are the key components of implementation? These are timely questions as districts like mine seek to push special education students into core instruction with more frequency.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I can remember the first time I taught students with disabilities. I was teaching sixth grade, and twelve students with IEPs had been placed in a single class period with me. Despite the fact that I'd had one whole 3-credit college course devoted entirely to special education, I was absolutely clueless. I mean, I had seen the students' IEPs, but I didn't really know how to interpret them. I was introduced to Kathy, the resource teacher who would accompany these students to class every day, but I wasn't sure what her role was or what shape our relationship was supposed to take.

And needless to say, that year was an absolute train wreck. I know I didn't serve those twelve kids well, and the remaining students also suffered, because I knew nothing about how to manage a class with such a wide range of abilities and needs.

I can only imagine how different things could have been if I'd known someone like Jam Gamble. I just discovered Jam-short for Jahmeelah-on Periscope a few weeks ago. She was talking about how she dealt with a student's misbehavior one particular day, and just listening to the love in her voice and the careful way she handled this student's feelings told me she was the kind of teacher I wanted to know. Once I realized her work focused primarily on special ed, an area I haven't given nearly enough attention to on this site, I knew I had to have her on the podcast.

Jam Gamble

Ms. Jam is a developmental services worker in Toronto, Ontario. She supports students with disabilities, holds workshops, consults, and hosts her own TV show called A Voice for All, which focuses on promoting disability awareness within the greater Toronto community.

When discussing possible topics for our interview, Jam and I talked about how many general ed teachers feel inadequately prepared to serve the needs of students with disabilities. Despite this lack of preparation, every year more teachers are likely to have these students in their classrooms. Because Jam spends every day doing this kind of work, we decided to have her share some ways general ed teachers could make their classrooms more welcoming for students with IEPs.

1. Express your fears and concerns.

When we think about making our classrooms more accessible, we tend to think primarily in terms of the physical space. "You could have the most accessible classroom in terms of space and lighting," Gamble says, "but if you don't have an accessible attitude, your classroom's not accessible."

She believes "inaccessible" attitudes stem from fear, from the discomfort of being assigned to work with a child with a disability and feeling ill-equipped to do so. She says the key to breaking through this is to admit your fears and talk to someone who can help. "You have to admit if you're nervous. You have to admit if you have worries. Then you can find the right people who could help you get over those fears."

And who are those people? "First and foremost," Gamble says, "talk to the parents. Ask them about their child. How was their summer? How was school last year? What were goals that you wanted to see manifest last year but didn't manifest that we could focus on this year? What are things they're doing outside the school that we could incorporate into their lessons? Questions like that give you so much information that you can take and run with."

The other person to confide in is the support specialist at your school. This was something I didn't really do as a general ed classroom teacher, and now I can't even imagine why. "This is someone who is there for the sole purpose of that student, and they understand a lot about inclusion and integration and program planning for this child," Gamble says. "Why wouldn't you talk to that person to get that juicy information that you need?"

2. Consult with your specialists. Regularly.

In my own experience as a classroom teacher, I rarely met with the support specialists unless I was having a problem. I didn't meet with them proactively. That was a mistake; I didn't fully understand what they had to offer.

Gamble says classroom teachers who make this effort, who reach out to the specialists in their building, get a lot in return. "I absolutely love some of the past teachers I've worked with who have come to me to like, 'I'll be honest with you. I don't know where to begin. Can we talk? Tell me what your skills are.' And I'm like, 'Yes. Oh my goodness, yes.'"

Because special ed teachers' resumes are not on display, classroom teachers may underestimate their skills and expertise. "Unless you ask me," Gamble says, "you wouldn't know I have supported people with disabilities from birth to seniors. I have a wide range of experience in terms of who I've supported, whether they're lower functioning or higher functioning, someone who's dependent or independent. I have a wide range of experience when it comes to seizures. I've worked with children who are nonverbal. I've worked with children who are verbal. I've worked with people who have echolalia. I've worked with children who have fears and phobias. I've worked with all these different people that I've taken all my personal experiences from them, and I've put it into this one big recipe book that a child could come in, and I could go, boom. I know exactly what to do."

3. Design activities that challenge everyone.

Much of the time, classroom work will need to be modified for the student with an IEP. But if we occasionally flip this-creating activities that truly level the playing field-we can give that student access while also letting others experience the world the way that student does.

"Once I had a student with a visual impairment," Gamble says, "and we created a sensory challenge where everyone had to be blindfolded, and you had to touch different objects and try to guess what they were. We did a scavenger hunt around the classroom-'Four steps to the left. Three to the right. Stop. Put your arm in front of you.'-so they could experience what it was like to move around the world with a visual impairment."

4. Recognize that parents struggle with their own discomfort and fear.

Teachers will be more successful in partnering with parents if they're aware that parents may need emotional support. "Some of these parents just received a diagnosis," Gamble explains, "so they're going through their own guilt and denial and embarrassment and shame, and all those types of emotions."

These emotions can manifest as behaviors that teachers might misinterpret. "I've had parents who are very silent. They don't want to come to the meetings. When you do get them in for a meeting, they don't have much to say...there's a wall that's up. They don't seem like they want to engage."

When encountering parents who present with challenging attitudes or behaviors, Gamble urges teachers to withhold judgment. "You have to look at the background story before you judge these parents," she says. "And unfortunately, I'm seeing too much judging happening. We're looking at their external behavior, and we're not looking at why their behavior may be happening."

She also recommends helping parents see how vital their role is. When Gamble talks with parents, she explicitly asks them for their help. "I go, 'I need you. I need you to meet me halfway. I want you to be invested in this, because I'm invested in your child...if you really want me to do the magic I'm capable of doing, I need you in on this with me, and if there's things that you're scared about, if there's things you're unsure about, let's get through this together.'"

5. Read books with students that promote diversity and inclusion.

Books are a powerful tool for building an inclusive classroom culture. Teachers should seek books for their classroom libraries that have characters with disabilities. They should also read and discuss them regularly as a class.

"We don't have to wait until Autism Awareness Month or Down Syndrome Awareness Month," Gamble says. "This needs to be a weekly thing that we talk about being different and promoting differences and celebrating it as a uniqueness and not something that we have to be cautious about."

Below are two of Gamble's favorite books for sharing with younger students, along with some other highly acclaimed books for a range of age groups.
This section contains Amazon Affiliate links. If you make a purchase through these, Cult of Pedagogy receives a small commission at no extra cost to you. Other highly-rated books that promote inclusive thinking:
Share Your Thoughts

The posts on this site get better over time because of all the insightful comments shared by readers. If you are a general ed or special ed teacher, tell us what you've learned about making your classrooms more inclusive. Parents, share your stories about teachers that have made your child feel welcome. ♦

Where to Find Jam Gamble

Website: www.msjam.ca

Twitter: twitter.com/Iamjamgamble

Instagram: instagram.com/iamjamgamble

Learn something new every week.
Join my mailing list and get weekly tips, tools, and inspiration all geared toward making your teaching more effective and fun. You'll also get access to my members-only library of free resources, including my e-booklet, 20 Ways to Cut Your Grading Time in Half, which has helped thousands of teachers spend less time grading!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Creating a Welcoming Classroom for Students with Special Needs

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many regular ed teachers feel inadequately prepared to serve the needs of students with special needs. Here are some ideas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
While 21st-century pedagogy puts group projects and collaborative learning at center stage for students, these cooperative habits have not yet assumed such a prominent role for teachers. But collaboration among teachers - and a desire for that teamwork - is growing, with positive repercussions across schools.

A new paper by Susan Moore Johnson, Stefanie K. Reinhorn, and Nicole S. Simon from the Harvard Graduate School of Education examines when and how this collaboration works best.

What Makes an Effective Team

The researchers, members of The Project on the Next Generation of Teachers, looked at teacher teams at three public and three charter Massachusetts schools located within the same city. All of the schools have a record of successfully serving high-poverty populations. In five of the six schools, teachers met with assigned teams on a regular basis (in the sixth school, teachers were strongly encouraged to collaborate but not assigned to teams). The researchers identified two types of teams: content teams, in which teachers focused on curriculum, lessons, and pedagogy; and cohort teams, in which teachers discussed behavior, individual student needs, and school culture.

Regardless of structure, teachers across the schools praised their teams, reporting that "working collaboratively helped them to manage the continuous, intense demands of instruction and to align their efforts with those of their colleagues." The researchers found that five factors consistently contribute to a team's success:

1. When teams and meetings have a clear, worthwhile purpose. Groups did not meet "just to meet," but rather had a specific goal for collaborating, such as giving all students the education they deserved or eliminating the achievement gap.

2. When group meetings occur regularly, with sufficient time set aside. When teachers and administrators prioritized the meetings over other activities, the teams were more productive. In these schools, meeting time was sacred, and always free from interruptions.

3. When administrators offer ongoing, engaged support and attention. While some principals regularly attended meetings, others expressed support by following online notes. This support held teachers accountable and kept administrators notified of teachers' strengths and struggles.

4. When there are trained teacher leaders to facilitate meetings. Teachers appreciated having peers responsible for leading their work. Although some leaders found the role difficult to balance, they also commented that the position let them expand their responsibilities and have a greater impact at the school.

5. When there is an integrated approach to teacher support. Because the hiring process in each of these schools highlighted the importance of collaboration, teachers were confident that they could count on their colleagues. They also received continual feedback from administrators that augmented the planning that happened in team meetings.

The Consequences of Teamwork

In each school, these factors led not only to a more a unified staff, but also to other positive consequences, both intended and unintended:

1. Greater consistency across classes and grades. In content teams, teachers developed curriculum and lessons together, with some schools even assigning a rotation of teachers to plan lessons for the rest of their team.

2. Increased rigor and expectations for students. When teachers intentionally aligned their expectations for students, they developed new ways to ask students to think bigger and deeper about tough concepts.

3. Opportunities for skill-sharing. While early-career teachers had more chances to study the experience of veteran teachers, veterans also learned from the new skills and training of their early-career colleagues.

4. Frequent feedback. Instead of having to wait for formal reviews from supervisors, teachers could ask their teams at every meeting for feedback on lesson plans, behavior management, and pedagogy.

5. A support network for new teachers. With pre-organized team meetings, new teachers had colleagues to turn to for advice and support.

The researchers recognize that, in some schools, teachers perceive teams as an annoying obstacle to their "real work." The teams worked in these six schools, explains Johnson, because "teams were at the heart of their real work." She continues, "Working closely and purposefully with colleagues helped the teachers in these schools do better with their own students, while building a better school. Students in these schools presented many needs, but no teacher felt alone in meeting them.

"Many factors contributed to these schools' success - careful hiring, frequent feedback on instruction, strong norms for both students and faculty, student supports, and skilled management - but it was teams that knit these components together for the good of students."

"It turns out that teams can be a very powerful engine of change," says Johnson, "but only if principals and teachers invest not only time, but also their best ideas, energy, and selves."

Additional Resources

Read an interview with Harvard Graduate School of Education Senior Lecturer Katherine Boles on the challenges of and benefits to teacher collaboration.

***

Get Usable Knowledge - Delivered
Our free monthly newsletter sends you tips, tools, and ideas from research and practice leaders at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. .

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
While 21st-century pedagogy puts group projects and collaborative learning at center stage for students, these cooperative habits have not yet assumed such a prominent role for teachers. But collaboration among teachers - and a desire for that teamwork - is growing, with positive repercussions across schools.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Collaboration of Special Education and General Education Teachers

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Special education refers to a range of services to help kids with disabilities learn and make progress in school. Explore this guide to special education basics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Special Education Division / New Sped Ed Home

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students with disabilities are entitled to a free appropriate public education (FAPE). The COVID-19 pandemic had a negative effect on schools resulting in learning disruption nationally. Students with disabilities may need Compensatory Education services to remedy any educational or other deficits that resulted from a student with an IEP or Section 504 plan not receiving the evaluations or services to which they were entitled during the COVID-19 pandemic.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In this bulletin, we will be discussing the topic of Ableism. You'll be able to find sections including definitions involving ableism, history, videos, articles/handouts, statistics, and questions to ponder.
When discussing ableism it is important to not label people either able or disable. Because someone can become disabled or overcome disabilities (physical or mental) in their lifetime we use the terms temporarily able and temporarily disable. In the same breath, it is also important to refer to people with disabilities as people with disabilities notdisabled people because the person comes before the disability.
DEFINITIONS
Ableism: Ableism is the intentional or unintentional discrimination or oppression of individuals with disabilities.

Disability: Having a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities. This is includes people who have a record of such an impairment, even if they do not currently have a disability. It also includes individuals who do not have a disability but are regarded as having a disability.

Inclusion: Inclusion, comparatively, means that all products, services, and societal opportunities and resources are fully accessible, welcoming, functional and usable for as many different types of abilities as reasonably possible.

Accessibility: The quality of being possible to get into, use, make use of.

Equity: The quality of being fair, impartial, even, just.

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: states that someone is disabled if he or she "a) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; b) has a record of such an impairment; or c) is regarded as having such an impairment."

(SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor Employment Standards Administration Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs)

The ADA's broad, three-pronged definition of disability focuses on functional ability rather than specific medical diagnosis to extend its legal protections to the full range of persons with disabilities. A person with a disability is defined as someone who experiences a physical or mental condition that limits the ability to perform a major life activity, such as walking, breathing, seeing, hearing, thinking, or working. The second prong of the ADA definition goes further in defining people who might be discriminated against on the basis of disability by saying that people who have a record or history of a disability are also protected from discrimination under this law. In addition, the third prong protects people who have no disability at all but who are perceived to have a disability. The second and third prongs of the ADA definitions were established in recognition that disability discrimination is a phenomenon unto itself and that disability discrimination results from misconceptions and prejudice that are partly or wholly unrelated to the reality of disability itself.
TYPES OF DISABILITIES AND EXAMPLES

Mobility: Spinal Cord Injuries, Disease, Paralysis, Amputation

Psychiatric: Depression, Bipolar Disorder, Schizophrenia, Post Traumatic Stress

Auditory: Deaf, Hearing Impaired

Cognitive/Developmental/Intellectual: Autism Spectrum, Learning Disabilities

Speech: Speech Impediment, Vocal Paralysis

Environmental: Allergies, Chemical Sensitivities

Medical: Cancer, AIDS, Epilepsy, Asthma, Diabetes, Myalgic encephalomyelitis/chronic fatigue syndrome (ME/CFS), Cystic Fibrosis, Severe Arthritis

VIDEOS I'm Not Your Inspiration Thank You Very Much
Talk to Me: Physical Disability Awareness
Including Samuel Preview Social Justice Project- Ableism We're More Alike than Different

According to the US census bureau people with severe disabilities working full time earn approximately $1,000.00 less per month than non-disabled workers.

54 million Americans have a disability.

13.3 million people with disabilities age 16-64 have experienced difficulty finding employment because of their disability.

In 2008, only 98% of all transit buses were equipped with a wheelchair ramp or lift.

In 2008, only 13% of people age 25 or older had a bachelor's degree or higher.

In 2010 the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) reported that 25,165 charges of disability discrimination were filed.

HISTORY Brief Perspective on the Historical Treatment of People with Disabilities:

Belief that "mentally ill" people were possessed by the devil or evil spirits

Regularly whipped, tortured and burned at stake.

Ejected from hospitals and shelters - forced to beg on streets - and given a cap in which to collect alms - this is the origin of the name "handicap" and why many contemporary people are offended by that title.

1860s

1800- Science begins to replace religion as the main authority guiding leaders in the west. Instead of being seen as having a spiritual deficit, people with disabilities are seen as having a genetic deficit. Thus they are placed under the care of medical professions, educators and social workers.

1800- State mental hospitals were the first formal system of public care for the "mentally ill" in the U.S.

1817 - first school for the deaf in the U.S.: American Asylum for the Deaf and Dumb, Hartford, CT

1832- The Perkins School for the Blind in Boston admits its first two students.

1848-The first residential institute for people with mental retardation is founded in Boston

1849- MA legislatures appropriate funds to create MA School for Idiotic Child and Youth in Boston.

1850 - Eugenics Movement begins. Goal to improve the quality of the human gene pool. People with disabilities were segregated and hidden (institutions, asylums, hospitals, segregated schools, sheltered workshops, attics) or placed on display as entertainment (freak shows, circuses).

Eugenics - Sterilization

1860 - The Braille System was introduced to America

1864 - The enabling act giving the Columbia Institution for the Deaf and Dumb and Blind the authority to confer college degrees is signed by President Abraham Lincoln, making it the first college in the world expressly established for people with disabilities.

1867 - every American school for the deaf was taught in sign language

1883- The Eugenics movement, taken up by Americans, leads to the passage in the United States of laws to prevent people with disabilities from moving to this country, marrying or having children. In many instances, it leads to the institutionalization and forced sterilization of disabled people, including children.

1907- Indiana became the first of 29 states to pass compulsory sterilization laws directed at people with genetic illness or conditions.

1920 - institutionalization of people with disabilities is seen as best for them and for society. People with disabilities seen as a "drag on civilization."

1922 - Harry Laughlin (part of the eugenics movement) drew up a model sterilization law, which served as an example for numerous state legislators. "It required the sterilization of the following "defective" classes: 1) feebleminded; 2) insane; 3) criminalistics; 4) epileptic; 5)inebriate; 6) diseased; 7) blind; 8) deaf; 9) deformed; 10) dependent"

1924- The Commonwealth of Virginia passed a state law that allowed for sterilization (without consent) of individuals found to be "feebleminded, insane, depressed, mentally handicapped, epileptic and other."

1927 - The Buck v Bell Supreme Court decision ruled that forced sterilization of people with disabilities was not a violation of their constitutional rights. The decision removed all restraints on eugenicist. By the 1970s, over 60,000 disabled people where sterilized without their consent.

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Commonwealth of Virginia as constitutional.

1937 - Poll in the U.S. indicates that 45% of the population favor euthanasia for "defective infants"

1938 - 33 States pass sterilization laws

1939 - Germany - 70,000 adults and 5,000 children put to death in initial phase and 200,000 killed in total (get rid of people who polluted Aryan race)

1942 - An article in the professional journal of the American Psychiatric Association calling for killing all "retarded children under the age of five": F. Kennedy, "The problem of Social Control of the Congenital Defective: Education, Sterilization, Euthanasia." American Journal of Psychiatry, 99(1), 13-16.

Congress enacts the Hill- Burton Act, authorizing federal grants to the states for he construction of hospitals, public health centers and health facilities for rehabilitation of people with disables.

The National Mental Health Foundation was founded by WWII conscientious objectors who served as attendants at state mental institutions rather than the war. The foundation exposed the abusive conditions at these facilitates that became an impetus towards deinstitutionalization.

1950- Congress enacts the Hill- Burton Act, authorizing federal grants to the states for he construction of hospitals, public health centers and health facilities for rehabilitation of people with disables.

1950- The National Mental Health Foundation was founded by WWII conscientious objectors who served as attendants at state mental institutions rather than the war. The foundation exposed the abusive conditions at these facilitates that became an impetus towards deinstitutionalization.

1950 Laws still on the books in some states prohibiting persons "diseased, maimed, mutilated or in anyway deformed so as to be in unsightly or disguising object" from appearing in public.

1954- Brown v. Board of Education passed

1954, 1956, 1958 amendments made to social security - retirement, age 50-64, insurance for dependents.

1961- President Kennedy appoints a special President's Panel on Mental Retardation.

1963- President Kennedy address congress calling for reduction of institutionalization over the next few years of mentally ill and retarded.

1964- Urban Mass Transportation Act

1965- Medicare and Medicaid are established

1968- Buck v Bell repealed, but sterilization under it continued until 1972

1970- Independent Living movement begins

1970- The Urban Mass Transit Act requires all mass transit vehicles to be equipped with wheelchair lift.

1970- Education of the Handicapped Act - state granted programs were expanded for children with disabilities. Higher education institutes given money to train Special Education Teachers.

1971- The Caption Center is founded at WGBH Public Television in Boston - it begins providing closed captioned programming.

1971- U.S. District Court decided in Wyatt V Stickney that disabled people were no longer to be locked away in custodial institutions without treatment or education.

1973- Rehabilitation Act of 1973 omitted the word "vocational" from rehabilitation legislation for the first time in 53-year history - 501, 503, 504 changed.
"Curb cuts in sidewalks, specially designated handicapped parking spaces, accessible public transportation, ramps into public buildings, universities with special services for disabled students, equal employment practices and many other changes are either partially or wholly result of section 504."

1975 - Education for All Handicapped Children Act passes.

1975- O'Connor v Donaldson, rules that people cannot be institutionalized against their will in a psychiatric hospital unless they are determined to be a threat to themselves or to others.

1979- Southeastern Community College v Davis - programs receiving federal funds must make "reasonable modifications" to enable the participants of otherwise qualified disabled individuals.

1981- Reagan Administration terminates the Social Security benefits of hundreds of thousands of disabled recipients.

1984- Congress passes the Social Security Disability Reform Act in response to complaints to hundreds of thousands of people who's benefits were terminated.

1985-Burlington School Committee v Department of Education

1990- American with Disabilities Act becomes federal law. Extends protection to the private sector.

1990- Technology advances result in greater freedom, access and independence.

1990- Deinstitutionalization - "mentally retarded and mentally ill allowed to live and work in the community"

1993- Holland v. Sacramento City Unified School District - affirms the right of disabled children to attend public school classes with non-disabled children.

Social Model of Disability versus Medical Model:

2002- No Child Left Behind

2004 - Individuals with Disability Education Improvement Act

Adopted from: © Teaching for Diversity and Social Justice, Second Edition, Routledge, 2007 QUESTIONS TO PONDER
The NCCJ supports the Social Model of Disability as it does not see the individual as the problem but instead societal barriers.
ARTICLES Legislation PEOPLE FIRST LANGUAGE and More

What are situations where you have heard/used ableist language?

What are the individual, cultural, institutional, or any other changes that can create a more inclusive society?

How do you think your reactions to people with disabilities affect people with disabilities?

In what ways is the world/environment designed to benefit your learning style, physical ability or psychological needs?

15 Crazy Examples Insanely Ableist Language
Doing Social Justice: 10 Reasons to Give Up Ableist Language

The Transcontinental disability choir, What ableist language and why you should care

Ableist words and terms to avoid (also included alternative words to use)
Disability RESOURCES Brown University: Student and Employee Accessibility Services - Appropriate Terminology
It's Not Only Steps us out mainstream feminism must stop ignoring disabled women
*All definitions and information provided is United States based.
An Introductory Guide to Disability Language and Empowerment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this bulletin, we will be discussing the topic of Ableism. You'll be able to find sections including definitions involving ableism, history, videos, articles/handouts, statistics, and questions to ponder. When discussing ableism it is important to not label people either able or disable.