ABSTRACT
The shift to consider inclusion in light of the academic progress and achievement of students with disabilities has been precipitated by legal imperatives for accountability and increased benefit from educational programs. Yet, students with high-incidence disabilities (SWHID) must receive specialized instruction and supports to effectuate academic and behavioral improvements. Presumably, these supports will occur in the general education classroom when there is a determination that FAPE is best achieved there. However, the social policy legacy of inclusion has superseded rigorous scientific study regarding the effectiveness of specialized instruction and support practices in general education. We believe, in the absence of this evidence, there is sufficient reason to doubt a presupposed relationship between inclusion and FAPE for SWHID. We assert that, to establish inclusion’s empirical integrity, improved thinking is needed on whether, how, and under what conditions specialized practices can be applied in general education.
