This paper examines inclusion as an educational model, with a particular focus on the challenges posed by students with emotional and behavioral problems. It explores how different definitions of inclusion shape practice, why children with emotional difficulties face unique barriers compared to peers with other disabilities, and how zero-tolerance policies can complicate inclusion efforts. The paper draws on frameworks from the literature — including wrap-around service models, staff collaboration strategies, and Fred West's instructional decision-making levels — to outline how schools can build systematic, supportive environments that help emotionally challenged students succeed in regular classrooms.
Educators talk about "inclusion" as an educational model, but in truth, it means different things to different people. When some people say "inclusion," they mean full inclusion, where the child spends all or very nearly all of his or her day in a regular classroom, with special education staff providing support within that classroom to the fullest extent possible. Some of these children have full-time aides assigned to them, while others may receive support for an hour or less each day. Others view "inclusion" as any program where students spend part of their day in a regular classroom (Stahl, 2000). No matter what model is used, however, when children with emotional problems are placed in a regular classroom, it means that a child with significant difficulty controlling his or her behavior is present in that setting.
Under some circumstances it is easier to think positively about inclusion for a student than under others. It might be very easy, for example, to consider inclusion for a cooperative boy with an IQ around 60 who tries hard and who rarely misbehaves deliberately. For some educators, it might also be straightforward to consider inclusion for an autistic child who has academic potential, especially if the district has a good support system in place with experts who can help staff meet that child's unique needs.
Children with emotional problems, however, can be harder to think positively about. If a child has temper outbursts that disrupt the class, it is easy to think, "He doesn't belong here; he interferes with the education of his classmates." The child may resist interventions designed to head off such behaviors, or those interventions may work only inconsistently.
In order to have a successful inclusion program that includes children with emotional problems, staff will have to work actively to develop a mindset of trying to understand the child rather than simply blaming him.
"Zero tolerance rules worsen outcomes for emotional students"
"Wrap-around models and staff collaboration strategies"
"West's ACID test and instructional modification levels"
Stahl, Joe. "Inclusion: What Can Teachers Do?" Academic Exchange Quarterly, September 2000.
You’re 34% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 3 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.