Pathways toInclusive Practices

Systems Oriented, Policy-Linked, and Research-BasedStrategies that Work

c o n s o r t i u m o n i n c l u s i v e s c h o o l i n g p r a c t i c e s

Written and Developed By

Christine Salisbury, University of Illinois-Chicago, Chicago, ILToni Strieker, Kennesaw State University, Kennesaw, GAVirginia Roach, National Association of State Boards of Education, Alexandria, VAGail McGregor, University of Montana, Missoula, MT

Preparation of this product was supported by Cooperative Agreement H324K980001A awarded bythe U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs, to Erikson Institute, Chicago,IL.; Dr. Christine Salisbury, Principal Investigator. No official endorsement of the content is implied.

© 2001 Consortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices

AcknowledgmentsThe information that is shared in the guidebook is based on thecollective experiences and insight from individuals and groupsacross the country. We would like to acknowledge thecontribution of the individuals listed below who participated innational meetings intended to identify “what works” and“lessons learned.” In addition, we express gratitude to AnneSmith, Ray Miner, Ian Pumpian, Doug Fisher, and the manyindividuals from the states and local districts who were partnerswith us in the Consortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices.

Kelly LeoMary Agnes McDevittPenny MilburnDona MeindersJan NisbetNannette OliverKathy PainsJen PrueCarol QuirkJane RookMary SchuhBill SharptonCheri SimpsonKathy StevensTeresa TaberCarol TashieChristine TempletDeborah Tweit-HullDonna WickhamLucille ZephKaren Zimbrich

Paul AlbertoAnnette AndersonAmy BartlinskiGwen BeegleMartha Blue-BanningJeannine BrinkleyWayne CrawfordJudith CroswellJudy DoktorIngrid DraperBesty EnrightJacqui Farmer-KearnsJanet FilbinAlison FordWayne FoxPhyllis GraneyMatt GuignoKim HaasDebra HartJulie HightowerDottie KellyElizabeth Kozleski

i

Table of Contents

Introduction ............................................................................ 1

Defining Elements of Our Approach ........................................ 3

Develop Inclusive Philosophy, Policies, .................................... 5Structures, and Practices

Build Capacity ........................................................................ 9

Approach Change Systemically ............................................. 17

Link Change to Policy ............................................................ 21

Use General Education as a Context ..................................... 25

Pitfalls and Difficult Situations ............................................... 29

Summary ............................................................................. 32

Table of Strategies and Challenges ...................................... 33

References .......................................................................... 34

iii

1

IntroductionThis guidebook was developed forparents, practitioners,administrators, and policy-makersseeking to make schools andclassrooms more responsive to theeducational needs of all students,including those with disabilities.Our specific intent is to shareinformation that can help othersthink about and advocate forinclusive approaches to policy andpractice at the state and districtlevel. We focus on large-scalestrategies that have changed theway that states, districts, andschools think about services, andthe way they use resources toensure that all children and youth,including those with the mostsignificant disabilities, aremeaningfully included inneighborhood schools.

With this as our focus, we alsowant to be clear about what is notaddressed in this booklet. We donot focus on change strategies atthe individual student level, nor dowe provide detailed informationabout inclusive classroom-basedsupport strategies. Many others

have done an excellent job of that,and the reader interested in thistype of information is referred tothe Resource list at the end of thisguidebook.

The information in this guidebookwas developed under the auspicesof a federally funded project calledthe Consortium on InclusiveSchooling Practices. This five-yearproject encompassed a variety ofactivities that shared a commonfocus —gathering and synthesizinginformation that will assist others intheir efforts to develop moreinclusive educational systems (cf.,McGregor & Vogelsberg, 1998).During the project period, wegathered a considerable amount ofinformation about promotingsystemic change related to theincorporation of students withdisabilities in general educationsystems. Our activities included in-depth work in three very differentstates over a period of four years.In addition, we collaborated withindividuals involved in systemschange efforts focused on inclusiveschooling practices in eighteen

2

other states across the country.From these various informationsources, we developed aframework for thinking about large-scale change, documentedstrategies that contribute tochanges at the state and locallevel, and developed some

theories about why certainapproaches may work better thanothers. Information derived fromthis framework and ourimplementation activities providethe information and experiencebase for what is shared in thisguidebook.

3

Defining Elements of Our ApproachTo understand how the informationin this guidebook might assist youin your state and community, it ishelpful to understand the elementsand strategies that grounded theConsortium’s approach tosupporting inclusive policy andpractice. No single element standsalone. Rather, we think theelements of this guiding frameworkare interdependent and mutuallyinfluential. They are as follows:

Develop InclusivePhilosophy, Policies,Structures, and Practices.We defined inclusion not justas a place or a method ofdelivering instruction, but as aphilosophy that undergirds theentire educational system.Inclusion is part of the culture ofa school, defining howstudents, teachers,administrators, parents andothers view the potential ofchildren (National Associationof State Boards of Education,1990).Build Capacity. For large-scalechange to occur, capacity mustbe developed within andacross organizations. Capacity

building involves developingthe knowledge and skills ofthose at all levels and in allareas of the organization,creating supporting structuresand policies, providingresources, and establishingmechanisms to continuallyevaluate progress.Approach ChangeSystemically. We focused onthe interdependence amongthe various systems and partsof systems that provide servicesand supports to children andyouth with and withoutdisabilities. Change in one areaoften affects what occurs inanother. In addition, effectivechange proceeds from anunderstanding of the culture ofthe system. We reasoned thatpromoting coherence amongstructures, policies, andpractices would produce themost durable and widespreadchanges in the states we weresupporting.Link Change to Policy.Improvement in the services,supports, and outcomes forstudents with disabilities is

4

dependent on altering thepolicies that drive both generaland special education. Changemust be explicitly linked topolicy, and policies must beinclusive in their intent andimplementation.Use General Education asthe Context. Inclusive learningcommunities should not beconsidered solely a specialeducation agenda. Generaleducation structures, practices,and curriculum should serve asthe context within whichindividualized services and

supports are delivered to allchildren, including those withdisabilities.

Given these values as ourframework, we feel that what bestcharacterizes our work, and theinformation in this guidebook, is itsfocus on policy-linked, large-scalechange. We hope our lessonslearned will foster conversationsthat will lead to changes thatbenefit children and youth withdisabilities, including those with themost significant needs.

5

Develop Inclusive Philosophy,Policies, Structures, and PracticesThe strategies described in thissection provide the foundation forinclusive practices to occur. Theyhelp individuals, groups, and

organizations think inclusively anddevelop policy-linked structuresand practices to support large-scale change.

Key StrategyFrame policy language and intent inclusively

Policies that reflect an inclusivephilosophy typically begin with astatement affirming the value ofdiversity to our schools andsociety. When diversity isconsidered a positive and enrichingcharacteristic, rather than aproblem to solve, the expectationis established that programs mustbe designed to meet the needs ofthe entire student population,including those with disabilities. Forexample, one state included thefollowing language in their statedepartment of education policy oninclusion:

“Full inclusion means that allchildren must be educated insupported, heterogeneous,age-appropriate, natural,child-focused classroom,school, and communityenvironments for the purposeof preparing them for fullparticipation in our diverseand integrated society.”

Such wording provides an essentiallaunch point for changingexpectations, supports, structures,and practices.

6

Key StrategyAddress barriers and resistance issues

Many state and district programsoperate within an environment ofpolicies, structures, and practicesthat create barriers to inclusion.Sometimes, these barriers can beattributed to turf battles, ingrainedrelationships, and/or nonuse ofcurrent research-based information.In other situations, long-standingpractices simply have never beenquestioned or examined with aninclusive lens. Consider, forexample, the impact of thefollowing practices which, on thesurface, may appear unrelated tothe issue of inclusive schoolingpractices:

Teachers who makeannouncements in class thatpublicly identify students whoare eligible for free/reducedlunch;The use of separate schoolschedules, classrooms, events,seating arrangements, andtransportation systems forstudents with disabilities;Failure to actively encourageparents of students withdisabilities to become involvedin the school PTA, supportinginstead, a separate “parentgroup” for families that havechildren with disabilities; and/orThe categorical structure ofmost state departments ofeducation, resulting in thephysical and programmaticseparation of programs such as

special education, Title I, andEnglish as a Second Languagefrom those focused exclusivelyon general education.

In fact, these practices reflect thelack of consideration of how dailypractice, policies and procedurescan reinforce difference and nurtureseparation based on aprogrammatic label.

As a change agent, it is essentialthat you discover the core issuesand philosophy affectingeducational policies, structures,and practices. We have found itpossible to identify barriers toinclusion by critically examiningfundamental beliefs and practicesin the areas of school governance,funding, personnel development,and instructional practice that occurwithin the general educationsystem. Barriers are oftentangential to issues of disability. Inone state, for example,administrators were concernedabout disaggregating stateachievement data more sobecause it would revealpronounced racial disparities thaninequities in performance ofstudents with disabilities. At thedistrict level in another state, anunwillingness to utilize co-teachingarrangements to support studentswith diverse needs in the generaleducation classrooms was rooted,

7

not in state certification policy, butrather, in a struggle for control andpower among administrators.

Change begins first by recognizingwhere the barriers and resistanceexist. Do the issues rest with turf,inadequate teacher preparation,insufficient information aboutgeneral education practices orpolicy requirements for specialeducation? Are there ingrained

patterns of poor communication orwary relationships, or perhapsineffectively implementedinteragency agreements? Byrevising policies, altering structures,and improving practices that affectthe organization and delivery ofservices and supports to allstudents, including those withdisabilities, it is possible toaddress barriers that affect bothaccess and quality.

Key StrategyBe intentional about broadening representationat the table

Change agents should ensure thatmany voices are at the table asplans related to systemic reformand inclusionary practices aredeveloped. This means that whenconversations about servicedelivery occur, representatives fromcurriculum and instruction,certification, transportation, parentgroups, and students should beparticipants. The logisticaldemands of including these variousrepresentatives should not beminimized. Yet, when solutions tothe issues are generated by agroup in which all are represented,they are more likely to be seen asworkable when the implementationprocess begins.

To take this a step further,conversations about how currentpolicies, structures, and practicesare affecting professionals,children and families, andcommunities must include

representation from those outsideof the school who also contributeto the service delivery system.Interagency agreements arecommonly written betweenagencies mutually involved withschool-aged children, butconsistent implementation is lesspredictable. Bringing partners fromother agencies to the table canexpand the base of resources andcreate greater cooperation andcoordination across human servicesystems. In one state, theDevelopmental DisabilitiesPlanning Council was included inboth the planning andimplementation of focus groups toassess state perception of thecurrent educational service system.In this state and others,representatives from social servicesand mental health collaboratedwith the school district to addressservice coordination, funding, andsupport issues for students with

8

disabilities who also receivedservices from these agencies.

These experiences suggest thatbroadening the membership ofgroups dealing with change inservice delivery practices not only

increases buy-in, but also makes itmore likely that “emissaries ofchange” who take back ideas andconcepts can, in turn, affect theplanning and actions within theirown organizations.

9

Build CapacityIn this section we describestrategies that collectively wefound useful in promoting inclusivepractices and large-scale change.Capacity building strategies focuson building knowledge, skills, and

supporting structures within andacross organizations. They createthe conditions necessary forinclusion to happen at theclassroom, school, and districtlevel.

Key StrategyCreate inclusive staff development systems

Staff development programsrepresent one critical strategy forbuilding capacity. An inclusiveapproach to staff developmentbrings both general and specialeducation teaching staff togetherto work on issues associated withmeeting the needs of all studentsin general education classrooms.This approach lends itself toestablishing common instructionalpractices that are aligned with aninclusive school philosophy.

Positive outcomes are associatedwith the practice of “merged” staffdevelopment at both the state andlocal levels. At the state level, this

can been seen where state-fundedtraining and technical assistanceentities, as well as professionaldevelopment schools, arestructured to address issues ofinclusive educational practice. Atthe district and building level,policies, schedules, and funds arecoordinated so that building basedteams, comprised of generaleducation, special education, andadministrative personnel, are ableto participate in professionaldevelopment activities. Such effortsat the state and local level help toensure that everyone involved inchanging practices hears the samemessage, is exposed to the same

10

base of information, and hassimilar opportunities to learn fromothers outside their own discipline.

Some of the most effective forms ofprofessional development are job-embedded, linked to the schoolimprovement plan, and deliveredduring the school year by arespected leader in the school who

has the ability to provide in-classsupport for the teachers as they trynew skills. Quality professionaldevelopment takes time—time toprovide supports to staff, time forteachers to collaborate with oneanother, and time for individualteachers to learn and practice newskills.

Key StrategyPromote co-teaching

Co-teaching is a powerful approachfor supporting student access tothe general education curriculum. Italso serves as a powerful strategyto foster more inclusive servicedelivery because it becomespossible for teachers withcomplementary areas of expertiseto draw from a larger base ofinstructional strengths. For co-teaching to be a useful tool foreducators at the local level, it isessential that teachers have thetime to plan with their instructionalpartners, that they receive training

on the various approaches to co-teaching, and that changes in rolesand responsibilities that occur as aresult of co-teaching haveadministrative support.

At the state level, certification,student-staff ratios, and fundingpractices must be evaluated and, ifneeded, revised to enable districtsthe flexibility to assign general andspecial education staff to the sameclass of students with and withoutdisabilities.

Key StrategyLeverage administrative supports

Administrative support is critical tothe process of change and thepromotion of inclusive schoolingpractices. Our findings andexperience suggest that time and

effort must be dedicated toinforming state boards, stateagency heads, districtadministrators, and school boardmembers about key issues and

11

outcomes associated with movingtoward inclusive schoolingpractices. Most districtadministrators and school boardmembers don’t want to know everylittle detail, but they do want toknow the game plan. Keep theminformed through at least annualpresentations on your efforts, andmore frequently with administrative(one-page) briefing reports.Videotapes and press releases, aswell as co-presenting with parentsof students with and withoutdisabilities, creates important

positive images for school boardmembers and those less familiarwith school and student levelsupports. If changes are to besustained over time they cannot bedependent upon a specific personwho may be a catalyst for changein practice. Policy-based,organizational support is key toensuring that a vision and itssupporting structures and practicesare embedded throughout anorganization and will remain longafter key change agents are gone.

Key StrategyUse internal resources

It is tempting to bring in outside“experts” when introducing aninnovation such as inclusiveschooling practices into a state ordistrict. While this may be effectivein creating initial interest, it iscritical that states and districtsexplore existing resources, talents,and knowledge within their ownorganizations rather than becomingdependent upon outsideconsultants. People within anorganization are less costly, aregenerally quicker to access, andhave the advantage ofunderstanding many of the stateand local contextual issues that canaffect the selection and impact ofstrategies/solutions. Human andfiscal resources exist at all levels ofan organization. In one state,teachers in a school district thathad successfully adopted an

inclusive service delivery modelserved as training and technicalassistance providers to otherdistricts though a regional fundednetwork. Some of these teachersultimately changed jobs andbecame consultants for the stateeducation department. In anotherdistrict, a school known as an“early adopter” of inclusiveeducational practices, became amentor site for schools new toinclusive education.

Accessing and leveraging theseresources often requires thatadministrators think creatively. As achange agent, it is your job to helporganizations keep goals in sightand clearly defined so thatconversations and action planningreflect an inclusive, solutions-oriented approach.

12

Key StrategyLeverage external resources

For durable change to occur, it isoften helpful to look acrossdepartments, to colleges anduniversities, and to other state andlocal organizations to discoverknowledge and talent that cansupport inclusive practices. As youseek reliable sources of support,make sure that those who providetechnical assistance have both asustained interest and sufficientunderstanding of the issues to bean effective support. “Drive-by”technical assistance doesn’t workand those who have “walked thetalk” will offer the greatestcredibility to those with whom youare working. The best solutionstend to arise from a deeperunderstanding of the local contextand conditions. While an externalcatalyst is often helpful in gettingchange started, those involved inthe organizations and systems ona day-to-day basis are often bestsuited to lead the on-going

conversations about workableapproaches and the priorities forchange.

External resources can beleveraged in many ways. Forexample, a high school teacherwith experience in providinginclusive education was deployedtwo days per week as a cross-building inclusion specialist in onedistrict. In another state,professional development schoolswere created with a localuniversity to address issuesassociated with inclusiveeducation. In this situation, pre-service teachers were taught thevalue and skills necessary todesign high quality lessons for allstudents. Administrators learned toevaluate their teachers on theirability to bring students fromdiverse groups to high levels oflearning, consistent with state andlocal standards.

Key StrategyUse data to make decisions

Data take many forms and may ormay not be available fromorganizations in useful formats. Auseful role for change agents is toconvert data into user-friendlyformats for use in launching

discussions about inclusivepractices. Charts that show studentplacement patterns, performancedata by school or grade, recurringthemes from interviews with stateor district personnel, and/or

13

analyses of student portfolio dataprovide authentic, usefulinformation for decision-making.Regularly scheduled meetings withbroad representation provide aforum in which data can beregularly reviewed, ensuring thatinterpretations are accurate and

that proposed actions will makesense for the context. Thesemeetings provide an opportunity tohighlight discrepancies betweencurrent policies, practices andoutcomes and the stated goals ofthe organization. This discrepancycan be used as a change lever.

Key StrategyMarket your success stories

The importance of marketing theconcept of inclusion cannot beunderestimated. Create and chargework groups with the responsibilityfor planning, introducing, andmarketing the concept of inclusion.Work with local newspapers,websites, and advocacy groups topublicize success stories ofindividual and organizationalaccomplishments from the stateand local levels. Visual portraits ofchange (multimedia or photobased) help create images with animpact. A brief message (“soundbite”) is essential and should berepeated in all marketingmaterials. For example, “Success

Leads to Success” is an example ofa statewide campaign thatrecognized exemplary schoolimprovement initiatives andprovided funds for staff from otherdistricts to observe site activities,buy materials, and attendconferences. Another examplecame from a district that used themessage “All Children Can Learn” tosignal their commitment to highstandards, diversity, and inclusion.The focus of marketing materials topromote inclusive practices shouldbe the connections to generaleducation, quality practices, andthe mission/core values of theorganization.

Key StrategyProcess matters

In working toward capacitybuilding, it is essential that youconnect your efforts to the prioritiesidentified by the state and district.

It is often possible to embed issuesof inclusion, diversity, equity,access, and quality within ongoingprogram improvement discussions.

14

While many argue that the changeprocess should begin withestablishing a common vision, wehave identified situations in which itwas possible to get at issues ofmismatched perceptions and theneed for a coherent vision withinthe context of other discussions.Involving states and districtadministrators in analyses ofpolicies, structures, and practices incore policy areas (funding,governance, curriculum,assessment, accountability,professional development) createsa situation within which criticalquestions about inclusion can beasked and decisions made thatsupport capacity building within thesystem. For example, asking “Doesthe funding formula createincentives for excluding studentswith disabilities from generaleducation?” provides a launch pointfor analysis and change.

In some cases it is helpful for achange agent to support a “quickfix” of a local issue as a means ofbuilding credibility and trust formore substantial issues that requireenduring change. In other cases,simply being accessible forquestions and at the table for

planning and problem solvingbegins the process of promotingcritical inquiry and change fromwithin. Whether working with stateor district level administrators,evidence suggests that writtenaction plans specifying the “who,when, how, and with whatresources” are necessary foreffective communication among allthe partners involved in the changeprocess. At the state level, planscan take the form of audit reportsand study session documents. Atthe district and building level,effective action plans are groundedin assessments of policies,structures, and practices.

At both levels of the system (stateand district), participant perspectiveof status, needs, priorities, andstrategies were central to craftingthe change plan. The Consortiumutilized the strategy of combiningcritical questioning, i.e., “thebalcony view” (McRel, 2000) withtechnical support, to promoteinclusive thinking, policies, andpractices. As a change agent, youcan adopt these same strategiesand adjust them as necessary to fityour existing resources andcontexts.

Key StrategyUnderstand and use the school year cycle

Efforts to create change,particularly in large systems, canstall because objectives andactivities are not appropriately

sized for the available time and/orresources. Information we havegathered suggests it is important to“plan and do” in the same school

15

year. In setting goals with teams atthe state and district level, it isimportant to create “stretchgoals”—goals that are challenging,but not out of reach. It is alsohelpful to write action plans duringthe summer with an eye towardcompleting the action steps in thefall. Use the plans in the spring toevaluate the progress of teachers,administrators, and students priorto revising the plan the followingyear.

The focus of the “plan and do”action plan should be to promote

inclusive thinking, policies, andpractices. The press should be foractions, rather than planning. Keepthe focus on the integration ofpolicies, resources, and structures.While recognizing that smalldemonstrations of the effectivenessof a new approach may benecessary, our collectiveexperiences strongly discouragethe overuse of the “special project”approach to change. Theseisolated efforts can fragmentsystems and create time-, person-,and funding-limited services andsupports.

17

Approach Change SystemicallyThis section represents our findingsabout how to influence the courseof action in large systems. Thestrategies address theinterdependencies within systems

and ways in which you can thinkabout creating coherence toproduce durable, widespreadchange.

Key StrategyLearn the context

School systems and communitieshave a culture of their own thatincludes structures, history, politics,a value base, and demographics.To effectively create systemicchange, we have found itinvaluable to begin with ananalysis of the state and districtcontext. This information can informyour selection of a technicalassistance approach, the specificareas that are targeted for change,and the support strategies youuse.

Talk with individuals who work in orare influenced by the system ofservices, gather and analyzepublicly available information andpolicy documents, test yourunderstandings in structured andunstructured ways, and then planyour approach. Don’t reinvent thewheel. A mismatch between yourapproach and the context canderail even the most reasonedthinking.

18

When attempting to introduce anew approach to practice, it is wiseto choose people andorganizations who have a historyof progressive thinking and risk-taking. Investments in such peopleand settings help create successstories that can be leveraged morebroadly. We recommend thatstrengths be identified and used ina strategic manner. To be strategicmeans to be planful—planful interms of who you align with, howyou constitute your work groups,which obstacles should be tackledfirst, which issues are bestavoided, how to promote buy-in,and how to market your successes.

Once a change in practice and/orpolicy has been introduced in onesetting, a “ripple effect” acrossindividuals, buildings, districts, andacross departments at the statelevel can often be seen. In onestate, for example, efforts toembed inclusive practices in astatewide professionaldevelopment system increased thenumber of participating districtsfrom 3 to 14 over a three-yearperiod. This ripple effect helpedcreate a more widespread set ofexpectations that inclusive practicewas the norm, rather than simplyan isolated pilot project.

Key StrategyGround change in local priorities

District officials typically want tohave control over the rate andtargets for change. There in anincreasing pressure for anyinstructional change that isadopted by schools to be credibleto both professionals (i.e., there isa research-base to substantiatethe effectiveness of the approach)and the community as a whole. It iscritical to consider the culture ofthe town and the culture of thedistrict in selecting what to change,as well as how quickly to change.In order to avoid becoming out of

sync with the opinions andpreferences of the community, it isnecessary to understand what isimportant to them, and how aninnovation might coexist withpractices that the communityvalues.

Learning what the real priorities arebegins with relationship building.Relationships will createopportunities for access to peopleand information, both of which willhelp you understand not only whatthe issues are, but why they are a

Key StrategyLead with your strengths

19

priority. Our experience affirms thevalue of discarding the “expert”role in favor of participantobserver. Listen, learn, thenrecommend. Make sure yourperception and your

recommendations match thecontext, the priorities, andavailable resources of the system.The nature and the rate of changewill be directly affected by yourability to develop a sound match.

Key StrategyFocus concurrently on levels and componentsof the system

To ensure success, it is importantto understand the interdependentnature of systems. This meansthat you need to work withindividuals and organizations atdifferent levels of the system(building, district, state) and alsofocus on the components withineach level (professionaldevelopment, curriculum, funding,certification/licensure, assessment,accountability). For example, wefound that once district officialsunderstood that generaleducation teachers were requiredto teach students with disabilitiesin their home schools andclassrooms, and that special

education teachers were requiredto understand state approvedstandards and/or curriculum, theyactively worked for changes inteacher preparation that wouldenable new teachers to be readyfor these responsibilities. Severaldistricts with whom we worked toldstate university partners theywould not hire their graduatesunless the graduates wereprepared to teach in inclusiveclassrooms. Change agents canfacilitate conversations amongschools and universities that cancreate the pressure for change tooccur.

Key StrategyFocus on larger units of analysis

For sustainable change to occur atthe individual school and studentlevels, state and district systemsneed to be the focal point of thechange process. It is important towork within the context of thedistrict improvement plan and tofocus on inclusion within broader

reform initiatives throughout theschool, the district, and the state.

The Consortium worked with“feeder paths” in each district—identifying an elementary schoolthat fed into a middle school thatfed into a high school. This allowed

20

us to create a coherent set ofinclusive practices across buildingssuch that the way in which studentservices were provided did notchange as students moved fromone building to the next. Often,issues across these three schoolssurfaced that required policychanges at the district level. Asystemic effect occurs when thepolicy changes associated with thiscross-site model are applied toother buildings throughout thedistrict.In our collective experiences, thesize of the district can affectcapacity building results—bothpositively and negatively. In largesuburban or urban districts, it isrelatively easy to “bury” a pilotproject, to test it out, and if it issuccessful, argue for its expansion.Once a practice has beenestablished in a system, it is oftenpossible to sustain and broadenefforts with little resistance.However, in these larger settings, itis often more difficult (because ofthe complexity of the system itself)to gain the initial entrée to schoolsand to obtain the degree ofcooperation and flexibility neededfor substantive demonstrationefforts. In many ways,educationally significant changes inurban districts represent a “drop inthe bucket” for them relative to

other, more pressing issues such asteacher turnover, violence, funding,and litigation. Recognizing thesecompeting realities requires thatpositive results be well marketed,that efforts to expand the initiativesbe systematic, and that links toexisting district and schoolresources be clearly established.In contrast, smaller and ruraldistricts have less bureaucracy andit is often faster and easier tointroduce a pilot demonstration(e.g., inclusive service deliverymodel) into their context. Becauseof their smaller size and lesscomplex structural/ administrativecontext, there is a greaterlikelihood that you will seesystemic effects. However, therange of resources to supportcapacity building efforts are oftenfewer in number than in largerschool districts. Further, it takesfewer people who oppose an ideato be effective in stopping it. Westrongly recommend that capacitybuilding efforts in these settingsstart with relationship and trustbuilding, and then proceed toplanning that includes as manystakeholders as possible.Community support in thesesettings is key and the investmentof start-up time is likely to be asgreat, but allocated differently,than in larger districts.

21

Link Change To PolicyIn order for services, supports, andoutcomes for students to improve,changes must be made in thepolicies that drive both generaland special education. Changeexplicitly linked to policy tends tosustain and become more

widespread than those changesthat occur on a waiver, exception,or child-by-child basis. Becomingfamiliar with the policy arena andlearning to leverage its power arecrucial to large-scale changesuccess.

Key StrategyUnderstand informal policies

Each state and district hasunwritten, locally understoodpolicies. Understanding theseinformal policies is as important asunderstanding the written policies.Sometimes someone with a visionis as good as a written policy.When you first go into a district it is

important to learn: (1) the writtenpolicy; (2) the unwritten policy; and(3) the strong rumors. Often therumors are more powerful than thewritten policy! Unless you clearlyunderstand all three, you areoperating at a disadvantage.

Key StrategyUse frameworks to communicateand organize action steps

A framework for change is a usefulroadmap for change agents andcommunity members alike. It

provides a common understandingof the potential avenues forchange that can then be prioritized

22

according to local needs. Aframework also provides a commonlanguage for discussion amongstakeholders, and helpsstakeholders focus on animmediate action step. TheConsortium developed a policyframework that proved to be usefulin its efforts to support change atthe district and state levels (CISP,

1996; Roach, Salisbury, Strieker &McGregor, 2001). While this iscertainly not the only frameworkavailable to guide the changeeffort, this policy frameworkexemplifies the benefits of basingthe change process on a tangible,comprehensive understanding ofthe policy foundation of theexisting system.

Key StrategyCreate informational feedback loops

Implementation of state educationpolicy is affected by people’sunderstandings of what wasintended and what is possible.Often polices can have verydifferent effects from what wasoriginally intended. Stakeholdersneed to have opportunities toprovide feedback to policy-makersabout barriers to policyimplementation. Policy makersneed opportunities to explain thereasoning and flexibilitiesassociated with state policyrequirements. One of the mostpowerful strategies adopted by theConsortium was to create regularvenues for policy-makers and local

administrators to discuss policyimplementation barriers andsolutions (Roach, Salisbury, &Fisher, 2001). Superintendents,school board members, principals,parents, educators, state agencyrepresentatives, and state levelpolicy makers were broughttogether in various combinationsover time within each stateinvolved in this project. Structureddialogue improved communicationand understanding amongstakeholders. Theseunderstandings informed actionsand contributed to shifts in policies,structures, and practices at thestate and district level.

Key StrategyAddress policy barriers

Understanding the policyenvironment is critical. While manytypes of policy barriers maycontribute to “stuck systems,” the

source of resistance often relatesto certification practices (howflexibly staff can be deployed withcertain certificates), funding

23

(incentives and disincentives forinclusive services/ supports), andcurriculum/ instruction (standards,graduation, grading).

If at all possible, change effortsshould be aligned with theagendas of the State Board ofEducation, state educationdepartment, and districtadministrators. As a change agent,it is helpful to use a structuredprocess to address existing barriersand keep desired outcomes clearlydefined for yourself and others.These strategies will help providea basic map to guide subsequentaction at the state and districtlevel. Becoming involved in studysessions, state board retreats,state education department taskforces, and local district planninggroups each create opportunitiesfor input to occur. These policyarenas are where the “How doesthis work for all students?” can berepeatedly be interjected into thediscussion.Using these strategies, we wereable to contribute to the changeprocess at the state and districtlevel with the following types ofresults:

The state assessment systemwas changed so that districtscould receive performance datafor students with disabilities;districts were supported in theirefforts to incorporate thisinformation in the development

of their comprehensive schoolimprovement plans.The state funding formula waschanged to eliminate incentivesfor out-of-district placementsand to eliminate fiscal barriers.Funding “follows the child” froman out-of-district placementwhen a special educationplacement is made to a lessrestrictive setting in a localschool district.At the state level, one stateDepartment of Educationcreated an eight-point strategicplan for inclusion that includedexiting and future actionsrelated to finance, certification,professional development,curriculum, accreditation, andsharing successful practices.At the district level, the role ofspecial educator wasredefined, shifting from a focuson individual children only, toencompass responsibilities as agrade level instructional teammember.At the district level, studentswith significant needs wereenrolled in age-appropriate,general education classroomsaccording to naturalproportions.At the district level, instructionalminutes were used differentlyto promote collaborativeplanning among general andspecial education staff.

25

Use General Education as a ContextGeneral education, whether at thestate or district level, should beconsidered the referent context fordiscussions of inclusive educationalpractice. That is, general educationstructures, practices, and curriculumshould serve as the context withinwhich individualized services and

supports are delivered to allchildren, including those withdisabilities when general andspecial education policies alignthere is greater likelihood thatinclusive practices will besupported and sustained.

Key StrategyFocus on principals

Principals significantly affectcapacity building efforts. In theexperiences we havedocumented, change agentsconsistently identified the need towork closely at this level to createmeaningful change in structuresand practices within theirbuildings. Principals can beactively involved in capacitybuilding efforts in several ways.Some desire full partnership inintroducing a change in theirbuilding—from planning toanalysis of the data to productdesign. Others prefer to bebriefed about what is occurring,

providing the necessaryendorsement of activities in theirbuildings without getting involvedon a day to day basis. The lack ofexperience and knowledge aboutinclusive practices is likely to affecttheir level of direct involvement inbuilding and district level changeefforts, but should not translateinto no involvement.

It is imperative that priorities forsupport and participation beindividualized to each principal.Recognize, too, that their level ofparticipation will likely change overtime. The goal is to promote a

26

sense of responsibility andownership among principals for allstudents in their school, includingthose with disabilities. Enablingprincipals to visit other schoolsengaged in inclusive practices is avaluable strategy, enabling themto see practices in action and talkwith other principals can be avaluable experience. Sharingbuilding-level data to help informtheir insight about inclusivepractices in their school and raise

their level of commitment for alllearners is another effectiveapproach to gain the involvementof the principal (McGregor &Salisbury, 2000; Salisbury &McGregor, (in press)). As principalsgain experience in creatinginclusive learning environments intheir schools, they becomeeffective emissaries to otherdistricts, and as co-presenters atstate and local conferences.

Key StrategyAddress attitudinal, as well asinformational barriers

This is not as simple as it appearson the surface. Attitudinal barrierscan affect our work as much asdeficiencies in structures, policies,and practices. Attitudinal barrierscan surface for a number ofreasons—turf, professionalpractice, personal histories,historical practices, and/or concernabout how inclusive practices willimpact students and self. It ishelpful to make explicit “old tapes”and ways of thinking that canconstrain change and get in theway of trust building. We havefound that being a “criticalquestioner,” providing on-sitesupport during the change process,and using both homogeneous andheterogeneous groups during staffdevelopment create safe venues inwhich attitudinal barriers can beaddressed.

Inclusive thinking applies toprofessional and support staff, aswell as to parents and students.The questions below help re-frametraditional ways of thinking withindiscussions with general educationpartners:

“How are all children going tobe included in this initiative?”“Will this apply to allprofessionals in your school?”“What about parents ofstudents with disabilities?”“Do our structures support themeaningful inclusion ofeveryone—staff, students, andparents?”“When you say “all,” do youreally mean all?”“How will our efforts to promoteinclusive practices connect withour service integration, title,and transition planninginitiatives?”

27

Key StrategyGet Yourself to theGeneral Educational Table

Opportunities to influence thethinking and decisions of generaleducation policy-makers andadministrators does not effectivelyhappen unless you are at thetable. Getting yourself to the tableis often easier if you have enteredthrough the general educationdoor. Our experiences suggest thatcoming to the discussion as aspecial educator often puts you ata disadvantage because you areviewed as “having an agenda.”You can turn this label to youradvantage if you listen, learn, andthen offer resources andinformation that support thepriorities of those in theadministrative area, yet raiseissues about how their action stepswill apply to all students.

When possible, enter through thegeneral education door bydeveloping partnerships with those

in the areas of curriculum/professional development. Theserelationships afford naturalopportunities for you to be invitedto meetings where generaleducators address important issuessuch as high stakes assessment,standards-based reform, andperformance standards for initialteachers. It is in theseconversations that you can raiseissues about the structures andsupports that will be necessary tomeet the needs of all learners,including those with disabilities. Ifyou do not have a natural entrée,asking someone in a leadershipposition to call and create anopportunity for you to attend aplanning meeting is sometimeshelpful. Alternatively, you can senda letter of introduction to keyplayers and offer resources tosupport their planning.

29

Pitfalls and Difficult SituationsIt is equally important to learn fromdifficult and unsuccessfulexperiences. In research, thesefindings are often referred to aslessons learned, negativeexemplars, outliers, and non-examples. These findings holdvalue if we stop to interpret theirmeaning and learn why we got theresult we did.

Below we provide guidance aboutpitfalls and lessons learned forthose within and outsideeducational systems. The key pointhere is to understand thesepitfalls—but not to use them as anexcuse for inaction. Insights aboutwhy things are not working canprovide important information tohelp you design an alternativestrategy for promoting large-scalechange.

ChallengeIntractable issues, structures, and policies

Despite intensive supports, someelements of the system areresistant to change. It can behelpful to try the following:

Restate the issue in a broadercontext—it’s not specialeducation inclusion, it is aboutensuring that all students meethigh standards.Look for opportunities toleverage change at a differentlevel in the system. Forexample, if a building principal

is resistant, look to parents,district administrators, or theschool board for support.Work on other areas of changeuntil the barrier becomes theoutlier, not the rule. Forexample, the curriculum andassessment is realigned to beinclusive, but the teachercertification policies don’t allowthe curriculum to be taught asintended.Create negative pressure. In

30

other words, change policy inan area that affects anotherpart of the system that youreally want to change. Forexample, changing the fundingformula in a state can diminishthe incentive to send studentsto segregated schools. As localdistricts take advantage of thefiscal relief, the number ofstudents in segregated settingsdeclines, which raises policyissues about the continuedviability of these “separateschools.”Change your terminology whilepursuing the same goal. Forexample, refer to the agenda

as “access to the curriculum,”rather than “inclusion.”Be flexible and be creative. Ifthe cows are sacred to peoplethat you respect, then leavethem alone and/or find newways to use them!

Some issues are best left alone.While structures may be a keyfactor in an inflexible system,changing some state structures maytake more years and energy thanyou can afford. It is wise to learnwhich issues are least likely togarner political support from withinthe state and to pick your battlescarefully.

ChallengeMyopic focus and misguided direction

You can get a slanted picture ofthe situation depending upon yourinformant. As a result, your changemodel may not fit the context. Themismatch can create wasted timeand energy for all involved.

Entering through the specialeducation door can make it moredifficult for you to affect changewith general education personnelat the state or district level. Theywill tend to see your efforts as a“special education agenda,” andbe less willing to explore how their

programs can be made moreinclusive. Where possible, createalliances with general educatorsand promote change from theirside of the house.

Recognize that change is a timeconsuming process. It is imperativeto listen, to respect the process,and to use the language of yourclients. Stand in their shoes andappreciate successiveapproximations. A little progress isbetter than none, and results arerelative to where you start!

31

ChallengeTurnover hurts

With turnover comes a loss ininstitutional memory. And,depending upon which personnelleft, new initiatives may beintroduced that usurp or run counter

to your efforts. As noted earlier,building relationships broadly andworking systemically can mitigateagainst set backs due to turnover.

ChallengeLitigation—asset or liability?

Inclusion by lawsuit can createopportunities, but also carries withit historical baggage. Anyone whohas worked with districts andparents engaged in litigation willtell you that everyone involved isin a “world of hurt.” A settlement is

just that: The court renders ajudgment and everyone has to livewith it and no one really gets whatthey want. Do not underestimatehow people feel. Do not takesides. Always go for a win/winresolution.

32

Summary

The information contained in this guidebook is intended to assist thoseinvolved in promoting large-scale change, specifically as it relates toissues of inclusive schooling practices. The collective understandings of theConsortium and our statewide systems change partners affirm the need fora systemically oriented, policy-linked approach to large-scale change.Efforts linked to state and district policy maximize the likelihood thatchanges will be sustained and will permeate across levels of the system.We have provided numerous strategies in this guidebook to assist you inestablishing these links.

Table 1 summarizes the strategies and challenges across key areas of ourlarge-scale change framework. Examples and supporting evidence havebeen provided throughout the guidebook to illustrate how these strategiescan be applied at the state and district level.

It is our hope and expectation that this information will prove useful toothers involved in promoting inclusive practices in state and local systemsthat support children and youth with and without disabilities and theirfamilies.

33

D

eve

lop

Inc

lusi

ve

Philo

sop

hy,

Polic

ies,

St

ruct

ures,

and

Pra

ctic

es

Bui

ld C

ap

aci

ty

Ap

pro

ach

Ch

ang

e

Syst

em

ica

lly

Link

Cha

nge t

o

Polic

y

Use

Gene

ral

Educ

ati

on

as

a

Cont

ext

Pitf

alls

and

Dif

ficu

lt

Situ

ati

ons

o

Fram

e po

licy

lang

uage

an

d in

tent

incl

usiv

ely

o

Add

ress

bar

riers

and

re

sist

ance

issu

es

o

Be in

tent

iona

l abo

ut

broa

deni

ng

repr

esen

tatio

n at

the

tabl

e

o C

reat

e in

clus

ive

staf

f dev

elop

men

t sy

stem

s o P

rom

ote

co

-tea

chin

g o L

ever

age

adm

inis

trativ

e su

ppor

ts

o U

se in

tern

al

reso

urce

s o L

ever

age

exte

rnal

re

sour

ces

o U

se d

ata

to m

ake

deci

sion

s o M

arke

t you

r su

cces

s st

orie

s o P

roce

ss m

atte

rs

o U

nder

stan

d th

e us

e th

e sc

hool

ye

ar c

ycle

o

Lear

n th

e co

ntex

t o

Lead

with

you

r st

reng

ths

o

Gro

und

chan

ge

in lo

cal

prio

ritie

s o

Focu

s co

ncur

rent

ly o

n le

vels

and

co

mpo

nent

s of

th

e sy

stem

o

Focu

s on

larg

er

units

of

anal

ysis

o

Und

erst

and

info

rmal

pol

icie

s o

Use

fram

ewor

ks

to c

omm

unic

ate

and

orga

nize

ac

tion

step

s o

Crea

te

info

rmat

iona

l fe

edba

ck lo

ops

o

Add

ress

pol

icy

barri

ers

o

Focu

s on

prin

cipa

ls

o

Add

ress

atti

tudi

nal,

as w

ell a

s in

form

atio

nal,

barri

ers

o

Get

you

rsel

f to

the

gene

ral e

duca

tion

tabl

e

o

Intra

ctab

le is

sues

, st

ruct

ures

, and

po

licie

s o

Myo

pic

focu

s an

d m

isgu

ided

dire

ctio

n o

Turn

over

hur

ts

o

Litig

atio

n—as

set o

r lia

bilit

y

Table

1.

Sum

mary

of

Larg

e S

cale

Cha

nge S

trate

gie

s and

Cha

lleng

es

34

ReferencesConsortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices (1996, December). A

framework for evaluating state and local policies for inclusion.Issue Brief. Pittsburgh, PA: Allegheny Singer Research Institute.

McGregor, G. & Salisbury, C. (2000). The reflective principal. Chicago,IL: Erikson Institute.

McGregor, G., & Vogelsberg, R.T. (1998). Inclusive school practices:Pedagogical and research foundations. Consortium on InclusiveSchooling Practices. Distributed by Paul H. Brookes Publishers.Baltimore, MD.

Mid-Continent Research for Education and Learning (McRel) (2000).Leadership for school improvement. Author.

National Association of State Boards of Education (1990). Winner’sAll. Alexandria, VA. Author.

Roach, V., Salisbury, C., Strieker, T., & McGregor, G. (2001). Utility ofa policy framework to evaluate and promote large-scale change.Paper submitted for publication.

Salisbury, C. & McGregor, G. (in press). The administrative climateand context of inclusive elementary schools. ExceptionalChildren.

Roach, V., Salisbury, C., & Fisher, A. (2001). A transactional approachto policy development and implementation. Manuscript inpreparation.