Within the past decades and a half considerable discussion has occurred
regarding the most appropriate setting within which to provide education for
students in special education. Although the change in the educational
environment is significant for handicapped student the concepts of inclusion
also bring up new issues for the regular education classroom teachers. The
movement toward full inclusion of special education students in general
education setting has brought special education to a crossroad and stirred
considerable debate on its future direction. Proponents of full inclusion argue
that the needs of students in general education. The problems dealing with
children who have special needs have been the subject of much educational
research and findings have helped educators provide programs and services for
many children who otherwise would not have been helped. Full inclusion is
"an approach on which students who are disabled or at risk receive all
instruction in a regular classroom setting" (Hardman, Drew, Egan, &

Wolf, 1993). Inclusion is more effective when students with special need are
placed in a general education classroom after adequate planning. Inclusion does
not mean unilateral changes in student\'s placements without appropriate
preparation. In 1990\'s, inclusion appears to be emerging terminology of advise
to describe educating students in special education. P. L. 94-142 (1975) in
effect, reinforced a separate special educational system to meet the educational
needs of children identified as having a disability. A cornerstone of the
federal law (reauthorized in 1990 as the federal law (reauthorized in 1990 as
the Individual with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA) is that students with
disabilities should receive an appropriate education in the least restrictive
environment (LRE0 until recently, courts favored conclusions that the most
appropriate education for students with extensive disabilities would most likely
occur in segregate setting that had more resources and special help. But as we
approach the 21st century, advocates are still concerned about discrimination
and the courts have been rethinking the need for physical inclusion to enhance
the opportunities for learning from students who do not have disabilities.

Inclusion is not a program that a school system should consider as a way to save
money. To do it right will cost more money. However, the pay off for all
students is likely to be worth the extra cost. We have found that in most cases\'
students with special needs who are included are achieving at far higher levels
than they did in segregated classrooms. We have also found them blossoming
socially, and many have developed real friendship with children in their
neighborhoods. In additions, all students with special needs who are included
are achieving at for higher levels than they did in segregated classrooms. We
have also found them blossoming socially, and many have developed real
friendship with children in their neighborhoods. In addition, all students have
benefitted from having such extra supports as curricular adaptations, study
aids, and more individualized assistance. All students are learning that
everyone brings strengths and needs to every situation. They are learning about
conflict resolutions and the importance of being responsible. Things that were
stumbling blocks at first have become benefits. For example, greater
collaboration among teachers and other staff members has allowed them to share
skills and resources and has led to the improvement of all instruction. We no
longer have regular education supplies and special education supplies. We simply
have educational supplies, and money has been reallocated to reflect that.

Morever, we no longer have the needs for a large fleet of special education
buses to bus students out of their home attendance areas for a particular
special education class. Our school system did not increase funding during two
years of inclusion; we operated on a frozen budget. Though costs have now
increased as more schools in our division have begun to adopt inclusion, our
per-pupil expenditures for students with special need are still less than those
of most neighboring school system, especially those that bus students to other
schools and those that pay tuition for students with special needs to attend
school in other school districts. We also found ways to reallocate resource
despite the fact that Virginia allocates special education funds categorically
and not according to inclusion models. We have found that, through writing
waivers, we can please teachers in cross-categorical positions so that they may
consult from school to school on student needs a cost comparison of
self-contained versus inclusive programs in our system showed that, with the
latter, money could be saved on classroom equipment, transportation,
instructional materials and mobile classrooms. With the recent passage of the

Americans with Disabilities Act and the continuing success stories emerging from
inclusion programs around the county, we believe that our school reflect