Mainstreaming and Inclusion

The term mainstreaming has come to be associated with the principle of educating children with and without disabilities in the same classroom and providing special education based on learning needs rather than categories of handicaps. In the decades before 1970, the most common treatment of children with mild to severe disabilities was to provide education in selfcontained classrooms. The situation changed in the United States as a result of the civil rights and educational reform movements of the late 1960s and early 1970s and as an outcome of two court cases in 1972, the Pennsylvanian Association for Retarded Children v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Mills v. Board of Education of the District of Columbia. The rulings in these cases directed at state education systems established the expectation of the placement of students with disabilities in general education settings because of fair and equal treatment as guaranteed by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Congress responded to these cases with legislation guaranteeing all children a free and appropriate public education. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Public Law 94–142) approved in 1975 extended free and appropriate schooling to children with disabilities and required that children with special educational needs be educated in the least restrictive environment. Congress revisited the act in 1990, and the resultant Individuals With Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) confirmed the principle of including disabled children in regular classroom settings in public education. In 1997, an amendment to IDEA further defined the principle that special education should be a service for children rather than a place where they are sent. None of the [Page 631]aforementioned legislation uses the term mainstreaming, which has been superseded in general educational usage by inclusion, referring to the philosophy and practice of providing a common educational experience for all children in a common setting.

Current court cases now follow IDEA requirements, finding that an inclusive placement with supplemental aids and support as necessary are appropriate to a wide range of students. A school district's decision to place a student in anything other than a general classroom setting will only be upheld if school officials can show that their efforts at inclusion have failed or have strong evidence to support the need for a separate educational setting for the child.