Inclusion is a term which explains the commitment to educate each child to the maximum extent appropriate, in the school and classroom he or she would otherwise attend. It involves bringing the support services to the child (instead of moving the child to the service) and requires only that the child will benefit from being in the class (instead of having to keep up with the other students). Full Inclusion opposed to inclusion means that

When full inclusion is effective it can be seen as harmful to students because of the idea that it does not fit to the students individual needs as would in a special school or something of such. In this way, each student can experience the realization of their potential as their needs are met. Full inclusion in a way is a "one size fits all" philosophy (Mackenzie par.2). Many observers maintain the idea that full inclusion isn't always the best way to meet student needs. Critics of full inclusion ask whether even students with the most severe disabilities benefit from placement in regular classrooms. While few educators oppose inclusion completely, some express reservations about how full inclusion works in the classroom ("Inclusion: Has It Gone Too Far" par.2). Albert Shanker, writing for the American Federation of Teachers in 1996 in "Where We Stand," stated:

Inclusion has become a controversial issue among parents, teachers, and school administrators because of the idea of disruption. They believe that by having students with disabilities into the regular classrooms it may disrupt school activities or require excessive amounts of class time. They worry that inclusion slows educational progress both for students with disabilities and for their non-disabled peers (Encarta Online). If a child causes excessive disruption in class, the child might not be benefiting educationally in that environment. "Social behavior problems may take the form of inappropriately touching other people, acting impulsively without considering the consequence of behavior, or throwing temper tantrums could be very disruptive to the class room"(Henson 21). For example, in the case Clyde and Sheila K v. Puyallup School District, 1994, the court ruled that the child's history of assaultive and disruptive behavior in addition to having Tourette's Syndrome andADHD were valid reasons to exclude him from school. He was not allowed to interfere with the education of other children (Villa and Thousand 39). In addition to interfering with their education, inclusion of children with severe behavioral problems could also endanger other children in the class putting them at risk of being bitten or hit.

More often then not, educators look only at the socialization emphasis children receive, in this case being placed with "regular" kids, and less at the academic benefits the child will receive. "This thing about socialization being the most important factor-I don't believe in that," said Barbara DiGiacomo, special education teacher at Wood Park Primary School in Commack (Hildebrand 4). Schools are places of learning. Often the child's social growth improves but, they do not learn a

Some common words found in the essay are:
Arnold Dodge, Villa Thousand, , Federation Teachers, Commack Hildebrand, Act Act, Education Act, Baker Zigmond, Encarta Online, Education Inclusion, regular classroom, regular classrooms, special education, regular education, individual education, status quo, placed regular, villa thousand, idea inclusion, individual education program, child particular, maximum extent appropriate, size fits philosophy, inclusion size fits, particular child particular,
Approximate Word count = 1811
Approximate Pages = 7 (250 words per page double spaced)