This article was downloaded by: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution]

On: 21 March 2009

Access details: Access Details: [subscription number 902156990]
Publisher Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Theory Into Practice

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t775653706

Classroom Management in Inclusive Settings

Leslie C. Soodak

Online Publication Date: 01 November 2003

To cite this Article Soodak, Leslie C.(2003)'Classroom Management in Inclusive Settings',Theory Into Practice,42:4,327 — 333
To link to this Article: DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4204_10
URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4204_10

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.informaworld.com/terms-and-conditions-of-access.pdf

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or
systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub-licensing, systematic supply or
distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden.

The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents
will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss,
actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly
or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.

Leslie C. Soodak
Classroom Management in
Inclusive Settings
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
The inclusion of children with disabilities in gen-
eral education classes provides an opportunity for
teachers to identify classroom management poli-
cies and practices that promote diversity and com-
munity. Community-building management strategies
that facilitate friendships, collaboration, parent
involvement, and address challenging behaviors in
a positive, proactive, and educative manner are
consistent with the goals of inclusive education. In
addition, in order to develop a truly inclusive school
community, management policies and practices that
are inconsistent with inclusive education—such as
exclusionary discipline policies—need to be addressed
by teachers and administrators.
R YAN , A STUDENT WITH MULTIPLE disabilities, and
Tania, a child who has challenges in attention
and behavior, are full-time members of a class of 26
mixed-ability students in a fifth-grade class in Hu-
bert Elementary School. The class is taught full-time
by Ms. James, a general educator, and part-time by
Ms. Olmstead, a special educator assigned to sup-
port the children, including the two students with
disabilities. Before she was assigned an inclusive
class, Ms. James generally taught lessons to the en-
tire class and required, with moderate success, that
Leslie C. Soodak is an associate professor of educa-
tion at Pace University.
THEORY INTO PRACTICE , Volume 42, Number 4, Autumn 2003
Copyright © 2003 College of Education, The Ohio State University
SoodakPM 327
Soodak
Inclusive Classroom Management
all students remain seated and quiet until everyone
had completed their assignments. This year’s inclu-
sive class frequently works in small groups so the
students can be more active, involved, and support-
ive of each other. Changes were also made in the
class rules and procedures. For example, because both
teachers felt it was unrealistic and unnecessary to
require students to stay seated, guidelines about
where and for how long students can take breaks
were established. As in previous years, the teachers
expected each student to complete his or her work;
however, this year not all students were given the
same assignment. Similarly, all students were ex-
pected to comply with the school and classroom rules,
but changes were made to ensure that all students
were equally able to succeed.
Inclusive classes, such as the one just de-
scribed, are no longer exceptional. In recent years,
the number of students with learning, behavioral,
and other educational disabilities being taught in
general education classes has more than tripled (U.S.
Department of Education, 2001). Ten years ago, less
than one third of students with disabilities participat-
ed in general education classes. By 1997-1998, more
than 75% of the 6.5 million students with disabilities
were being educated in classes with their nondis-
abled peers. The move toward inclusive education is
supported by legislation, such as the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act Amendments (IDEA) of
1997, and research showing the benefits of inclusion
for children with and without disabilities (Baker,
Wang, & Walberg, 1994; Staub & Peck, 1994).
327
10/13/03, 2:27 PM
 THEORY INTO PRACTICE / Autumn 2003
Classroom Management in a Diverse Society
As the composition of students within class-
es becomes ever more diverse, educational poli-
cies and practices need to be made more inclusive.
The purpose of this article is to identify research-
based strategies for creating and managing a di-
verse classroom community. The following three
questions frame the discussion of inclusive class-
room management practices:
1. How do teachers create a sense of community
in classes comprised of students who differ in
their abilities and behaviors?
2. How can teachers form a safe and responsive
learning environment for all members of the
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
classroom community using knowledge from
two traditionally discrete fields (i.e., special and
general education)?
3. What considerations and accommodations need
to be made at the building and district level to
ensure there are explicit and fair expectations
for all students?
In this article, strategies to enhance the overall
quality of the classroom environment are present-
ed before discussing positive and supportive strat-
egies that may be used to address the challenging
behavior of individual students. This approach,
which is supported by research in both special ed-
ucation and general education, suggests that school
discipline issues are minimized when students feel
welcomed, safe, and supported.
Creating an Inclusive Community
Philosophically and pragmatically, inclusive
education is primarily about belonging, member-
ship, and acceptance. Historically, the inclusive
school movement grew out of a parent-initiated
effort that focused on the rights of children with
disabilities to participate with their nondisabled
peers (Turnbull & Turnbull, 2001). Parents be-
lieved, and educators supported the notion, that
separating children on any characteristic, such as
ability or race, inherently leads to an inferior edu-
cation for those who are “tracked” out of the main-
stream. In addition, efforts to allow part-time
involvement in targeted subject areas (usually non-
academic) based on student “readiness” to partici-
pate, as in the case of mainstreaming, resulted in
less than favorable outcomes (Gartner & Lipsky,
328
SoodakPM 328
1987). What then emerged was a commitment to
full-time membership in age-appropriate, general
education classes.
Quality inclusion is not merely determined
by student placement, but rather is based on creat-
ing an environment that supports and includes all
learners (Villa & Thousand, 2000). An inclusive
school community must be supported by policies
and practices at the school and classroom levels.
In the scenario described earlier, Ryan, Tania, and
the other 10- and 11-year-old children in the neigh-
borhood simply went to school to learn and be
together. However, specific policies, strategies, and
supports needed to be in place to ensure that all
children felt welcome and that the teachers were
able to teach their students effectively. These prac-
tices were specifically aimed at promoting mem-
bership, friendships, and collaboration. While these
terms are central to inclusive education, they also
hold important meaning to general educators seek-
ing to create democratic classrooms.
Promoting membership
According to parents and teachers, member-
ship refers to a child’s right to belong and to have
access to the same opportunities and experiences
as other children of the same age (Kunc, 2002). In
schools that effectively include all students, mem-
bership is promoted by educating all children in
their neighborhood (i.e., local) schools, assigning
students to classes heterogeneously within those
schools, and avoiding policies and practices that
exclude students from programs, settings, or events.
One revealing indicator of a school’s com-
mitment to inclusion is whether there are condi-
tions placed on a child’s participation in general
education classes. Classroom community is under-
mined when membership is made conditional on
the student’s behavioral or academic readiness
(Soodak & Erwin, 2000). When students are re-
quired to earn their way into a class or school,
teachers and students are given the message that
the child is not a full and rightful member of the
class, which is likely to decrease teachers’ expec-
tations for success and their willingness to assume
responsibility for student learning. There is a sub-
stantial body of research demonstrating that sort-
ing, grouping, and categorizing children reduces
10/13/03, 2:27 PM

their status to that of being considered “other peo-
ple’s children” (Delpit, 1998; Sailor, 2002). On
the other hand, acceptance of student diversity pro-
vides the groundwork for accommodating natural-
ly occurring learning and behavioral differences
among students through strategies such as differ-
entiated instruction.
Facilitating friendships
Inclusive school communities focus on so-
cial as well as academic outcomes for children.
Friendships matter to children, their parents, and
teachers because they provide children with the
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
opportunity to develop important skills and atti-
tudes and, perhaps most important, they enhance
quality of life for children and their families (Meyer,
Park, Grenot-Scheyer, Schwartz, & Harry, 1998).
Based on what we know to be the benefits of hav-
ing friends, and conversely the negative effects of
being socially isolated, many schools actively strive
to foster friendships among children. Some of the
strategies used to promote friendships include (a)
selecting activities that involve cooperation and
collaboration rather than competition, (b) creating
rituals that involve all members of the class, such
as class meetings and friendship circles, (c) using
children’s literature to promote discussions about
friendship and belonging, and (d) setting up class-
room rules to encourage respect, such as requiring
turn-taking or not permitting any child to be left out.
Collaboration
Positive interactions among teachers, as well
as students, contribute to a sense of school and
classroom community. Inclusive schools seek to
encourage collaboration among teachers for the
purposes of planning, teaching, and supporting stu-
dents. With adequate support, collaborative teach-
ing leads to positive outcomes for learners in
heterogeneously grouped classes (Villa, Thousand,
Nevin, & Malgeri, 1996). Implementing effective
teaching collaborations, however, is time-consum-
ing and complex. Teachers often express concern
about changes in their roles and responsibilities;
differences in teaching style and philosophical orien-
tation; and logistical issues, such as scheduling, plan-
ning time, and resource allocation. Friend and Bursuck
(2002) offer a number of school-wide strategies to
SoodakPM 329
Soodak
Inclusive Classroom Management
support collaboration, including (a) developing and
adopting a set of rules, responsibilities, and privi-
leges pertaining to collaboration, (b) providing
teachers with designated time for co-planning and
reflection, and (c) offering preservice and inser-
vice training in collaboration.
Creating community within a school also de-
pends on the policies and practices affecting fami-
lies. Although parent participation has long been a
goal in both general and special education, differ-
ences in policies and practices within the two fields
warrant attention. Parent participation in general
education has traditionally focused on sharing in-
formation about student achievement and ensuring
that parents provide the context and supervision
needed to complete assignments (Hoover-Dempsey,
Bassler, & Brissie, 1992). Parental involvement in
the education of children with disabilities, on the
other hand, is not just considered good practice, it
is mandated by law (IDEA, 1997). Parents of chil-
dren with disabilities must be given the opportuni-
ty to collaborate in decision making about the
placement, instruction, and related services pro-
vided to their children.
An understanding of what parents consider
to be effective partnerships may be useful to teach-
ers in negotiating expectations about parent in-
volvement in inclusive settings. Parents interviewed
by Soodak and Erwin (2000) stressed the impor-
tance of building trust, which developed from in-
teractions characterized by honesty, openness, and
mutual respect. Specifically, parents felt welcomed
by an open-door policy, ongoing opportunities for
involvement, and informal and open communica-
tion with professionals. Interestingly, parents said
they felt less of a need to be present in schools
when relationships were based on trust and respect.
In sum, membership, friendship, and collab-
oration are key components of an inclusive school
community. Diverse classrooms provide a unique
opportunity to promote a sense of understanding
and tolerance of others—conditions that are likely
to reduce conflict and opportunities for misbehav-
ior. However, all teachers, including those who
strive to create a sense of community among di-
verse learners, need to be responsive to students
whose behavior impedes their own or others’ sense
of community (Stainback & Stainback, 1996).
329
10/13/03, 2:27 PM
 THEORY INTO PRACTICE / Autumn 2003
Classroom Management in a Diverse Society
Supporting Positive Behavior
in All Students
Hubert Elementary School is similar to many
of today’s schools. Therefore, it is not difficult to
imagine that issues of inappropriate student be-
havior and aggression would arise. For example, a
child might speak offensively to an adult, threaten
a classmate, or hit another student. What is impor-
tant at schools like Hubert Elementary School, and
other inclusive schools, is that interventions used
to address student behavior reflect the values of
inclusiveness by being equitable and supportive to
all learners. The teachers at Hubert Elementary
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
School are mindful of the messages sent by their
responses to challenging behavior. They choose not
to punish or suspend students—actions they feel
demean and exclude children. Instead they use pos-
itive interventions that focus on supporting the chil-
dren by making changes in the school environment
(such as changing seating arrangements, schedules,
and patterns of supervision) and teaching students
new or alternate behaviors.
Positive and supportive behavioral strategies
One promising approach to educating chil-
dren whose behavior impedes their own learning
or the learning of others in a respectful and inclu-
sive manner is called positive behavioral support.
Positive behavioral supports, which were intro-
duced into special education in the most recent
revision of IDEA (1997), refer to the use of be-
havioral interventions and teaching strategies to
achieve important and meaningful behavior change.
Positive behavioral supports are based on the be-
lief that problem behaviors are context-related and
purposeful, and interventions should reflect an
understanding of and respect for the student. The
intent is to be preventative, proactive, and educative
(Koegel, Koegel, & Dunlap, 1996). Positive be-
havioral supports are an alternative to punishment
and other traditional methods of behavior modifi-
cation, which do not necessarily teach positive be-
haviors or create a climate of civility. Although
teachers can and should use traditional methods to
strengthen students’ positive behaviors by “catching
them being good,” behavioral supports proactively
modify contexts and teach students to use appropri-
ate behaviors so the stage is set for them to do well.
330
SoodakPM 330
Use of this problem-solving approach to be-
havior management usually begins with an analy-
sis of the situation through a process called
functional behavioral assessment. A functional be-
havioral assessment provides an understanding of
the student and the function of his or her behavior
so a plan for altering the environmental conditions
can be developed (Knostner & Kincaid, 1999).
Positive behavior supports were used in the
fifth-grade class taught by Ms. James and Ms. Olm-
stead to help Tania find appropriate ways to ex-
press her anger. Tania was frequently becoming
upset and was occasionally verbally aggressive to
her peers when transitions occurred, particularly
when small groups were formed. The teachers ar-
ranged to meet with the child study team to dis-
cuss possible reasons for her behavior. A functional
assessment of the behavior led to the hypothesis
that Tania was feeling frustrated by not knowing
what was going to be required of her during group
work and constrained by the tight class schedule.
The supports that were found to help Tania includ-
ed having the teachers say the directions aloud be-
fore students changed seats, having a friend
accompany her to her group, and teaching Tania to
ask to speak individually with a teacher when she
was feeling angry or upset. Also, to help Tania
feel more in control of her day, efforts were made
to offer her reasonable choices whenever possible.
Responding to misbehavior while
support planning
Because classrooms are dynamic places,
teachers need to respond to situations as they oc-
cur, as well as take the time needed to design and
implement a plan to support change. When stu-
dents misbehave, particularly when the behavior
disrupts learning or threatens the well-being or safe-
ty of others, teachers may need to respond with
immediacy to restore order, preserve dignity, and
provide guidance. The goal is to manage the prob-
lem behavior without losing sight of how the be-
havior connects to the individuals’ history and the
context. There are well-supported recommendations
to consider when responding to student misbehav-
ior. First, try to diffuse and redirect behavior. For
example, give choices about what a student may
do to make amends for the misbehavior. The choices
10/13/03, 2:27 PM

should reflect “natural” consequences, such as re-
placing materials taken or redoing work that has
been defaced. Second, avoid punishment, because
although it may serve to reduce the problem be-
havior for the moment, it usually encourages stu-
dents to disengage rather than behave differently.
Lastly, if it is deemed necessary to remove a stu-
dent from the class, do so for a brief time (a few
moments can seem long to a child) and without
endangering or humiliating the student or others.
Also, help the student re-enter the classroom without
experiencing shame, guilt, or anger. For example,
you may privately inform the student of what he or
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
she missed or ask a supportive classmate to help.
These strategies can serve to remind students of
established rules and expectations. Recurring be-
haviors need to be understood and systemically
addressed, as with a well-designed positive behav-
ior support plan.
School-wide use of positive behavioral supports
In the past few years, positive behavioral sup-
ports have been used more often and with consider-
able success, particularly in the education of students
with disabilities (Braddock, 1999). Recently, there
has been growing interest in positive behavior sup-
ports as a school-wide approach for creating positive
and supportive environments (Colvin, Sugai, Good,
& Lee, 1997; Sailor, 1996). Moving to a school-wide
implementation requires that there be explicit and
shared expectations that are taught, supported, and
practiced, and a willingness to use interventions that
are grounded in an understanding of students, behav-
iors, and contexts. Although school-wide adoption of
this approach may be beneficial, its use in general
education classes requires critical changes in the cul-
ture of schools that have long relied on punishment
as the primary, and sometimes only, means to curtail
negative behavior (Gartin & Murdick, 2001).
Can exclusionary discipline policies
work in inclusive schools?
Positive approaches to school discipline are
consistent with the goals of inclusive education,
but they are far less compatible with existing school
or district-wide discipline policies that punish and
exclude children from school. Exclusionary disci-
pline policies, known as zero tolerance policies,
SoodakPM 331
Soodak
Inclusive Classroom Management
have become increasingly prevalent in recent years
in response to growing reports of school violence.
Designed to send a message that aggressive behavior
will not be tolerated, many schools have adopted a
tough, clear, and seemingly simple plan: evict stu-
dents who commit specific acts of aggression.
There are two major problems in the use of
zero tolerance policies in inclusive schools. First,
these policies may undermine their own purpose
as well as the goals of inclusion by eroding civili-
ty within the school and by disenfranchising those
students most in need of emotional connectedness
(Skiba & Peterson, 1999, 2000). Second, zero tol-
erance policies may not apply equally to all stu-
dents. There is a substantial body of evidence
suggesting inequities in the manner students get
suspended or expelled. A recent report by the Civil
Rights Project at Harvard University (June, 2000),
provided compelling statistical and anecdotal evi-
dence to support the contention that students of
color and students with disabilities are at greatest
risk of expulsion. In particular, students with emo-
tional and behavioral problems have been overrep-
resented in reports of suspensions and expulsions
(Cooley, 1995) and are most likely to be removed
from inclusive settings (Lewis, Chard, & Scott,
1994). Thus, while some educators are trying to
meet the needs of students with disabilities in typ-
ical settings, the goal of others “may well be the
removal of troublesome students from mainstream
educational environments” (Skiba & Peterson,
2000, p. 340).
Presently, the way inequities in discipline
policies are handled is through the use of legal
safeguards for students with disabilities. Safeguards
are procedures used to protect students from being
unfairly punished for behaviors beyond their con-
trol or when the consequences of the behavior were
not understood. Legal safeguards included in 1997
revisions to IDEA require schools to make a deter-
mination as to whether a student’s disability is re-
lated to his or her misbehavior before deciding
what, if any, consequences will follow. In addi-
tion, school personnel must also determine wheth-
er the student was receiving an appropriate
education as defined by his or her own individual-
ized education plan (IEP) at the time the incident
or behavior occurred.
331
10/13/03, 2:27 PM
 THEORY INTO PRACTICE / Autumn 2003
Classroom Management in a Diverse Society
Although mechanisms for preventing inequi-
ties have been set up, these procedures do not nec-
essarily protect students or help them to receive
the services and supports they need to succeed. It
is difficult to arrive at an accurate determination
as to whether a child’s behavior was a result of his
or her disability because disability categories are
themselves subjective, socially constructed phe-
nomena (Sleeter, 1986) and teachers’ judgments
about students with disabilities are likely to be bi-
ased (Soodak, Podell, & Lehman, 1998). Clearly
there is a need to develop methods for making val-
id and unbiased judgments about students’ behav-
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
ior. On the other hand, it may be unreasonable to
expect an inherently exclusionary discipline policy
to be fairly and equitably applied to students within a
diverse school community. All members of the school
community need to consider the reasons for and
implications of punishing and excluding students
and then determine whether alternative strategies,
such as positive behavioral supports, would be more
effective in reaching the school’s goals.
Conclusion
General education classes are more likely to
be diverse and inclusive of students with disabili-
ties than ever before. The strategies identified in
this article offer a starting point for classroom prac-
tice and professional dialogue about the possibili-
ties of a school-wide commitment to teaching all
students. Teachers should identify and access the
supports they need to create an inclusive class-
room community that ensures membership and op-
portunities for friendships, collaboration, and parent
involvement. Teachers also need to consider the
benefits of using positive approaches to behavior
management rather than punitive and exclusionary
methods in inclusive settings. Clearly, administrative
support will be needed for teachers to implement pos-
itive behavioral approaches and other strategies to
promote an inclusive classroom community.
Inclusive education has already begun to af-
fect school and classroom policies and practices.
An increasing number of schools are employing
inclusive, community-building management prac-
tices, such as those that are used at Hubert Elementa-
ry School. It is now the responsibility of all educators
to ensure that school policies and classroom
332
SoodakPM 332
practices are consistent with what is in the best
interest of all children.
References
Baker, E., Wang, M., & Walberg, H. (1994). The ef-
fects of inclusion on learning. Educational Lead-
ership, 52, 33-35.
Braddock, D. (Ed.). (1999). Positive behavior support
for people with development disabilities: A re-
search synthesis. Washington, DC: AAMR.
Colvin, G., Sugai, G., Good, R.H., III, & Lee, Y.
(1997). Using active supervision and precorrec-
tion to improve transition behaviors in an elemen-
tary school. School Psychology Quarterly, 12,
344-63.
Cooley, S. (1995). Suspension/expulsion of regular and
special education students in Kansas: A report to
the Kansas State Board of Education. Topeka, KS:
Kansas State Board of Education. (ERIC Docu-
ment Reproduction Service No. 395 403)
Delpit, L. (1998). Other people’s children: Cultural
conflict in the classroom. New York: The New
Press.
Friend, M., & Bursuck, W.D. (2002). Including stu-
dents with special needs. Boston, MA: Allyn &
Bacon.
Gartin, B.C., & Murdick, N.L. (2001). The new IDEA
mandate: The use of functional assessment of be-
havior and positive behavior support. Remedial and
Special Education, 22, 344-349.
Gartner, A., & Lipsky, D.K. (1987). Beyond special
education: Toward a quality system for all stu-
dents. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 367-395.
Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Bassler, D.C., & Brissie, J.S.
(1992). Explorations in parent-school relations.
Journal of Educational Research, 85, 287-294.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amend-
ments of 1997, PL 105-17, 20 U.S.C.
Knostner, T., & Kincaid, D. (1999). Effective school
practice in educating students with challenging
behavior. TASH Newsletter, 11, 8-11.
Koegel, R.L., Koegel, L.K., & Dunlap, G. (1996). Pos-
itive behavior support: Including people with dif-
ficult behavior in the community. Baltimore: Paul
H. Brookes.
Kunc, N. (2002). Rediscovering the right to belong. In
R. Villa & J.S. Thousand (Eds.), Restructuring
for caring and effective education (pp. 77-92). Bal-
timore: Paul H. Brookes.
Lewis, T.J., Chard, D., & Scott, T.M. (1994). Full in-
clusion and the education of children and youth
with emotional and behavioral disorders. Behav-
ioral Disorders, 19, 277-293.
Meyer, L.H., Park, H.S., Grenot-Scheyer, M., Schwartz,
I.S., & Harry, B. (Eds.). (1998). Making friends:
The influences of culture and development. Balti-
more: Paul H. Brookes.
10/13/03, 2:27 PM

Sailor, W. (1996). New structures and systems change
for comprehensive positive behavioral support. In
L.K. Koegel, R.L. Koegel, & G. Dunlap (Eds.),
Positive behavioral support: Including people with
difficult behavior in the community (pp. 163-206).
Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Sailor, W. (2002). Devolution, school/community/fam-
ily partnerships, and inclusive education. In W.
Sailor (Ed.), Whole school success and inclusive
education (pp. 7-25). New York: Teachers Col-
lege Press.
Skiba, R.J., & Peterson, R.L. (1999). The dark side of
zero tolerance: Can punishment lead to safe
schools? Phi Delta Kappa, 80, 372-382.
Skiba, R.J., & Peterson, R.L. (2000). School discipline
at a crossroads: From zero tolerance to early re-
Downloaded By: [EBSCOHost EJS Content Distribution] At: 12:04 21 March 2009
sponse. Exceptional Children, 66, 335-347.
Sleeter, C.E. (1986). Learning disabilities: The social
construction of a special education category. Ex-
ceptional Children, 53, 46-54.
Soodak, L.C., & Erwin, E.J. (2000). Valued member
or tolerated participant: Parents’ experiences in
inclusive early childhood settings. The Journal of
the Association for Persons with Severe Handi-
caps, 25, 29-44.
Soodak, L.C., Podell, D.M., & Lehman, L. (1998). Teach-
er, student, and school attributes as predictors of
SoodakPM 333
Soodak
Inclusive Classroom Management
teachers’ responses to inclusion. Journal of Spe-
cial Education, 31, 480-497.
Staub, D., & Peck, C.A. (1994). What are the out-
comes for nondisabled students? Educational Lead-
ership, 52, 36-40.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1996). Structuring the
classroom to prevent disruptive behaviors. In S.
Stainback & W. Stainback (Eds.), Inclusion: A
guide for educators (pp. 343-348). Balitmore: Paul
H. Brookes.
Turnbull, A.P., & Turnbull, H.R. (2001). Families, pro-
fessional, and exceptionality: Collaborating for
empowerment (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill/Prentice Hall.
U.S. Department of Education. (2001). Twenty-five
years of educating children with disabilities: The
good news and the work ahead. Washington, DC:
American Youth Forum and Center on Education
Policy.
Villa, R.A., & Thousand, J. (2000). Restructuring for
caring and effective education. Baltimore: Paul H.
Brookes.
Villa, R.A., Thousand, J.S., Nevin, A.I., & Malgeri, C.
(1996). Instilling collaboration for inclusive
schooling as a way of doing business in public
education. Remedial and Special Education, 17,
169-181.
333
10/13/03, 2:27 PM