Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T20:03:19.509Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integration: What Do We Mean?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

David Thomas
David Thomas*
Affiliation:
School of Education, The Flinders University of South Australia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is now 18 years since Lloyd Dunn (1968) wrote his seminal paper “Special Education for the Mildly Retarded: Is much of it justified?” In the meantime, there has been major legislation in USA in the form of Public Law 94-142 (1975) which has been widely interpreted as a blueprint for improved services for the handicapped and for their integration into ordinary schools. In Britain, Section 10 of the Education Act (1976), the Warnock Report (1978) and the Education Act (1981) have provided, in varying degrees, official encouragement for integration.

Type
Research Article
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , May 1987 , pp. 10 - 14
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ammer, J.J. (1984). The mechanics of mainstreaming: Considering the regular educators’ perspective. Remedial and Special Education, 5 (6), 15–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1983). National school statistics collection. Australia.Google Scholar
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1984). National school statistics collection. Australia.Google Scholar
Birch, J.W. (1974). Mainstreaming: Educable mentally retarded children in regular classes. Reston, Va: Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
‘Booth, T. (1981). Demystifying integration. In Swann, W. (Ed.) The practice of special education.Blackwell.Google Scholar
Brennan, W. K. (1982). Special education in mainstream schools. The search for quality. National Council for Special Education.Google Scholar
Bricker, D.D. (1978). A rationale for the integration of handicapped and non-handicapped pre-school children. In Guralnick, M.J. (Ed.) Early intervention and the integration of handicapped and non-handicapped children (pp. 191–206).Google Scholar
Center, Y., Ward, J., Parmenter, T. & Nash, R. (1985). Principals’ attitudes towards the integration of disabled children into regular schools. The Exceptional Child, 32 (3), 149–161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, M. K. (1984). Integration in Victorian Education. (Report of the Ministerial Review of Educational Services for the Disabled). Melbourne: Office of the Director-General, Victoria.Google Scholar
De Leo, A.V. (1976). The attitudes of public school administrators and teachers toward the integration of children with special needs into regular programs. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Boston College.Google Scholar
Dunn, L.M. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded — Is much of it justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fish, J. (1985). (Chairman) Educational opportunities for all? (report of the committee reviewing provision to meet special educational needs). London: Inner London Education Authority.Google Scholar
Gresham, F.M. (1982). Misguided mainstreaming: The case for social skills training with handicapped children. Exceptional Children, 48, 422–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaufman, M.J., Gottlieb, J., Agard, J.A. & Kukic, M.B. (1975). Mainstreaming: Towards an explication of the concept. Focus on Exceptional Children,> 7 (3), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kunzweiler, C. (1982). Mainstreaming will fail unless there is a change in professional attitudes and institutional structure. Education 102, 284–288.Google Scholar
MacMillan, D.L. (1982). Mental retardation in school and society (2nd ed.). Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
McNeil, J.D. (1977). Curriculum: A comprehensive introduction. Boston: Little, Brown & Co. Google Scholar
Meyen, E. & Lehr, D. (1980). Least restrictive environment: Instructional implications. Focus on Exceptional Children, (12) 1–8.Google Scholar
Nirje, B. (1969). The normalization principle and its human management implications. In Kugel, R.B. & Wolfensberger, W., Changing patterns in residential services for the mentally retarded. Washington: National Institute on Child Health and Human Development.Google Scholar
Noel, M. M. & Fuller, B. C. (1985). The social policy construction of special education: The impact of state characteristics on identification and integration of handicapped children. Remedial and Special Education, 6 (3) 27–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabornie, E. J. (1985). Social mainstreaming of handicapped students: Facing an unpleasant reality. Remedial and Special Education, 6 (2) 12–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sharron, H. (1985). Needs must. Times Education Supplement, 22nd Feb., 20.Google Scholar
Solomon, E.L. (1977). New York City’s prototype school for educating the handicapped. Phi Delta Kappan, 59 (1), 7–10.Google Scholar
Stobart, G. (1986). Is integrating the handicapped psychologically defensible? Bulletin of the British Pyshcological Society, 39, 1–3.Google Scholar
Strain, P.S., Odom, S.L. & McConnell, S. (1984). Promoting social reciprocity of exceptional children: Identification, target behaviour selection and intervention. Remedial and Special Education, 5, (1), 21–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swann, W. (1984). Statistics of segregation. Childright. London: Children’s Legal Centre.Google Scholar
Thomas, D. (1982). Teachers’ attitudes to mainstreaming the intellectually handicapped. Unpublished doctoral thesis. Flinders University of South Australia.Google Scholar
Warnock, H.M. (1978). Special educational needs. (Report of the Committee on Inquiry into the Education of Handicapped Children and Young People). London: H.M.S.O.Google Scholar
Wolfensberger, W. (1972). The principle of normalization in human services. Toronto: National Institute of Mental Retardation.Google Scholar