Stout (2001) defines inclusion as the integration of special needs children into the regular educating setting and notes that this practice is based on the Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) which states that the placement of a disabled student must be in the "least restrictive environment," which is defined as the environment closest to the general classroom in which the student's individual needs can be met. However, as noted by Kavale (2002), the notion of inclusion has been somewhat controversial, and continues to be so as the years go by. For the most part, this controversy concerns the specification of what should properly be considered "the least restrictive environment." In other words, are some disabled children best off in the regular classroom as this is the least restrictive environment for them while others are better off in special schools because, given the severity and nature of their disabilities, any other setting would in fact be restrictive?
On one side of the argument, advocates say that not only do disabled children have an equal right to membership of the same groups as everybody else, but further note that a segregated education restricts that right and limits opportunities for self-fulfillment for all children, no matter their degree of handicap. As noted by Capper, Keyes, and Frattura (2000), this side of the argument states that people with disabilities or learning difficulties do not need to be separated or protected, and that the goal must be to include almost all disabled children in regular classes, no matter how severe their handicaps. This side of the argument views inclusive education as a human rights issue and hold that as more and more children are included in the mainstream, it shall benefit everyone.
However, as noted by Hornby, Atkinson and Howard (1997), inclusive education is not without criticism. According to the authors some critics argue that placing a special education student in ...