The roots of these practices can be seen through section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. It is the legal mandate on Least Restrictive Environment, use of supplementary aids, and services for students with disabilities. It was to ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of disability. The problem with this Act is section 504 did not explain the use of supplementary aids and services. The term least restrictive environment has increased in popularity

There are many approaches teachers are now using to help students with an inclusion classroom. Three of these models are a consultant approach, teaming, and co-teaching (Gartner and Lipsky, 1997, para. 2). The consulting model is used in a building with a low incidence of special needs students and overall low student population. The special education teacher is made available to re-teach a difficult skill or to help the student(s) practice a newly acquired skill. This is a non-intrusive approach that provides the special needs students with at least two teachers to ask for help with curriculum problems. Regularly scheduled meetings are recommended rather than communication on an as-needed basis. The teaming model is where the special education teacher is assigned to one grade level team with one planning period per week for the team. The special education teacher provides student information, possible instructional strategies, modification ideas for assignments/ tests, and behavior strategies. The team meets on a regular basis, establishing consistent communication among the group. The team model is presented so teachers are not working independently to achieve success with their students. All team members work together and broaden their knowledge in various areas, whether they are from a general education or special education background. The disadvantages of this model could include possible resistance to implementing the modifications, delayed assistance for students with difficulty, high student to teacher ratio, and limited opportunities for special ed teachers to work in the general education classroom. The collaborative or co-teaching model is when the general education teacher and special education teachers work together to teach students with/ without disabilities in a shared classroom. Both are responsible for instruction planning and delivery, student achievement, assessment, and discipline. Students receive age-appropriate academics, support services, and possible modified instruction. This model provides a minimum of scheduling problems, continuous and ongoing communication between educators, and a lower student to teacher ratio. Collaborative teaching can be organized in a number of ways: one teacher, one support- This organization works well for teaching a unit where one teacher is more expert than the other. Students still have two teachers to ask questions of and get help. Parallel teaching design is another approach where the teacher divides the class into groups and teaches them simultaneously. The student to teacher ratio is low, more time is devoted to learning versus students waiting for help, opportunities for re-teaching are immediate, support for the teacher is present, communication is constant, and behavior problems can be minimized. Station teaching is another collaborative teaching model where it divides up content and students so that teachers or students rotate at the end of a unit. It is ideal for subject matter taught in units with no particular sequence. Benefits include the opportunities for re-teaching, the student to teacher ratio is low, teachers become experts with material, and communication among teachers is constant. Alternate teaching design is a model, where one teacher leads an enrichment or alternative activity while a second teacher re-teach

Some topics in this essay:
Gartner Lipsky, Learning Disabilities, Board Education, Reading Difficulty, School Corporation, , Amendments IDEA, District Court, Act IDEA, Hopkins University, special education, regular education, supplementary aids, 1999 para, aids services, student teacher ratio, student teacher, teacher ratio, maximum extent appropriate, carlberg 1999, extent appropriate, regular classroom, carlberg 1999 para, special education teacher, children disabilities educated,