TASH Connections, Volume 40, Issue 2
All Means All: Ending Segregation in Schools and Achieving Education
Equity and Excellence for All!
Letter from Our President, Ralph Edwards
While I’m excited about each new edition of TASH Connections, I must admit I don’t read each cover-tocover. It depends on the relevance of the topic to my overall interests and current priorities.
Connections’ articles can provide new information or insights, confirmatory perspectives, and
sometimes anecdotal reports that become part of the TASH folklore. Contributors can include
advocates and family members, policymakers, new or iconic researchers, service providers or some
combination of this list. They may be provocative or confirming or, as in this edition, provide a recipe
for change.
Just as the geocentric concept of the universe has been proven inaccurate, education research shows
that a segregated, “special education” approach is ineffective in achieving preferred educational and
quality of life outcomes. Yet many students, particularly males of color, spend significant portions of
classroom time in segregated classes. In my New England community, a regional center for special
education instruction and services was a proposed option for recycling the senior center building.
Proponents said it would both reduce town “external placement” costs and bring revenue from other
communities. Additionally, many families feel that they have “won” the IEP battle when segregated
services are promised.
This Connections issue provides information on a paradigm shift from “special education” to an “equitybased definition of inclusion”. The framework developed by the University of Kansas SWIFT Center is
described and examples given. An assessment tool is referenced that enables school districts to
determine how the system can be strengthen. A successful shift can be expedited by informing changemakers of the possibility, opportunity and value of change.
Make this edition of TASH Connections your tool for change. Consider making sure that every school
board member, superintendent, principals, PTOs and family organizations and other key stakeholders
get a copy. Initiate community conversation by writing a letter to the editor on how education can be
done differently and why. Support your state chapter regarding inclusive education policy and programs.
Share your ideas and activities with the TASH Inclusive Education Committee and help to hasten this
shift.
Letter from Our Executive Director, Barb Trader
Confronting Myths and Facts of Education Policy
TASH is thrilled to be the Policy Team Leader with the SWIFT Center. The Policy Team includes: Sandra
Warren, representing the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO); Bill East, Executive Director,
National Association of State Directors of Special Education (NASDSE); Jenny Stonemeier, Education
Policy Director, TASH; and myself as TASH’s Executive Director. We are greatly benefited by the
partnership, guidance and perspective of CCSSO and NASDSE.
Education policy is multilayered and complex, as nearly everyone involved understands. Federal policy
sets a floor of expectation for equity and access, and accordingly, has provided federal funding to
support equity expectations. State policy interprets federal law, provides important state responsibility
for monitoring and enforcing federal policy, and leverages state authority on many matters, including:
teacher and leader certification, funding models, interagency agreements, curriculum selection, and
much more. Elected school boards exercise a great deal of authority in how federal and state policy is
interpreted, particularly by setting priorities through local budgeting.
Since TASH’s inception, members have felt much frustration regarding the lack of “stickiness” among
inclusive reform efforts. It has been a shared understanding that the inclusiveness of a school is a
reflection of the belief system of the building principal. One way we think we can increase the likelihood
that change will remain in place is to coach stakeholders, including parents and community leaders, to
change policy if it interferes with values, particularly values of equity and inclusiveness. Policy alignment
is a process of examining the existing policy (including the written policy, the popularly held
interpretation of the policy, and the culturally based practice) for bridges and barriers that impact the
implementation, replication, and sustainability of a systemic change, and going through a series of steps
to “align” policies in support of expressed values, implementation steps and desired outcomes.
To illustrate the importance of policy alignment, we can use the example of the “continuum” language
in IDEA and how this language is interpreted by states and districts.
A common myth or believe is a “continuum of services” meaning segregated settings, is required by
IDEA. This belief can be a serious barrier to inclusive education. A first step in policy alignment is to
discover what, in fact, the law in question “requires”.
FACT: The IDEA does not, neither in statute, regulations, nor guidance, require a school district to
provide—or populate—a segregated classroom setting for students with disabilities. IDEA ’97 clearly
states that the presumption of service delivery for ALL students with disabilities is the regular education
classroom with appropriate supports and services.
IDEA regulations outline a series of factors that guide “placement” decisions made by an IEP
team. They include:
 Children with disabilities must be placed so that they participate with nondisabled students in
nonacademic and extracurricular services and activities to the maximum extent appropriate to
the needs of the individual child with a disability. 34 CFR §300.553.

Each child’s placement must be as close as possible to the child’s home, and unless the child’s
IEP requires some other arrangement, each child with a disability must be educated in the
school that he or she would attend if nondisabled. 34 CFR §300.552(b)(3) and (c).

Public agencies must ensure that children with disabilities are not removed from education in
age-appropriate regular classrooms solely because of needed modifications in the general
curriculum. 34 CFR §300.552 (e).

Special classes, separate schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities occurs only if
the nature or severity of the disability is such that education in regular classes with the use of
supplementary aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily. 34 CFR §300.114 (a)(2)(ii).
FACT: The ADA goes a step further by requiring that people with disabilities have access to the most
integrated setting possible.
ADA regulations state:
“no individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be
denied the benefits of services, programs, or activities of a public entity, or be subjected to
discrimination by any such entity” 28 CFR§ 35.130(a)
In plain language this means public entities (schools) CANNOT exclude students with disabilities. A fully
segregated classroom prevents any student from accessing the full scope of programs, services,
activities offered by a school.
These short talking points help explain the policy rationale for inclusive education:
 We have a strong evidence base that when children are given access to the general education
curriculum with appropriate supports and services, academic and behavioral outcomes for ALL
students improve.

There is no federal authority (law, regulation, or guidance) that requires school districts to have
a segregated environment for students with disabilities.

Segregated classroom settings are in direct conflict with the Supreme Court Decision Brown v.
Board of Education, the primary finding of which stated “separate is NOT equal”.

Segregated classrooms are in direct conflict with the Olmstead decision of 1999, in which the
U.S. Supreme Court declared that unjustified segregation of people with disabilities is a violation
of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The TASH Inclusive Education Committee created an Inclusive Education FAQ, which can be used to
further confront the myths about the “continuum” and other false notions about inclusive education
(www.tash.org/iefaq). Please continue to follow the progress of the SWIFT Center, and consider policy
alignment as a necessary step as you advocate for change for one student and for system-wide change.
Barb Trader
Articles from Our Contributors
SWIFT: Where All Means All
By Mary Schuh, Maura Hart, Karmen Mills
The SWIFT Center, a national K-8 technical assistance center funded by the U.S. Department of
Education, Office of Special Education Programs, provides schools and districts intensive technical
assistance related to academic and behavioral supports that make it possible for all students to be
educated in their neighborhood public schools alongside their grade-level peers.
Working intensively in 64 schools in five states (Oregon, Mississippi, Maryland, Vermont, and New
Hampshire), and providing resources nationally, the SWIFT Center, Schoolwide Integrated Framework
for Transformation, is committed to: 1) creating powerful inclusive learning opportunities for students
and educators alike; 2) promoting active, engaged partnerships among families and community
members; and 3) widely sharing the lessons learned to improve the academic, behavioral, and social
outcomes for all students.
What do we mean by all students? We mean every student who lives in the community, including
students who are struggling readers, gifted, living in poverty, students with disabilities, high achievers,
culturally and ethnically diverse students, and those with the most extensive needs. Just imagine a
busy, vibrant school filled with classrooms where students with a wide range of abilities are working and
playing together and engaged in meaningful learning. A school where special and general education
silos are eliminated and resources are provided so all students have the supports they need to succeed.
In this school, all adults (teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, and support staff) share the
responsibility for teaching and supporting student learning, and families and community members are
integral and valued partners in the process.
Research indicates several components need to be in place in order to effectively meet the needs of ALL
students; these include: administrative leadership, a multi-tiered system of support, family and
community partnerships, an integrated educational framework, and inclusive policies and practices.
Sharing the Lessons from SWIFT Partner Schools in New Hampshire and Mississippi
In collaboration with the New Hampshire Department of Education, SWIFT is currently working with four
school districts providing on-going technical assistance to eight partner schools. One of these schools,
Charlestown Primary School in the Fall Mountain Regional School District, is developing a school culture
focused on equity and excellence in education for all students. For the first time, primary school
children with significant disabilities in Charlestown are fully included in their neighborhood school and
enrolled in age appropriate general education classrooms. The school district literally shut down its selfcontained “school” that served students with disabilities.
Brenda Olson, a third grade teacher at Charlestown Primary, reflected on the first week of school. She
was pleased with how well all the students in her class were doing and found the student in her
classroom who came from a segregated program was much more capable than was documented in his
IEP. Charlestown’s principal, Chris Young, anticipated this type of mismatch, and already asked the
planning teams for recently transitioned students to meet to review and revise the IEPs for these
children to reflect their new inclusive environment. The district also provided a stipend for teachers
working directly with the students who used to attend the separate program and special educators who
worked with transitioning students to meet for a full day prior to the beginning of the school year. The
focus for the planning day included discussion about the teaching methods and accommodations to best
meet each student’s educational needs, as well as how to make sure these children would be fully
included in all aspects of the classroom communities to which they now belonged.
In another New Hampshire SWIFT partner school, the Hudson Memorial Middle School decreased school
suspensions by 9% and out of school suspensions by 40% with detentions dropping by an amazing 70%
in just one year. This shift was a result of their implementation of a schoolwide behavior intervention
system that acknowledged all positive contributions to the culture of the school. This system is for
everyone who is a part of the school community—students, staff, families—not just students with
behavior support needs. As a fully integrated community, they are accountable to one another for
upholding their core values daily.
In Indianola, Mississippi, the Lockard Elementary School (of the Sunflower Consolidated School district)
is working to eliminate pull-out and out-of-district programs for students with IEPs, and including them
in general education classrooms for all or a majority of their school day. General and special education
teachers as well as para-educators are collaborating in order to provide students, including students
with IEPs, access to the general curriculum and support their academic and behavior needs. So far, 88%
of students with IEPs (24 students) are learning and growing alongside their age-peers. Educators are
learning from and supporting one another through professional learning communities. Lockard
Elementary School was recently awarded the Mississippi Governor's 2014 Partnership Excellence Award.
The implementation of the SWIFT framework is helping schools to become places where children learn
in a community that values the contributions of each and every student! In 2015, the five partner states
will be inviting more of their schools and districts to participate in the SWIFT initiative. For additional
information about the SWIFT Center visit the website at www.swiftschools.org.
Defining Inclusion Through an Equity Lens
By Wayne Sailor
Does the research support inclusion? The answer to my question is “yes”—but we need to be careful
how we define that word “inclusion.” In some ways it is the wrong question. Since the Education for All
Handicapped Act of 1975 extended a free public education to all Americans, why in 2015 should we be
concerned with who is included and who is not? The reason we still talk about this is that during the
1970s, the age of specialization in public services, we as a nation, bought into a “medical model”
grounded in a categorical construct we now call “disability.” Considered a characteristic of the person, a
disability could, ostensibly through science, be “diagnosed” and then a specialized form of education
“prescribed” to address the disabling condition. After lengthy Congressional debates during this period,
the medical model was written into IDEA PL 94-142 and introduced the term “placement,” which
enabled segregation of students through the Individual Educational Program (IEP) process. Those
opposed to the medical model were thrown a bit of a bone with the “least restrictive environment”
(LRE) language with its so called “continuum of placements,” which has mainly proven over the years to
be a fruitful ground for litigation and a nightmare for families.
Now we are 40 years in and, thankfully, the landscape has shifted, and the medical model is being
seriously challenged. This challenge would not be occurring if available evidence supported reasonable
outcomes from application of the medical model, but it has not. The bulk of evidence for academic,
social, behavioral, and communication gains in school and the long-term consequences of education
such as employment, access to higher education, and suitable quality of life indicators for students
supported in special education, has been dismal.
An Adaptive/Environmental Model
My colleagues, Leonard Burrello and Jeannie Kleinhammer-Tramill, and I published a book last year that
described a framework for public education that provides a different way to consider “inclusion”
(Burrello, Sailor, & Kleinhammer-Tramill, 2013). Instead of anchoring the term in “placement” decisions,
we argued for an equity-based definition grounded in the work of Alfredo Artiles, Elizabeth Kozleski and
their associates, and applied to all students (Kozleski, & Thorius, 2014). Under this definition inclusion is
considered to be a characteristic of all students through provision of an “instructional match” for
identified student learning needs. Inclusive education thus becomes a matter of tailoring, or
differentiating instructional practices to meet any measured (progress monitored) difference from
reasonable, expected progress in the general curriculum for all students (and yes, “all means all”). The
principal drivers for change to this newer concept of inclusion are: (a) a multi-tiered system of support
with embedded response to intervention (MTSS/RTI), as a way to match different levels of intensity of
instruction to indicators of measured progress from instruction; (b) positive behavioral interventions
and support (PBIS) to effectively and efficiently apply pedagogical principals to the management of
behavior that impedes student learning; and (c) universal design for learning (UDL), which guides the
arrangements of teaching environments and methods to address the needs of diverse students in a
universal instructional, schoolwide context.
The equity-based definition of inclusion focuses more on the environment and adaptations that can be
provided to enhance learning opportunities and associated outcomes for individual students. Rather
than “including” a marginalized group of students within the context of the greater group (i.e.,
placement), the equity-based definition of “inclusion” refers to all resources available to a school in the
service of enhanced learning for all students. In short, instead of including students, schools include
supports and services needed by all students with the associated human capital and equitably distribute
these supports and services to enhance all student learning.
A Tale of Two Schools
Let’s consider how these two conceptions of inclusion differ by considering how they apply to two
elementary school settings. School A is a traditionally organized school serving an urban area in the
Midwest. Students in school A who are performing poorly in their grade-level classroom are routinely
referred by the general education teacher to the school psychologist for testing to see if they have a
“disability” that explains the poor performance. If the results confirm a disability, the student receives
an IEP, is removed from the grade-level classroom and placed in a separate classroom with a dedicated
special education teacher. Some students will be considered eligible for the “inclusion” program and
will be allowed to be in the general education classroom for some blocks of the curriculum, often the
“specials” (art, music, etc.). Students with more extensive support needs will have a paraprofessional
assigned to them and may work at the back of the classroom on a different curriculum than the rest of
the class. School A has separate “gifted” and English learner classrooms as well. The data from annual
assessments at School A show limited grade-level progress in math and reading for most grades, but
deteriorating performance for the language and special education subgroups.
School B, also an urban elementary school, looks very different. Both schools serve a diverse population
of students who require “specialized” (not “special”) supports and services, but School B has no
separate, self-contained classrooms. All students are screened twice annually for performance
decrements in math, reading, social development and behavior that impedes learning. Those students
who require more intensive educational interventions (i.e., tier 2 and tier 3) are monitored for progress
using valid and reliable tools to ensure their maximal engagement with the grade-level curriculum.
Space in the school is utilized more efficiently so that students requiring more intensive interventions
can be brought together in small groups for certain curricular blocks or even undergo one-on-one
instruction (i.e., tier 3) as needed outside of the grade-level classroom. No students are grouped or
segregated on the basis of their “disability.” Specialized educational resources and teachers (i.e.,
“special education”, second language instruction, etc.) are deployed throughout the school as needed to
provide instructional matches for each student. Co-teaching (i.e., general and special educators) occurs
in several classrooms on a regularly scheduled basis and paraprofessionals are assigned to grade-level
classrooms rather than to specific students.
What Does the Research Say?
We at the University of Kansas SWIFT Center developed a framework of ten inclusive educational
features, each of which is supported by a body research. We refer to these features as strong and
engaged site leadership, strong educator support system, inclusive academic instruction, inclusive
behavior instruction, fully integrated organizational structure, strong and positive school culture,
trusting family partnerships, trusting community partnerships, strong LEA/school relationship, and LEA
policy framework. We also compiled a master bibliography of evidence in support of inclusive education
in general. Readers wishing a copy of a brief explaination of these features and supporting research as
well as the bibliography can find them on our website at www.swiftschools.org/research.
In general, peer-reviewed studies using rigorous methodology comparing student academic and sociobehavioral outcomes under segregated vs. inclusive arrangements favor the inclusive practices. This
finding, however, is mitigated by the operational definition of inclusion. Strong outcomes are associated
with degree of participation in the grade-level curriculum but not with simply being placed in a general
education class with a paraprofessional as the principal educator. More recent research supports
whole-school applications (i.e., School B) with an equity-based rather than a placement-based definition
of inclusion.
References
Burrello, L., Sailor, W., & Kleinhammer-Tramill. (2013). Unifying educational systems. New York:
Routledge.
Kozleski, E., & Thorius, K.K. (Eds.). (2014). Ability equity & culture. Sustaining inclusive urban education
reform. New York: Teachers College Press.
SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment (FIA): Monitoring Transformation through On-going
Self-Assessment
By Allyson Satter and Jessica Meisenheimer
What is the SWIFT framework?
The SWIFT Center is a national technical assistance center that provides academic and behavioral
support to improve outcomes for all students, including students with the most extensive needs. The
SWIFT framework is composed of 10 features within 5 domains: administrative leadership, multi-tiered
system of support, fully integrated educational framework, family and community engagement, and
inclusive policy structures and practices.
In the SWIFT framework, administrative leadership includes strong and engaged site leadership with a
strong educator support system. A multi-tiered system of support ensures all students are getting
inclusive academic and behavioral instruction targeted to their specific needs. A fully integrated
educational framework combines the resources of different systems, such as general and special
education, into a fully integrated organizational structure that supports all students’ participation in the
general education curriculum. When a school has a strong and positive culture, all students have equal
access to learning activities and all school personnel share responsibilities for all students. Furthermore,
family and community members are engaged in the process. Partnerships that are reciprocal among
family, staff, and community members benefit all who are involved. To implement and sustain inclusive
school reform, inclusive policy structures and practices are in place to allow the local educational agency
or district to effectively support schools as they implement SWIFT features.
How do schools measure fidelity of implementation of the SWIFT framework?
The SWIFT Center developed assessment tools to help schools measure the extent to which they are
implementing the features of the SWIFT framework—that is, the fidelity of their implementation. These
tools provide valuable data schools use to identify strengths and areas of opportunity in order to set
priorities for technical assistance and to create action plans.
The SWIFT-FIA (Fidelity Integrity Assessment) is a self-assessment tool that takes a school team about 15
to 20 minutes to complete. They can use SWIFT-FIA to frequently monitor their own progress toward
inclusive school reform and possibly adjust short-term action plans to make incremental changes.
Schools involved with the SWIFT Center, may also use the SWIFT-FIT, which is a more in-depth fidelity
implementation tool administered by a trained assessor. Data from these tools as well as other sources
can help guide school team discussions that contribute to priority setting and action planning for
becoming a inclusive school.
How do schools use the SWIFT-FIA (Fidelity Integrity Assessment)?
School teams can understand their own rate of progress implementing SWIFT features begin by selfscoring the SWIFT-FIA. In order to make adjustments to plans that facilitate the biggest change in the
shortest time, and often with the least amount of effort or investment, the teams narrow their attention
to their top one, two, or three priorities from the items they scored as “high” or “very high” on the
“Priority for Improvement” category. After identifying their top priority item(s), team members can
then move into a process to create goals and develop action plans.
What does the SWIFT-FIA process look like at a school?
In schools currently participating in the SWIFT technical assistance process, the data collected from the
SWIFT-FIA is used in conjunction with additional data sources to identify priorities and plan action steps.
SWIFT partners accomplish this process through six technical assistance practices: School / District
Visioning, Data Snapshots, Priority and Practice Planning, Transformation Teaming, Coaching and
Facilitation, and Resource Mapping. The following scenario of a fictional school, however, shows how
any school could use the SWIFT-FIA to identify needs, priorities, and action steps to move toward a
schoolwide integrated framework.
After scoring themselves with the SWIFT-FIA, George Washington Elementary School leadership team
identified “Trusting Family Partnerships: Family Opportunities” as their top priority for improvement.
Currently, the school solicits feedback from families once a year, but does not have a process in place to
analyze or share this data. George Washington family members are included in a parent council, which
overseas fund-raising and event planning, but do not make school governance decisions.
Because family survey data is already collected, the school’s leadership team decided an easy first step
would be to share this information with families. Their action plan steps included summarizing family
survey data, improving family engagement based on survey results, and sharing the results with families.
After eight weeks, each goal was completed, so the leadership team revisited their action plan.
Summaries of family survey data indicated family members heard George Washington adopted the
SWIFT framework, but wanted more information about what SWIFT is and how it impacts their
children’s education. The school’s action plan steps included inviting parent members to join the
leadership team and reporting decisions to parent council meetings.
Now, every six to eight weeks the George Washington leadership team reviews their SWIFT-FIA ShortTerm Action Plan and sets new goals as needed. Once sufficient progress is made in the area of
“Trusting Family Partnerships: Family Opportunities”, the leadership team rescores themselves using the
SWIFT-FIA, selects new top priority item(s), and creates action steps for incremental change.
How can the SWIFT-FIA help my school?
The SWIFT framework organizes the factors most likely to contribute to an inclusive school. Schools can
use the SWIFT-FIA to self-monitor their implementation of these features. By regularly revisiting the
SWIFT-FIA and associated action plans, teams continue to move forward in their own transformation
process to come inclusive schools.
For more information, a free download of the SWIFT-FIA can be accessed online at
swiftschools.org/resources.
Trusting Family and Community Partnerships: Necessary Ingredients for a Fully Inclusive
School Community
By Martha Blue-Banning and Judith Gross
Trust is the bedrock of successful partnerships that influence positive student outcomes (TschannenMoran & Hoy, 2000), which is why SWIFT uses the term “trusting” in relation to the feature of “family
and community partnerships,” thereby emphasizing the importance of trust in the relationship. Family
and community partnerships play essential roles in successful inclusive schools, often providing supports
and resources to meet staff, family, and student needs that go beyond what is typically available
through the school. These partnerships ultimately represent the diversity of the community itself
involving families, social service organizations, local businesses, higher education, governmental
authorities, and recreation departments. Reciprocally, families and community partners benefit from
their relationships with schools in many ways including learning about schools’ inclusive cultures.
Lacy Redd—the former principal of a SWIFT Knowledge Development Site —realized long ago that
positive student outcomes depend a lot on feeling valued and supported as learners. She recognized
the importance of an inviting school culture to positive student outcomes, saying, “It has always been
very important to me that our school feel welcoming to families and community members. This starts
from the moment people walk into our building and continues with the presence of our teachers and
students in the community. At Newberry Elementary, every child is included and every child is learning
and succeeding. Because of this, we are proud to be considered a top performing ‘A’ school in Florida!”
Listed below are the top 10 strategies Lacy Redd believes makes her school a welcoming community for
everyone:
1. Accelerated Reader Nights – We encourage families to read together—as well as reinforce the
practice of reading every night—by opening our Media Center to families one night a month
during the school year and one night a week during the summer.
2. Family Picnics – We host a family picnic once in the fall and once in the spring. The picnics take
place on the grassy area near our bus circle, which we cover with blankets, and we enjoy bag
lunches or picnic baskets brought by families and classes. Everyone loves these picnic days. Even
if it rains, we have the picnic on the floor of the cafeteria!
3. Lunch Tables for Parents – We encourage parents to come to the school to eat lunch with their
children and have tables in our cafeteria specifically for this purpose. Children can choose a
friend to join them at lunch, which is a special treat for both the kids and parents.
4. Learning Community – Our school partners with the local university and their teacher
preparation program to host future teachers. We have interns in 17 of our classrooms this year.
The benefits are twofold: the college students get to learn about inclusion and we are better
able to meet the needs of kids thanks to extra educators in our classrooms.
5. Positive Behavior Celebrations – As part of our Schoolwide Positive Behavior Supports program,
our students earn “Skybucks” that they can use to attend special events during the school year.
Events include a game day, field day, movie day, and a dance that our School Resource Officer
DJs! Our parents volunteer and provide snacks for these events.
6. Food Backpacks – Our community food bank brings backpacks of food to the school on Fridays
for needy students to take home, ensuring they have food for the weekend. Parents can also
contribute to the program. Students participate in a service learning project where they create
soup bowls that are sold to raise money for the hungry at a local Community Soup Day.
7. Serving in the Community – As principal of the school, I served on our local Chamber of
Commerce, the Economic Development Council, and coached for the local Recreation
Department. This involvement outside of the school formed strong partnerships with parents,
students, and community members.
8. Involving the Mayor – Our local mayor writes letters to students throughout the year regarding
contests, “Citizens of the Month,” and other recognitions. He visits the school and is always
looking to recognize student successes.
9. Newspaper Highlights – A grandparent of a former student writes a weekly column in the local
newspaper, and always highlights events at the school, as well as recognitions received by
teachers and students.
10. Helping Families – Our school is involved in many events that help families including the
American Cancer Society’s “Jump Rope for Heart” and “Relay for Life;” a coat drive organized by
local churches; and a yearly 5K run benefitting muscular dystrophy research. School staff,
parents, and community members go above and beyond to help families, and play a big part in
those successes.
What does it take to promote trusting family and community partnerships? According to SWIFT, an
inviting, inclusive school culture; strong administrative leadership driven by a clear vision of inclusion;
systemic presence of trusting partnership attributes (commitment, respect, communication,
collaboration, and competence); and opportunities for involvement and reciprocity are essential factors
that contribute to successful partnerships. Benefits of effective family-school partnerships include
improved outcomes for students (e.g., better grades, reduced dropout rate), families (e.g., strengthened
family satisfaction, increased social capital), and educators (e.g., increased teacher efficacy, improved
instruction). Benefits of strong community partnerships in inclusive schools include the excellent
opportunity for community members to enhance their understanding of how they perceive disability
and support the importance of inclusion and full participation in settings beyond the school walls.
References
Tschannen-Moran, M. & Hoy, W. K. (2000). A multidisciplinary analysis of the nature, meaning, and
measurement of trust. Review of Educational Research, 71, 547-593.
Transforming Systems: Essential Elements to “Be the Future”
By Laura L. Nuss, Director, District of Columbia Department on Disability Services
This year’s TASH conference theme, “Be the Future,” is both relevant and timely. We all are involved in
the daunting task of transforming systems that are built on foundations whose building blocks are
centuries old, rooted in segregation and outdated medical models that still tend to see people through a
lens that focuses on deficits.
So what are the essential elements required to successfully transform a service system for people with
intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), especially one that was judged, as was the case for the
District of Columbia at one time, to be one of the weakest in the country? As we all work on “transition
plans” to ensure that people with IDD have the properly structured support they require facilitating and
maximizing participation in and contribution to their communities, where should we focus our efforts?
My experience during the past seven years in the District of Columbia has reinforced and clarified that
which must be our priorities as we make decisions about how best to deploy our financial and human
resources.
So what are the critical elements in creating systems with those characteristics? I’ll offer my top five, all
of which relate to specific aspects of LEADERSHIP. To transform systems, leaders at all levels of every
organization and system must:
(1) Be able to envision the system(s), services and outcome you want to create. To quote Stephen
Covey, “Begin with the end in mind.” People with disabilities and their families want systems
that are responsive; to be treated as full partners, where success can only be achieved if
everyone is informed and engaged; provide people with real and informed choices; and are
progressive, flexible and nimble enough so that additional changes and new ideas can be
introduced as people and the system itself grows.
(2) Be consistent. Consistency is more than just being there over time, although that’s important.
(I took over a system that had had 10 leaders in 7 years!) Many things need to be consistent.
Vision and mission need to be consistent. So that continuing progress isn’t vested in the
presence of a single person, it is critical that leaders cultivate other leaders at all levels of the
organization and within the stakeholder community. This must include leaders within the state
systems and through partnerships with people with disabilities, their families, provider
leadership and direct support professionals, all of whom share and shape the vision and
mission.
(3) Create coherence. Leaders have to ensure that they are aligning vision and mission with day-today expectations. That is, over time, leaders need to work on transforming quality and
monitoring standards, service descriptions and funding formulas that reflect the priorities and
outcomes that are important to the people receiving services, and that go far beyond minimum
standards for health and safety.
(4) Never forget that every decision and action affects real people! Sounds obvious but, in reality,
it’s easy to change budgets, staffing, reporting and program requirements for any one of a
number of reason and lose sight of the impact on people receiving supports and services.
(5) “Find your voice and inspire others to find theirs.” This was Stephen Covey’s “8th habit,” added
five years after his original “7 habits” book. Throughout my career, I have made this a priority,
creating opportunities for people with disabilities and family members to find their own voices,
gain seats at the tables at which decisions are made, and providing support so that they
individually and collectively can inspire others. In the District of Columbia, DDS supports Project
ACTION!, our statewide self-advocacy coalition, has family liaisons on staff, and provides
funding and staff support to a Supporting Families Across the Lifespan Community of Practice –
so that they all can “Be the Future.” DDS has also invested heavily in offering best practice
training and technical assistance in Person-Centered Thinking, Customized Employment,
Discovery, parent to parent and peer support and other inclusive service strategies for all
stakeholders – staff, providers, self-advocates and family members, and continue to support
on-going Communities of Practice so that everyone has the opportunity to be part of the
change and a home to pursue shared goals for the future.
As we continue on this journey to transform and transition our systems to ones that people with
disabilities and their families now and for generations to come look to for support without the
limitations set by low expectations, rigid program structures and complex funding formulas, it’s exciting
to think of the possibilities – and the positive impact that groups like TASH, Self-Advocates Becoming
Empowered (SABE), the National Association of State Directors of Developmental Disabilities Services
(NASDDDS), and so many others are making in creating the future so many of us envision and want to
enjoy.
References
Covey, S.R. (1989). The 7 habits of highly effective people: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change. New
York: Free Press.
Covey, S.R. (2004). The 8th habit: From effectiveness to greatness. New York: Free Press.
Braiding Reform Initiatives and Increasing Outcomes for All: A Unity of Purpose
By Mary Schuh and Jenny Stonemeier
RttT, UDL, SIG, MTSS, PBIS, RtI, and CCSS are a few of the acronyms populating the vocabulary of
educators in our nation’s public schools. How many of these reform initiatives are your schools
implementing or considering adopting? The variety of federal, state, and district opportunities and
expectations to enhance student learning can be overwhelming for school administrators, educators,
and families; they may even contradict the outcomes they are purporting to achieve.
Race to the Top, Universal Design for Learning, School Improvement Grants, Multi-Tiered System of
Support, Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports, Response to Intervention, and Common Core
State Standards are among the many school reform initiatives possessing their own processes and
systems for educational professional development and strategies to implement with fidelity. Because of
the rising tide of educational reform initiatives, SWIFT is a particularly welcome approach to educators,
administrators, and other stakeholders who apply SWIFT at the school, district, and state levels—not as
another initiative to pursue, but as a comprehensive schoolwide framework. This framework enriches,
enhances, and coordinates other initiatives to maximize efficiencies, resources, and—most
importantly—outcomes for children.
What would happen if school leaders developed plans and processes for braiding these reform
initiatives to benefit all students in the general education classroom rather than only having certain
initiatives for certain populations of students delivered in, often times, separate locations? SWIFT
Knowledge Development Sites and school partners are learning that by systematically unifying the
multitude of initiatives, outcomes for students are likely to improve and school personnel feel more
invested in implementing initiatives with fidelity (Kingston et al., 2014).
Inclusive Policy Structure and Practice is one of five key domains in the SWIFT framework. Aligning
school district policy frameworks takes time and a significant investment of human and capital resources
from district and community leaders, but the outcomes are readily apparent. The outcomes also
demonstrate that when policy alignment is included as an active and fundamental strategy for
schoolwide transformation, the centralizing force of the change shifts from a dynamic leader to an
ingrained and lasting cultural framework. When initiatives are aligned to support change in a school and
policy reflects this alignment, the ownership for the change becomes shared among all staff and
community stakeholders—expanding investment in the new culture both now and into the future.
Strategies for initiative alignment include:
 Completing the SWIFT Fidelity Integrated Assessment (FIA) tool (available at swiftschools.org) to
determine where and how the system can be strengthened through the unification of reform
initiatives and identify professional development needs.

Expanding the school and district leadership teams to develop strategies to link multiple
initiatives and revise policy to make sure resources are broadly available to support all student
learning.

Ongoing examination of all student data (including those with IEPs) to determine effectiveness.
If you are involved in educational reform initiatives or considering examining their application in your
school or district, you will appreciate SWIFT Center’s Issue Brief—Leading Education Reform Initiatives:
How SWIFT Coordinates and Enhances Impact—to realize positive outcomes and increased student
achievement for ALL.
References
Kingston, M., Richards, C., Blank, R., Stonemeier, J., Trader, B., East, B. (2014). Leading education reform
initiatives: How SWIFT (Schoolwide Integrated Framework for Transformation) coordinates and enhances
impact. (Issue Brief #2). Lawrence, KS: National Center on Schoolwide Inclusive School Reform: The
SWIFT Center.
Stonemeier, J., Trader, B., Kingston, M., Richards, C., Blank, R., & East, B. (2014). How policy alignment
impacts sustainability of schoolwide transformation: Lessons from SWIFT knowledge development sites
(Issue Brief #4). Lawrence, KS: National Center on Schoolwide Inclusive School Reform: The SWIFT
Center.
Association News
TASH Joins AmazonSmile
Donating just got easier! TASH has officially joined AmazonSmile, creating a simple and automatic way
for you to support TASH every time you shop on Amazon. At no cost to you, the AmazonSmile
Foundation donates 0.5% of eligible purchases to TASH. This is a quick and easy way to continue
supporting and promoting equity, opportunity, and inclusion for people with disabilities!
To get started, visit: www.tash.org/smile
TASH Releases Position Statement on Cameras in Classrooms
TASH has been at the forefront of ending restraint and seclusion in our nation’s schools for many years.
So, why not support the use of cameras in classrooms? TASH believes that placing cameras in
classrooms could lead to new and more entrenched types of discrimination and abuse. In late January,
TASH released a new position statement, Will Cameras in Classrooms Make Schools Safer?, urging
caution and describing the unexplored dangers of having video cameras in schools.
To view the full position statement, visit: www.tash.org/cameras
TASH Kicks Off 2015 Regional Conference Program
TASH kicks off conference registration for the 2015 TASH Regional Conference program. Events will be
held in Marlborough, Massachusetts on May 12th and in Greensboro, North Carolina on May 15-16th.
To register for the regional conferences, follow the links below.
Inclusive School and Community Engagement | Across the Lifespan: An Ethical Imperative
Marlborough, MA
www.tash.org/newenglandconf
Promoting Self-Determined Futures
Greensboro, NC
www.tash.org/northcarolinaconf
Call for Papers | TASH 40th Anniversary Book
In celebration of TASH’s 40th Anniversary, a book will be published. The book will feature celebratory
memories and reflections written by various individuals associated with TASH and the disabilities
community (e.g., founders, researchers, federal representatives). The book will also include brief stories
and personal narratives from parents, self-advocates, and TASH members. If you are interested in
sharing a “TASH” memory with us (something funny, touching, or life-changing)—for example, how
TASH impacted your life or that of your child, a friend, or a student—you are cordially invited to submit
such a testimonial. Such reflections need to be brief and should be from 1 to 2 paragraphs long.
As we anticipate that we will receive a large number of papers, we cannot guarantee that all papers
submitted will be accepted. All of us involved with TASH have had our lives affected in some way by it
and we hope you take advantage of this opportunity to share how it has affected your life. TASH has
achieved so much in the last 40 years and it’s time now to celebrate and recognize its achievements. If
you have any questions about this paper, please contact Martin Agran at magran@uwyo.edu.
All papers must be submitted by March 1, 2015. Testimonials can be submitted online at:
www.tash.org/40thbook
2015 Call for Proposals Now Open!
TASH is now seeking proposal submissions for the 2015 TASH Annual Conference, December 2-5, 2015 in
Portland, Oregon!
This year’s conference theme, “Celebrating 40 Years of Progressive Leadership,” acknowledges TASH’s
40 years of generating change within the disability community and anticipates a brighter, more inclusive
future for people with disabilities in all aspects of life.
TASH’s Call For Proposals (CFP) process is highly competitive. To increase the chance of your proposals
being accepted, review the form instructions prior to completing and submitting the CFP form. If you
have any questions or concerns, please contact Edwin Canizalez at ecanizalez@tash.org or (202) 5409015. The deadline for CFP submission is Tuesday, June 2 at 11:59 PM Pacific Time.
Submit your proposal at www.tash.org/2015-cfp/
#FlashBackFriday
Time to get social! If you currently follow TASH on Facebook and/or Twitter, you may have noticed our
ongoing #FlashBackFriday campaign. In celebration of #TASH40th Anniversary, we’ve created an online
campaign where individuals share photos of their experiences with TASH.
An internationally used hashtag, #FlashBackFriday, was created so that social media users could share a
personal story via photos and take their followers on a walk down memory lane. Using this hashtag
along with #TASH40th, WE can do the same for TASH followers!
Please post your photos with a short description and both hashtags on every Friday throughout 2015!
Questions? Contact Bethany Alvare at balvare@tash.org
2014 TASH Conference Recap
Energy billowed about the ballroom as the 2014 TASH Conference kicked off with the passing of the
ABLE Act in the House on December, 3rd. Washington, DC Mayor Vincent Gray also welcomed the
crowd with a stimulating speech on equity and human rights. Larger than ever, this year’s meeting
hosted Town Halls, TASH Talks, Poster Presentations, Capitol Hill Day, and more!
Capitol Hill Day
TASH was thrilled to host the first ever Capitol Hill Day during this year’s annual conference. Attendees
met with Senator Chris Murphy and Representative Gregg Harper, quickly becoming Congressional
champions for progressive disability policy before visiting their Congressional offices. Several TASH
members met with House Representatives right before their vote on the ABLE Act. Kenneth Kelty of
North Carolina was mentioned by his Representative on the floor of the House during the debate.
Passage of the ABLE Act later that day accentuated the power of advocacy!
Photo Caption: Capitol Hill Day attendees on the steps of the Russell Senate Office Building
TASH Talks
New to the 2014 conference program, TASH Talks were delivered in a fast-pace format where over 30
presenters connected with the audience, provoking deeper inquiry and creative thinking.
Poster Presentations
Every year, over 50 members and like-minded colleagues, advocates, and family members present at the
Poster Presentation sessions. One of the most popular events, Poster Presentations address the vision of
TASH - equity, opportunity and inclusion for people with disabilities. For the first time, TASH enlisted a
panel of judges to determine presentation winners. Congratulations to the following 2014 Poster
Presentation Award recipients:





Erin Leveton - Understanding End of Life Decision-Making with and for People With Significant
Intellectual and Development Disabilities
Jody Bartz - TASH Student Chapter…Maintaining the Momentum
Kimberly Knackstedt - Seclusion and Restraint in Schools….Literature, Policy and Practice
Laura Lee Wright - Supporting Spiritual Lives
Zach Rossetti - Families as Faculty: Collaboration For Inclusive and Culturally Competent Teacher
Preparation
Photo Caption: Terri Ward (TASH Board Member) pictured with Kimberly Knackstedt (Award Winner)
Town Halls
This year, TASH hosted Town Halls on the following topics: Employment, Inclusive Education, Life in the
Community, and Transition. Each Town Hall featured federal partners who engaged attendees in
productive, problem-solving conversations in order to identify new directions for addressing barriers
and maximizing opportunities. It was an extraordinary opportunity to host this year’s conference at a time
when the federal government has been unified in its efforts to dramatically improve equity, opportunity, and
inclusion for ALL people.
Each Town Hall will be documented in a whitepaper format and published in a following issue of
Connections.
The Ghosts of Mariposa
Playwright and 2014 TASH Positive Images in the Media award winner, S.C. Pinney, visited DC to share a
live theater production of his play with conference attendees. Seats became scarce as four actors took
the stage to perform “The Ghosts of Mariposa.” Captivated, the audience followed the tragic journey of
the protagonist assessing the well being of individuals with disabilities and the performance of services
that aim to address their needs.
Photo Caption: Actors perform play, “The Ghosts of Mariposa”
2015 Call for Proposals (CFP)
The Call for Proposals for the 2015 TASH Annual Conference is now open. The deadline is Tuesday, June
2nd. For more information on the 2015 TASH Annual Conference in Portland, Oregon and to submit a
proposal, visit www.tash.org/2015TASHconf
Thank You to Our Donors!
TASH relies on the generosity of our members to accomplish our work. Because of your support, we are
able to continue to work for equity, opportunity, and inclusion for people with significant disabilities.
We are grateful for the support we have received from the following people and organizations:































William W. Scales
New Hampshire Charitable Foundation
Ruby Moore
United Way - California Capital Region
Leslie Kolkmeier
Donald J. Vigliotti
George Singer
Matthew Miller
Micah Fialka-Feldman
Lisa Mills
Kenneth Lakin
Dawn Brown
Barbara Trader
Mary Jo Griffin
John Butterworth
Mark Wurzbacher
Merrill Friedman
Stephen Westling
Public Consulting Group
Jonathan R. Shevin
Diane M. Browder
Ben Adams
Whitney Rapp
Donna Gilles
Pat Amos
Craig Michaels
Roxana Hartmann
Edward Westling
Paula Kluth
R.L. and Christine Dougherty
Lou Brown

Mosakowski Family Foundation
If you would like to consider making a gift to TASH, contact Dawn Brown at 202-509-9596 or
at dbrown@tash.org.
Thank you, donors!
2014 TASH Conference Sponsors


















Arbor Soft
Chapman University
National Youth Transitions Conference Support Fund
MetLife Center for Special Needs Planning
Public Consulting Group
University of Minnesota RTC on Community Living
National Children's Center
LEAD Center
Virginia Department of Education
Virginia Commonwealth University
Maryland State Department of Education
Parent Educational Advocacy Training Center
DC Department on Disability Services
Quality Trust for Individuals with Disabilities
National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities
National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability
Wal-Mart
WellPoint
About TASH
TASH is an international leader in disability advocacy. Founded in 1975, TASH advocates for human
rights and inclusion for people with significant disabilities and support needs – those most vulnerable to
segregation, abuse, neglect and institutionalization.
TASH works to advance inclusive communities through advocacy, research, professional development,
policy, and information and resources for parents, families and self-advocates. The inclusive practices
TASH validates through research have been shown to improve outcomes for all people.
Policy Statement
It is TASH’s mission to eliminate physical and social obstacles that prevent equity, diversity and quality of
life for children and adults with disabilities. Items in this newsletter do not necessarily reflect attitudes
held by individual members of the Association as a whole. TASH reserves the right to exercise editorial
judgment in selection of materials. All contributors and advertisers are asked to abide by the TASH
policy on the use of people-first language that emphasizes the humanity of people with disabilities.
Terms such as “the mentally retarded,” “autistic children,” and “disabled individuals” refer to
characteristics of individuals, not to individuals themselves. Terms such as “people with mental
retardation,” “children with autism,” and “individuals who have disabilities” should be used. The
appearance of an advertisement for a product or service does not imply TASH endorsement. For a copy
of TASH’s publishing and advertising policy, please visit www.tash.org.
TASH Mission & Vision
As a leader in disability advocacy for more than 35 years, the mission of TASH is to promote the full
inclusion and participation of children and adults with significant disabilities in every aspect of their
community, and to eliminate the social injustices that diminish human rights. These things are
accomplished through collaboration among self-advocates, families, professionals, policy-makers,
advocates and many others who seek to promote equity, opportunity and inclusion. Together, this
mission is realized through:





Advocacy for equity, opportunities, social justice and human rights
Education of the public, government officials, community leaders and service providers
Research that translates excellence to practice
Individualized, quality supports in place of congregate and segregated settings and services
Legislation, litigation and public policy consistent with the
The focus of TASH is supporting those people with significant disabilities and support needs who are
most at risk for being excluded from society; perceived by traditional service systems as most
challenging; most likely to have their rights abridged; most likely to be at risk for living, working, playing
and learning in segregated environments; least likely to have the tools and opportunities necessary to
advocate on their behalf; and are most likely to need ongoing, individualized supports to participate in
inclusive communities and enjoy a quality of life similar to that available to all people.
TASH has a vision of a world in which people with disabilities are included and fully participating
members of their communities, with no obstacles preventing equity, diversity and quality of life. TASH
envisions communities in which no one is segregated and everyone belongs. This vision will be realized
when:






All individuals have a home, recreation, learning and employment opportunities
All children and youth are fully included in their neighborhood schools
There are no institutions
Higher education is accessible for all
Policy makers and administrators understand the struggles of people with disabilities and plan –
through laws, policies and regulations – for their active participation in all aspects of life
All individuals have a way to communicate and theircommunities are flexible in communicating
in alternate waysthat support full participation




Injustices and inequities in private and public sectors are eradicated
Practices for teaching, supporting and providing services topeople with disabilities are based on
current, evidence-based strategies that promote high quality and full participation in all aspects
of life
All individuals with disabilities enjoy individualized supports and a quality of life similar to that
available to all people
All individuals with disabilities have the tools and opportunities to advocate on their behalf