Running head: EFFECTS OF A VERBAL BEHAVIOR ANALYSIS TREAMENT 1 44 Global Education Review 1(1) Global Education Review is a publication of The School of Education at Mercy College, New York. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 Unported License, permitting all non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Citation: Greenberg, Jeremy H. & Greenberg, J. Christine (2014). It takes two to tango: Inclusive schooling in Hong Kong. Global Education Review, 1 (1). 44-55. It Takes Two to Tango: Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong Jeremy H. Greenberg The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong J. Christine Greenberg The Harbour School Hong Kong Abstract The inclusion of students with autism and other special needs into the general education curriculum continues to be a challenging process for school communities in the United States of America (US) and increasingly abroad. Although inclusion is a challenging process for those involved, the global demand is growing. Traditionally this initiative has originated from advocates such as parents and communities who represent the students. With enough pressure from constituents of the system, those efforts may be converted into policy through the local education department. The US has led the inclusion movement and many other developed nations have followed suit in recent decades. Consequently more and more schools are focused on building inclusive school communities. These programs see the value of a balanced approach that emphasizes curriculum coupled with pedagogy. This paper provides an overview of the history of the inclusion movement in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China. Three main types of school systems in the region are explained, and one successful inclusive school model will be described with outcome data included. Multiple factors that affect the development of the inclusion movement will also be discussed. Keywords applied behavior analysis; autism; inclusion; inclusive education; Hong Kong; neurodiversity; special education needs Introduction The inclusion of students with autism and other behavior disorders into general education is a constant challenge for the families, educators, and communities confronted with this widespread practice. The issues involved in inclusion were framed in detail years ago by Stainback and Stainback (1995), calling it a challenging and controversial practice. Several factors have been a part of the collective conversation about inclusion in the research literature. Those factors include: teacher efficacy (attitudes) (Beacham & Rouse, 2012; Chen, Lau, & Jin, 2006; Harrower, 1999; Sharma, Loreman, & Forlin, 2012), attitudes of school primary school principals (Sharma & Chow, 2008), the effects that inclusion might _________________________________ Corresponding Author: Jeremy H, Greenberg, The Children's Institute of Hong Kong, 19/F Kennedy Town Centre, 23 Belchers Street, Kennedy Town, Hong Kong Email: jgreenberg@tcihk.org mailto:jgreenberg@tcihk.org Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 45 have on the regular education students (Feldman, 2002; Koegel, Vernon, Koegel, have on the regular education students (Feldman, 2002; Koegel, Vernon, Koegel, Koegel, & Paullin, 2012; Rea, McLaughlin, & Walther-Thomas, 2001), students with severe disabilities (Harrower, 1999), and the preparedness of teacher training programs (Forlin, 2010; Greer, 2002; Yuen, Westwood, & Wong, 2005; Forlin & Sin, 2010). Studies investigating parent experiences with inclusion (Tsai & Fung, 2009), and applied studies that have improved students’ attending behaviors and social skills have expanded and punctuated the discussion on inclusive education in the US and Southeast Asia (Caballero & Connell, 2010; Callahan & Rademacher, 1999; Conroy, Asmus, Sellers, & Ladwig, 2005; Greenberg, Tang, & Tsoi, 2010; Owen-DeSchryver, Carr, Cale, & Blakeley-Smith, 2008). Although this discussion has spanned across decades, it remains central to the mission of many of today’s schools and communities in the US and, increasingly, abroad. The dialogue and subsequent formation of political policies and practices can be quite polarizing to stakeholders in educational systems and communities. The present paper provides an overview of the history of inclusion1 in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of China (HK). We will briefly outline the three main systems of schooling, and describe one international school’s model in the region with some of its outcome data. Additionally, factors affecting the progress of the inclusion movement will be presented. The challenge to include students with special needs into mainstream classrooms is not a new initiative, nor is it a unique challenge faced by the US and other developed nations2. Most educators would agree that although the field is still inching forward; there is room for improvement. The earliest forms of federal legislature providing for the education of children having special needs originated in the US with the Education of All Handicapped Children’s Act (P.L. 94-142, 1975) and subsequently, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (P.L. 101-476, 1990). In 1975, children with special needs became entitled to a free appropriate public education (FAPE) in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Hence, we suggest that the LRE doctrine is likely the source of the notion and initiative to include students into classrooms alongside their general education peers, even those with severe developmental disabilities.3 Effective inclusive educational practices in HK and abroad are scarce (Poon-McBrayer, 2004; Wong & Hui, 2008). On the rise and spurred on by globalization and through the expatriate community overseas, some positive developments in HK in the form of policies towards inclusion have occurred (HKSAR Education Bureau, 2008). This is due, in part, to the dramatic increase in students with autism and other behavior disorders that have been observed to affect communities abroad. Although other countries have not matched the recent increase in the US to 1 in 88 births (Autism Speaks, 2012), significant increases have been noted and are difficult to ignore. In spite of the growing need, effective services and inclusion initiatives have been particularly slow going in Hong Kong and Southeast Asia, (Forlin, 2010; Wong & Hiu, 2008). Of course, autism is but one diagnosis that may pose significant challenges to a given child’s participation in the mainstream curriculum. The Hong Kong Educational System in the 21st Century Hong Kong was handed over by the British to China in 1997, as per their 100-year agreement 4. Under the benefits of British Common Law, HK developed into a powerful financial hub and a modern city of 7 million people. A tri-lingual culture, HK has three languages regularly spoken: English, Mandarin, and the Chinese dialect of Mandarin known as Cantonese. There are other small ethnic groups who bring their 46 Global Education Review 1(10) own language and culture to the region; however, over 90% of Hongkongers are Chinese (HKSAR, 2013). There are primarily three school systems within the HK region. A brief description of these systems and how they serve students with special needs is described below. There is the local government Chinese- speaking system; the English Schools Foundation (ESF) established by the British in the 1960’s to accommodate the English-speaking expatriates residing in the region at the time, and the more-recently developed international schools5. Local schools will include both English and Mandarin lessons; however the medium of instruction is in Cantonese. ESF schools teach in English for most subjects and provide lessons in a secondary language such as traditional Mandarin. The international schools teach two or more languages, whereas English and Mandarin may be obligatory. One characteristic that all three of the systems have in common is that they are all highly competitive and have class sizes that are generally considered by educators to be large. Local schools typically have from 30 to 35 students in a classroom (Chong, 2012). The ESF and international schools charge high tuition and both are plagued by long waiting lists for enrolment. Waiting lists are so severe, that they tend to be the subject of debate in the South China Morning Post, Hong Kong’s local English newspaper, as well as in the various chambers of commerce. The concern shared by the British and American chambers of commerce and the business community is that the nature of HK’s status as “Asia’s World City” is threatened by this shortage of school placements in English speaking schools (Chong, 2011; Chong & Leung, 2011). Special Education in Hong Kong Historically, the efforts for inclusion in Hong Kong began back in the 1970’s and 1980’s with the establishment of compulsory education for students with special education needs (SEN). Subsequently, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO, 1994) issued a policy statement that called for special education students’ access to general education free from discrimination. This began a series of efforts and policies within the HK region aimed at initiating the inclusion movement. Those policies include the Disability Discrimination Ordinance set forth by the Equal Opportunities Commission’s Code of Practice in Education (Hong Kong Government, 1996). In 1997, the Education Bureau subsequently recommended that schools adopt the “whole school approach” to enhance the quality of learning and schooling experience for integrated students (Forlin, 2010). A review of special education and inclusion practices reveals a distinctly different picture across the three schooling systems mentioned above. For local students with special education needs (SEN), there are about 60 schools in the region. Some cater to students with blindness and visual impairments, deaf students, or other physical disabilities. Other local schools serve those children with intellectual disabilities and other behavior disorders as well. Regardless of the diagnosis or category of student, class sizes range between 8 and 20 students. The teacher to student ratio in primary schools is 1:7 while in the secondary schools; the ratio is 1:9. Classes are self- contained and inclusive educational opportunities are extremely rare or are unavailable to most local students. Inclusive opportunities become scarcer for secondary students (Forlin, 2010). In the ESF system, there are about 15 schools serving a population of approximately 15,000 students. Some children that have special needs are successfully taught in the mainstream through the use of Learning Support Teams (LST) and pullout support services. These students participate in regular classes although they may have attention difficulties, or specific learning and behavior disorders such as dyslexia or dysgraphia. Children receiving support have Individual Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 47 Education Programs (IEP) with specific learning provisions as executed by teachers or specialists either in a pull-out small group setting or with the teacher “pushing-in” to the class. Schools with LST are few in number and they have very limited numbers (less than 200) of students who can receive services from the LST. No LST services are offered for kindergarteners. (English Schools Foundation, 2013). Through the ESF system, there is one school dedicated to students with SEN. This school serves about 60 students including students with autism. Classes are self-contained and may have 1-3 teachers and 6-8 students. Traditional special education services are offered through small class sizes, and although goals for individual students or classes may aspire to generalize skills learned to the general education settings, support during inclusion in a regular education school are extremely rare or unavailable for most of the population of students. Compared to the local and ESF system, the international schooling system in HK is an expensive option for most families. As a result of competitive admission requirements and a lack of school spaces available for expatriate families, admissions policies favor high achieving. Students with SEN or those with specialized learning provisions such as the IEP experience incredible difficulties in comparison with their high achieving peers. In general, international schools in HK are known for being ill equipped to handle students with SEN. Although there may be an exception to the rule, few international schools cater to students with SEN in the manner intended by the Education Bureau policies. Suffice to say, our fair city has a long way to go in its quest for inclusion. To illustrate this point, Wong-Ratcliff & Ho (2011, p. 103) suggest that while inclusion has actually been happening in HK, albeit at a snail’s pace, most educators agree that the actual practice is “far from satisfactory”. Factors Limiting Inclusive Education in Hong Kong In its latest effort, the HK Government Education Bureau produced a guideline titled, Catering for Student Differences: Indicators for Inclusion (HKSAR Education Bureau, 2008). Developed as a tool for school self-evaluation and school development, the initiative represents a valiant effort to enhance support services to students with SEN. The document provides a series of criteria for a quality education program against which HK schools can evaluate their own attempts at inclusion. The document does a thorough job of providing quality indicators, however it does not provide a structural template or recipe for how these criteria might originate or evolve. Further, it does not advise how schools can help to realize the educational potential of students with SEN, nor does it delineate how the school improvement process regarding inclusion in general education enhances teacher education programs necessary to meet the demands of the system. We suggest that the document would better serve the constituents of the education system by specifically highlighting and outlining three crucial areas. First, it should adequately define diagnostic criteria for students with SEN. Second, it should include a review of the research literature yielding effective pedagogical practices resulting in an analysis that should drive teacher education curricula and certification processes. Finally, it should hold schools and administrators accountable for the implementation of effective inclusion practices. Because the document reads as an optional reference rather than a set of policies that are enforceable by the Education Bureau of Hong Kong, it falls short of its purpose. Forlin (2010) proposed a series of factors impeding the progress of the inclusion movement in HK. Foremost among these factors was the need for stricter guidelines on teacher education curricula and practicum. 48 Global Education Review 1(10) Even with recent specific government initiatives designed to teach comprehensive special courses to about 2000 teachers, only 10% may be exposed to this specialized training. It’s no wonder then, that Forlin reported that teachers generally feel inadequately prepared to accommodate students with learning provisions in their class, hence contributing to their trepidation when requested or required to provide inclusive opportunities to such students in their classes. Another major hurdle to developing inclusive schools in Hong Kong is the inflexible nature of the educational system itself. In HK and much of the greater Southeast Asia region, there is a significant discrepancy between the practices of teacher education programs and the needs of the teachers and learners in classrooms. Systems charged with teacher education or the administrators themselves may be inflexible, overly conservative, or slow to react to the changing needs of a student population. Further, social stigma is a serious consideration that negatively affects cultures both within schools and the parent community, thus affecting the execution of new education initiatives (Gartner & Lipsky 1987). We suggest that as a leading global city, Hong Kong ought to take steps to realize its potential in achieving the journey of successful inclusive education to advance the educational system and to emulate those of other developed nations. To elaborate on Forlin’s call for enhanced teacher training, it may be prudent for Hongkongers to look abroad for teacher education trends and effective practices. Well-referenced and effective pedagogical practices such as research within the Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) literature are replete with effective strategies and tactics for various types of learners across a multitude of settings. Approaches such as Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) and fields such as Verbal Behavior Analysis (VBA) are becoming commonplace in special education systems of many developed nations. These practices have been at the forefront of the special education and inclusion movements in the US for more than a decade (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007; Crossland & Dunlap, 2012; Greer, 2002; Greer & Ross, 2008; Fallon, O’Keeffe, & Sugai, 2012). Currently, there are no teacher training programs using ABA in HK at the university level. Nevertheless, a review of the research literature reveals that one successful application using principles derived from ABA has been used to improve attention skills of one kindergarten student with SEN in a regular education classroom (Greenberg, Tang, & Tsoi, 2010). Increasingly, parents are becoming aware of the need for practitioners with expertise in autism, SEN, and ABA, and their expectations are changing. Barriers, whether institutional or individual, do a disservice to the constituents of the system (i.e. children and families). By definition, a system that places heavy emphasis on only the top tier of academic performers overlooks the greater majority. Disqualifying or marginalizing strengths in areas not measured by stringently traditional local exams, such as critical and creative thinking so prominent in music, debate and the arts, is a disservice not only to the student in the short term, but to society as a whole. Congruence between one’s predisposition and strengths and future job satisfaction and performance has been well documented (Derr & Laurent, 1989). Armstrong (2010) provides a strong argument for how systems that are driven by the narrow-minded perception of what construes academic achievement are at odds with the reality of an already neurologically diverse student population. Especially in the more conservative circles of education change comes hard, but change, Rothstein (2012) would agree, is here already. As a constant, change is inevitable particularly in the scope of human diversity and learning systems. There is a Chinese proverb attributed to philosopher, Lao-tzu who said that the journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. HK ought to take bigger steps to Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 49 quicken the pace of that journey, and help to set priorities for its educational systems that seek to respectfully address learning diversity through inclusive education. These changes, if implemented, would help to align the education system in Hong Kong with those of other developed nations. The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong The adage, “Necessity is the mother of invention” could not better describe what happened to alter a predominantly monocultural education landscape that typified HK schooling in the late 1990s. When siblings born to an American family residing in Hong Kong were both diagnosed with autism, the family had no choice but to move back to the United States for a short spell due to lack of appropriate educational options for their children. When job opportunities necessitated their return to Hong Kong soon after, the parents founded The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong (TCI) in 2003, the first organization set up specifically for students with autism and other SEN. The school was the first to use the evidence-based approach known as Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) (Zheng, 2003). Experts in ABA and autism were imported from Teachers College Columbia University and the CABAS Schools (Greer, 2002; Greer & Ross, 2008) in New York to build the instructional foundation one “learn unit” at a time (Albers & Greer, 1991; Greer & McDonough, 1999; Greer, 2002) using state-of-the-art pedagogical practices within a cybernetic system. TCI was the first organization with a mission to provide quality one-to-one educational and support services to students with autism or other learning difficulties. Beginning with three students, the program grew and expanded slowly from 2003 through 2006. When it was determined that a few TCI students with high functioning autism or with only very minimal learning or social difficulties needed a general education placement for supported inclusion opportunities, it became evident that a self- contained organization with one-to-one services was not enough. Students needed to be around their typical peers in order to “practice” skills learned in isolation, and to be monitored through naturally occurring social contingencies during a school day in a school setting (Owen- DeSchryver, Carr, Cale, & Blackeley-Smith, 2008; Poon-McBrayer, 2004). Since its inception, TCI subscribed to the early tenet of normalization that, along with the LRE doctrine, provides the right ingredients to fuel the inclusion movement (Wolfensberger, 1983). The Harbour School (THS) was established in 2007 to be a general education school to accommodate students with SEN and provide supportive inclusive opportunities alongside typical peers regularly throughout the year because attempts by TCI to liaise with other English speaking general education and international schools for a supported inclusion arrangement yielded very little. Armstrong’s (2010, p. 182) assertion that “One of the biggest problems is that special education has developed…as a completely separate system from regular education…” alludes to the expected divide that usually describes inclusion arrangements between regular and special education organizations. As the establishment of a regular education mission (THS) in this case resulted from the need to complement, or rather complete, a special education need and vision (TCI), we have observed that the result in this case has been a healthily holistic inclusive community without the fragility and imbalance typical of similar general/special education inclusion arrangements. One hundred percent of TCI’s 18 students participate in THS with their one-to-one teacher throughout the school day. Students have their own individualized schedules, ranging from one or more weekly all-school activities to full-time inclusion. The model has been so successful for some students, that they have been enrolled into THS without the need for their ABA teacher 50 Global Education Review 1(10) from TCI. Through the use of ABA strategies and tactics, data-based decision- making, and systematic fading procedures, TCI has successfully transitioned students into being fully integrated THS students on a regular basis. To date, 10 students have successfully graduated from TCI to THS over the school’s five-year history. This translates to roughly 10% - 20% of TCI students per year. Figure 1 shows the cumulative number of students who have graduated from TCI to being fully mainstreamed without additional support at THS. Admittedly, these data are not large, but given the school’s very short history and small size, just the continuity of having a “light at the end of a tunnel” has been promising to teachers and families all the same. That success, as defined by full graduation from one-to-one support to being fully mainstreamed, has been invaluable and educationally game changing. This is apparent through regular parent testimonials (TCI, 2013). Due to its unique, “reverse” engineering process, THS has been an inclusive school community from the start. It’s widely known that schools generally start out as general education schools and provide special education provisions as necessary (Armstrong 2010). That TCI was established first and that THS evolved out of the need for a general education population for inclusion opportunities for TCI students is unusual and we believe it to be key to the seamless rapport enjoyed by both populations. Stakeholders in the school community from the administration, parents, and the teachers are all tied to the collective mission of building a collaborative, supportive and intensely inclusive school community. Both programs measure their successes through the achievement of their students and the continued growth and satisfaction of faculty. A commitment to inclusive schooling has also resulted in the administrative commitment to keep abreast of research-based tactics and curricula. Administrators are facilitators in each teacher’s professional growth and learning, which creates a collegial professional atmosphere wherein teacher behaviors are aligned with student needs. This drives professional expertise as systematically acquired by teachers. CABAS® schools refer to this relationship as a cybernetic system (Greer, 2002), wherein changes in one body or more within an interdependent system result in changes elsewhere within the system. TCI’s teacher education program is based on the principles of ABA. Since the field of ABA is constantly changing and evolving, so do the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) experiences of the teachers at TCI. One of the ways that the school perpetuates this continuous learning is through teaching and support of teachers’ Board Certification in Behavior Analysis6. Similar to a mentor and mentee relationship, experienced certified teachers mentor lesser experienced teachers throughout their tenure. Modeling, positive reinforcement, learn units, public posting of visual graphic displays, data decision analysis, and personalized systems of instruction are but a few of the behavioral strategies and tactics employed on an ongoing basis at TCI (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007; Greer, 2002; Greer & Ross, 2008). TCI teachers also participate in CPD trainings with THS teachers to expand their curricular expertise and understanding of the scope and sequence of teaching and learning. In-house policies and training materials were created to ensure systematic application. One example includes the school’s Inclusion Guideline for Teachers that contains a screening assessment, roles and responsibilities for TCI and THS teachers, an inclusion procedure checklist, and scenarios for teachers to learn to apply their roles, and initiate the inclusion process for a given student. We believe that the aforementioned systems represent just a few of the innovations that consistently align with Forlin’s recommendations (2010). Omission of systems like these will result in schools simply failing to Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 51 forge ahead in their efforts to create and nurture an inclusive school community. More importantly, they will continue to fail children with special education needs and their families. Figure 1. Cumulative number of students that have transitioned from The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong to The Harbour School over its five-year history. The Harbour School-A Model Inclusive School Community THS has also grown and expanded quite rapidly, into a small but highly effective general education school community. Its learning standards align with the US based Common Core and Project American Education Reaches Out7 as sanctioned by the Office of Overseas Schools in the United States and the curricula used to achieve these standards are international. The school’s commitment to sound pedagogical practices and curricular choices are described by the school’s principal, Dr. Blurton as flexible best practice (E.U. Blurton, personal communication, March 3, 2012). THS has been fully accredited by the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC). The student-teacher ratio is 7:1 which affords stronger communication between home and school, specific differentiation for a diverse student body which includes gifted, twice exceptional, typical, SEN, specific learning disorders, and intense teacher professional development to match. In each classroom, there is one qualified teacher, one co-teacher (an 52 Global Education Review 1(10) individual with a graduate or undergraduate degree in a content-area of expertise). Additional faculty members include specialist teachers in the areas of Chinese Studies, physical education, art and music as well as a full Learning Enhancement team (LEn). The LEn team provides in-house pull-out or push-in support for students with specific learning difficulties within a dyad or small group arrangement. Also referred to as “Level 1 services,” this practice includes the construction of an IEP as well as periodic assessments and reports. Students who require additional behavioral support beyond this level receive consult from the TCI Supervisor who is a BCBA and can provide FBA, if warranted. Students receiving one-to-one services from TCI are identified as students receiving “Level 2” services. Level 2 (TCI) students enter the TCI program and are assessed to determine acceptable criteria for specific areas of inclusion. For example, students who are academically on par for a given subject are generally included for that subject. Students for whom social interaction proves difficult, work on social and behavioral goals within the general education setting during “non-academic” subjects such as physical education, music, art or during less structured times such as recess or lunch. During these times, inclusion is monitored by the THS teacher as well as by the TCI one-to-one teacher. Opportunities and assessments are provided in which specific goals on the student’s IEP can be addressed. Some typical inclusion goals might be: responding to academic, social and transitional cues within a group, responding to the THS teacher with more distant proximity, fading procedures for reinforcement from primary to generalized reinforcers, role playing and literacy (i.e., reading, speaking, writing) skills. TCI students participate in field trips, whole school assemblies and whole school events and activities such as co-curricular programming, sports day, the winter concert, arts interim, and the talent show as is appropriate for each child and family. THS and TCI students and their families develop lasting friendships and socialize outside of school (i.e. birthday parties, play dates) fostering a true atmosphere community. We see this around the school regularly. One of the most successful partnerships between the two organizations is the mentoring program between THS and TCI students throughout the Social Teaching and Relationship Skills program known by the acronym, STARS. THS families volunteer their children for a weekly structured and facilitated play date after school for similar aged pairings between their child and a TCI student. Though it started out as a mentoring effort to expand social and play repertoires for the TCI participant, there is documented research as to the benefits to typically developing students who are involved with students with SEN (Owen-DeSchryver, Carr, Cale, & Blakeley-Smith, 2008; Rea, McLaughlin, & Walter-Thomas, 2001). In fact, a few THS parents regularly seek out STARS mentorships for their child to increase helping, friendship and responsibility skills in their own children. “The School of Tomorrow?” Research literature in the areas of special education and education policy converge on the subject of maintaining cohesive inclusive school communities (HKSAR Education Bureau, 2008; Hong Kong Government, 1996; UNESCO, 1994). A strategically inclusive education system benefits all members of the community in the sense that it prepares them for the reality of diversity throughout life. Schooling systems that focus only on one facet (academics) by which to assess student success do not ultimately prepare students for entering a workforce, partnership or relationship which relies on collaborative give and take as well as depth of emotional and social perspective. A school preparing its students for the 21st century ought to reexamine its definition of diversity and include the neurologically diverse Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 53 rather than considering only the more obvious factors of ethnicity and social economic status. As these have already been correlated with student outcomes in terms of language and as predictors of success (Hart & Risley, 1995), a concerted effort to officially consider other dimensions of diversity would direct a more complete means to thorough inclusion. Armstrong (2010) states that a more balanced approach to the appreciation of our genetic continuum is important to establishing a culture of acceptance within our societal systems. Only with the understanding and respect for the wide spectra of human abilities might we accept that schools committed to teaching anyone within a broader range should be the rule and not the exception. Rothstein (2012, p. 101) reported “the neurodiversity movement accompanies an apparent boom in the number of people with mental disorders, especially children.” If so, then any school which does not provide adequately for such learning differences could not be considered as being realistically 21st century in its aims and practices. In short, when it comes to schooling, best practice seems to suggest that there be elements of both general education and special education systems. Therefore, we believe that the metaphor it takes two to tango, applies. Only a school committed to the learning and development of any and every kind of student within a supportive and diverse community would be preparing its citizens for a successful, rather than a marginal, tomorrow. Notes 1. The practice of including or students with autism and other developmental disabilities and/or behavior disorders into mainstream (general education) classrooms and related activities will be referred to herein as inclusion. 2. According to Kofi Annan, former secretary of the United Nations a developed nation is one in which “its citizens are allowed to enjoy a free and healthy life in a safe environment”. Examples include: Japan, Canada, the United States, Australia, New Zealand, and Europe amongst others. 3. For more on special education law in the US, refer to: Wrightslaw: Special Education Law Wright & Wright (1999). 4. For more on the British Colony of Hong Kong see The Opium Wars or Anglo-Chinese Wars and the Treaty of Nanking (1842) see J. Lovell The Opium War (2012). 5. International schools are private, maintain their own standards and curriculum, and generally conduct instruction in English and their language of preference. The French International School teaches English and French, for example. Generally, all schools in Hong Kong provide traditional Mandarin instruction. 6. Board Certification in Behavior Analysis is attained through the Behavior Analysis Certification Board (www.BACB.com). 7. For more information on Project Aero go to www.projectaero.org. References Albers & Greer, R. D. (1991). Is the three term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction? Journal of Behavioral Education, 1, 337-354. Armstrong, T. (2010). Neurodiversity: Discovering the extraordinary. Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press. Autism Speaks (2012). Facts about autism. Retrieved 6 November, 2012, from http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/facts- about-autism Beacham, N. & Rouse, M. (2012). Student teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about inclusion and inclusive practice. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 12 (1), 3-11. Caballero, A., & Connell, J. E. (2010). Evaluation of the effects of social cue cards for preschool age children with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). Journal of Behavior Assessment and Intervention in Children, 1 (1), 25-42. Callahan, K., & Rademacher, J. A. (1999). Using self- management strategies to increase the on-task behavior of a student with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1 (2), 117-122. Chen S., Lau, K. O., & Jin, M. (2006). Students’ attitudes towards including students with disabilities in http://www.bacb.com/ http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/facts-about-autism http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/facts-about-autism 54 Global Education Review 1(10) regular PE settings in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Asian Journal of Exercise & Sport Science, 3 (1), 35-39. Chong, D. (2011, July 13). Business fears over lack of school places. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/973307/ business- fears-over-lack-school-places Chong, D. (2012, November 3). 200 school headmasters protest for smaller class sizes. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/news/hong- kong/article/1074777/200-school-headmasters- protest-smaller-class-sizes Chong, D. & Leung, P. AmCham warns of schools ‘crisis’. (2001, December 5). South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/986858/amcham- warns-schools-crisis Conroy, M. A., Asmus, J. M., Sellers, J. A., & Ladwig, C. N. (2005). The use of an antecedent-based intervention to decrease stereotypic behavior in a general education classroom: A Case Study. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20 4, 223- 230. Cooper, J. O, Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2007) Applied Behavior Analysis (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall. Crossland, K. & Dunlap, G. (2012). Effective strategies for the inclusion of children with autism in general education classrooms. Behavior Modification, 36 (3), 251-269. Derr, C. B. and Laurent, A. (1989). The internal and external career: a theoretical and cross-cultural perspective. In: M. B Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (eds.), Handbook of career theory (p. 454 - 471). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. English Schools Foundation (2013). Overview: Special Education Needs. Retrieved 15 April, 2013, from http://www.esf.edu.hk/overview-sen Fallon, L. M., O’Keeffe, B. V., & Sugai, G. (2012). Consideration of culture and context in School- wide positive behavior support: A review of current literature. Journal of Positive Behavioral Intervention, 14, 209-219. Forlin, C. (2010). Developing and implementing quality inclusive education in Hong Kong: Implications for teacher education. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 10, 177-184. Forlin, C. & Sin, K. F. (2010). Developing support for inclusion: A professional learning approach for teachers in Hong Kong. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 6 (1), 7-26. Feldman, J. (2002). Research on the Benefits of Inclusion. Retrieved 15 October, 2012, from http://www.spannj.org/pti/Researchont hebenefitsofinclusion.pdf Gartner, A., & Lipsky, D. K. (1987). Beyond special education: Toward a quality system for all students. Harvard Education Review, 57 (4), 367-396. Greenberg, J. H, Tang, M., & Tsoi, S. P. Y. (2010). Effects of a treatment package on the on task behavior of a kindergartener with autism across settings. Behavioral Development Bulletin, 10, 18-24. Greer, R.D. & McDonough, S. (1999). Is the learn unit a fundamental measure of Pedagogy? The Behavior Analyst, 22 (1), 5-16. Greer, R. D. (2002). Designing Teaching Strategies. London: Academic Press. Greer, R. D., & Ross, D. E. (2008) Verbal Behavior Analysis. Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. Harrower, J. K. (1999). Educational inclusion of children with severe disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavioral Interventions, 1 (4), 215-230. Hart, B. & Risley, T. (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Lives of Everyday American Children. Baltimore, Maryland: Paul H. Brookes. Hong Kong Government. (1996). Integrating the disabled into the community: A United Effort (White Paper). Hong Kong: Government Printer. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government Education Bureau. (2008). Catering for Student Differences:Indicators for Inclusion. Retrieved 5 November, 2012, from http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManger/EN /Content_187/Indicators-82008_E.pdf Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (2013). Hong Kong – the Facts. Retrieved 15 April, 2013, from http://www.gov.hk/en/about/abouthk/f acts.htm. Koegel, L. K, Vernon, T. W. Koegel, R. L., Koegel, B. L., & Paullin, A. W. (2012). Improving social engagement and initiations between children with autism spectrum disorder and their peers in inclusive settings. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 14, 220-227. Lovell, J. (2011) The Opium War: Drugs, Dreams, and the Making of China. USA: Picador. Mitchell, D., Morton, M., & Hornby, G. (2010). Review of the literature on Individualized education plans. Report to the New Zealand Ministry of Education. New Zealand: Ministry of Education. Owen-DeSchryver, J. S., Carr, E.G., Cale, S.I., & Blackeley-Smith, A. (2008). Promoting social interactions between students with autism spectrum disorders and their peers in inclusive school settings. Focus on autism and other developmental disabilities, 23 (1), 15-28. Poon-McBrayer, K. F. (2004). To integrate or not to integrate: Systemic dilemmas in Hong Kong. The Journal of Special Education, 37 (4), 249-256. Public Law 94-142. (1975). The Education of All Handicapped Children Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress. http://www.scmp.com/article/973307/ http://www.spannj.org/pti/Researchont http://www.spannj.org/pti/Researchont http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManger/EN http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManger/EN http://www.gov.hk/en/about/abouthk/f Inclusive Schooling in Hong Kong 55 Public Law 101-476. (1990). Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: U.S. Congress. Rea, P., McLaughlin, V., & Walther-Thomas, C. (2001). Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs. Exceptional Children,68 (2), 203-223. Rothstein, A. (2012). Mental disorder or neurodiversity? The New Atlantis, 99-115. Sharma, U. & Chow, E. W. S., (2008). The attitudes of Hong Kong primary school principals toward integrated education. Asia Pacific Education Review, 9 (3), 380-391. Sharma, U. Loreman, T., & Forlin, C. (2012). Measuring teacher efficacy to implement inclusive practices. Journal of Research in Special Education Needs, 12 (1), 12-21. Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1995). Controversial issues confronting special education: Divergent Perspectives (2nd ed.). Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon. The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong Limited (TCI, 2013). Testimonials. Retrieved 15 April 2013, from, http://tcihk.org/testimonials/testimonials.html Tsai, E., & Fung, L. (2009). Parents' Experiences and Decisions on Inclusive Sport Participation of Their Children With Intellectual Disabilities. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly, 26 (2), 151-171. Retrieved 4 February 2013, from Academic Search Premier database. United Nations Educational, Scientific, & Cultural Organization (UNESCO). 1994. The Salamanca statement and framework for action on special needs education. Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_ E.PDF Wolfensberger, W. (1983). Social role valorization: A proposed new term for the principle of normalization. Mental Retardation, 21, 234-239. Wong, Virginia, C. N. & Hiu, Stella, L. H. (2008). Brief Report: Emerging services for children with autism spectrum disorders in Hong Kong (1960- 2004). Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38, 383-389. Wong-Ratcliff, M. & Ho, Kwok Keung. (2011). Can integrated education meet the needs of Students with SEN? New Horizons in Education, 59 (2), 101-115. Wright, P. W. D, & Wright P. D. (1999). Wrightslaw: Special Education Law. Hartfield,Virginia: Harbour House Law Press. Yuen, M., Westwood, P., & Wong, G. (2005). Meeting the needs of students with specific learning difficulties in the mainstream education system: Data from the primary school teachers in Hong Kong. The International Journal of Special Education, 20 (1), 67-76. Zheng, X. (2003, December 6). How years of anguish turned to action. South China Morning Post. Retrieved from http://www.scmp.com/article/437056/how-years- anguish-turned-action About the Author(s) Jeremy H. Greenberg, PhD, is Director of The Children’s Institute of Hong Kong. He earned his doctorate in Special Education Applied Behavior Analysis from Teachers College Columbia University. He currently resides in Hong Kong with his wife Christine and four children. J. Christine Greenberg is Vice Principal of The Harbour School in Hong Kong. She earned her Master’s degree in Special Education Applied Behavior Analysis from Teachers College Columbia University. She completed her Bachelor’s degree in Elementary Education and English Literature. http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_ http://www.unesco.org/education/pdf/SALAMA_ http://www.scmp.com/article/437056/how-years-%20%20%20anguish-turned-action http://www.scmp.com/article/437056/how-years-%20%20%20anguish-turned-action