1. Introduction

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which was enacted in 1975, has reinforced the principle of inclusive education in the United States [1]. It requires that pupils with disabilities receive a Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE) in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE). In order to guarantee that students with disabilities have a meaningful educational experience, this legislation mandates that public schools provide them with access to general education classrooms, with the necessary accommodations. This legislation establishes the groundwork for the promotion of inclusive education in American schools, guaranteeing that students with disabilities are able to participate in mainstream classrooms alongside their peers.

Despite these legal protections, many students with disabilities still face significant barriers to inclusion. These barriers are often linked to socioeconomic factors such as disparities in school funding, availability of specialized resources, and societal attitudes toward disability [2]. These numerous socioeconomic challenges disproportionately affect students in underfunded and low-income school districts.

The United States' inconsistent enforcement of inclusive education policies and a fragmented legal framework have resulted in unequal progress in practice. In other words, legal mandates are not consistently enforced. For example, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) prioritizes the provision of education in the least restrictive environment. Nevertheless, numerous students with disabilities are still segregated in distinct classrooms or institutions, rather than being integrated into general education environments. According to data from the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Special Education Programs, 63.4% of students with disabilities spend at least 80% of their time in general education classrooms. Although this figure indicates that there has been progress in the direction of inclusivity, it also indicates that more than one-third of students with disabilities are not entirely integrated into traditional classroom settings. The discrepancy underscores the persistent obstacles and inconsistencies associated with the implementation of genuinely inclusive education.

There are disparities in the caliber of education that pupils receive in various geographic regions of the United States, as public education is primarily funded through municipal property taxes [3]. Schools in affluent districts frequently possess additional resources to facilitate inclusive education, whereas those in low-income regions may encounter challenges in implementing fundamental accommodations. This funding inequality results in a two-tiered education system, in which students with disabilities in underfunded districts are at a disadvantage compared to their counterparts in more affluent areas.

Furthermore, the implementation of inclusive education is still influenced by societal attitudes toward disability. In certain communities, there is opposition to the integration of students with disabilities into mainstream classrooms as a result of misconceptions about their capabilities and the conviction that they necessitate specialized, separate instruction [4]. These attitudes can result in the social isolation of students with disabilities, both within and outside of the classroom.

Different state and district emphases multiply these issues at hand, some states having cash and infrastructure-poor regions, others have invested money in teacher training, inclusiveness, etc. Due to this differing location in support dispersion, the ability of students to attain inclusive education is affected by their geographical location, therefore increasing the inequality in education [3].

This paper aims to explore the specific socioeconomic barriers that prevent students with disabilities from accessing inclusive education in the U.S. These barriers include financial limitations, inadequate resources, societal stigmas, and inconsistent enforcement of education policies. By focusing on the United States, this paper highlights how these barriers manifest and provides recommendations for improving the inclusiveness of the American education system.

2. Socioeconomic Barriers to Inclusive Education in the U.S.

2.1. Financial Constraints

The issue of funding is one of the most significant obstacles to inclusive education in the United States. Public education is primarily funded through local property taxes, which means that schools in affluent areas tend to have more financial resources, while schools in low-income areas struggle to meet fundamental necessities [3]. Additionally, the funding of education is derived from property taxes, which exacerbates disparities. The income of schools is reduced as a result of the lower property values in impoverished areas [3]. This systemic issue suggests that schools with a higher number of children with disabilities have fewer resources to meet their requirements.

The capacity of schools to provide the accommodations and supports mandated by IDEA is directly influenced by the funding disparity between the affluent and low-income areas.Additionally, numerous schools in low-income regions are unable to employ specialized personnel, including speech therapists, occupational therapists, and special education instructors, due to a lack of financial resources. The U.S. Department of Education reports that there is a nationwide shortage of special education instructors, with approximately 46 states reporting shortages during the 2017–2018 school year [5]. This scarcity is especially severe in low-income regions, where schools are unable to compete with affluent districts that can provide special education personnel with better working conditions and higher salaries.

Some districts are compelled to eradicate even the most fundamental services due to funding shortages. Schools may delay building enhancements or reduce the number of assistants, specialists, and assistive technology in their employ [6]. These reductions impede the academic and social development of disabled children by undermining the quality of their instruction.

In response to these obstacles, federal legislation allocates funds to assist students with disabilities in their academic pursuits. The federal government is required to cover up to 40% of the excess costs associated with educating students with disabilities under IDEA. However, this target has never been achieved in practice [2]. For example, in 2018, the federal contribution was only approximately 15%, leaving the remaining costs to be covered by states and local districts [2]. This shortfall results in disparities in educational opportunities for students with disabilities in underserved areas, placing a significant strain on state and local budgets. Attempts to alleviate financial constraints on inclusive education have yielded mixed results. While some states have tried to reform their school funding policies to promote greater equity, progress has been slow, and significant disparities remain [7]. Legal challenges, such as those seen in Texas and Kansas, have emerged through lawsuits aimed at addressing funding inequalities. However, these legal battles often span years and do not lead to immediate changes in the funding landscape. The slow pace of these reforms means that many schools continue to struggle with inadequate resources.

Grant programs and federal projects intended to support inclusive education often have limited reach. The competitive nature of such funding means that schools with more administrative capacity are better positioned to secure these funds, leaving under-resourced schools behind [8]. As a result, the benefits of such programs are not evenly distributed, perpetuating the gaps in financial support necessary for inclusive education.

The success of inclusive education is closely tied to overcoming these financial barriers. Adequate funding is essential for schools to provide the necessary accommodations, tools, and staff to support students with disabilities. Without sufficient resources, schools are unable to fulfill the objectives of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This not only undermines the spirit of the IDEA but also hinders the progress toward educational equity that inclusive education seeks to achieve.

2.2. Inadequate Infrastructure and Resources

Inclusive education in the United States is further hindered by inadequate infrastructure, in addition to financial constraints. The physical infrastructure required to facilitate students with disabilities is often lacking in numerous schools, particularly those located in rural or low-income regions. For instance, students with physical disabilities may encounter challenges when navigating the school environment due to the absence of accessible restrooms, elevators, or wheelchair platforms. Students with disabilities may be discouraged from attending school or engaging in classroom activities due to this lack of accessibility.

Facilities are among the most prevalent accessibility concerns. In 2012, the National Center for Education Statistics reported that only one-third of public schools were entirely accessible to students with disabilities [9]. This impediment restricts the ability of disabled teachers, parents, and community members to participate in student activities and school operations.

Additionally, numerous educational institutions lack the specialized learning materials and technology that students with disabilities require to achieve success. For instance, students with visual impairments may necessitate Braille textbooks or screen-reading software, while students with hearing impairments may require captioning services or sign language interpreters. These resources are frequently costly and may not be accessible in all institutions, particularly those located in low-income regions.

These issues are further exacerbated by the digital divide. The interaction of disabled pupils with instructional materials is restricted by their inability to afford assistive technology. According to the American Institutes for Research, students with disabilities have less access to high-quality digital learning resources [10]. Operational requirements may be prioritized over specialist instruments in schools with restricted resources.

The scarcity of trained special education teachers exacerbates the dearth of infrastructure and resources. The U.S. Department of Education reports that there is a nationwide shortage of special education teachers, and numerous institutions are experiencing difficulty in recruiting qualified personnel to assist students with disabilities. Consequently, students with disabilities may not receive the individualized attention and support necessary to succeed in school.

This shortage is crucial as the Learning Policy Institute claims that between 2010 and 2018 special education teacher preparation programs lost almost 17% of their enrollment [11]. Schools may thus have to recruit less experienced or uncertified teachers, which could reduce the quality of instruction for disabled students. The great turnover rates of special education teachers disturb support and learning [12].

Furthermore, general education teachers are lacking professional growth to support inclusive classrooms . Many educators claim inadequate special education instruction during certification leaves them unable to meet the needs of students with disabilities [13]. This shortfall could result in erroneous teaching and a less motivating classroom for disabled students.

Moreover, underprivileged institutions could not be able to offer occupational therapy, physical therapy, or counseling. Services aimed at students with disabilities help them meet their needs and participate fully in their education [14]. Without this kind of encouragement, students' social-emotional and intellectual development might suffer. Some of the fundamental elements impeding inclusive education are inadequate physical infrastructure, specialized resources, and trained personnel. Schools must solve the fundamental problems in their capacity such that disabled students may flourish alongside their peers.

2.3. Societal Attitudes and Stigma

The educational experiences of students with impairments in the United States are much shaped by society opinions on disability. Many groups still see disability negatively even if disability rights have advanced. This stigma may cause children with disabilities—inside and beyond the classroom—to be marginalized.

Sometimes parents of children without disabilities may object to inclusive education out of concern that the presence of kids with disabilities would cause disturbance in the classroom or slow down the learning process. Students with disabilities may find a hostile atmosphere created by these views difficult to develop friendships and engage fully in school life. Likewise, some educators could see children with disabilities as a burden rather than a chance for development and might lack confidence in their own capacity to educate them.

Prejudice and low expectations hurt special needs students' grades and self-esteem. A study found 45% of disabled children bullied others [15]. These events have increased truancy, academic performance, and dropout rates for these students. In addition, disability misperceptions in culture and society stem from ignorance. Some people view disabilities as inferior or wretched. This may affect how teachers and peers treat disabled children [16]. By always choosing nondisabled students for leadership and class discussions, teachers may be unconsciously ableist. Media portrayal additionally shapes society's views. Limited or stereotyped disability portrayals reinforce stigma and myths [17]. They may influence teacher, parent, and student perceptions, reinforcing classroom stigma.

3. Recommendations

3.1. Legal Level

While IDEA provides a strong legal framework for inclusive education in the U.S., the law’s implementation is often inconsistent. One of the key challenges is the lack of enforcement mechanisms to ensure that schools comply with the requirements of IDEA. For example, while IDEA mandates that students with disabilities receive an Individualized Education Program (IEP) that outlines the specific supports and services they will receive, many schools fail to fully implement these plans due to a lack of resources or trained staff.

Ensuring schools follow federal requirements depends on IDEA's enforcement being strengthened. Establishing more strong monitoring systems both at the federal and state levels is one suggestion. This can entail routine assessments of how well educational institutions follow IEPs and provide necessary services [18]. Legal changes might also impose harsher fines for non-compliance, so motivating schools to follow IDEA's guidelines.

Historically, the federal government has failed to fulfill its obligation to fund 40% of the supplementary expenses associated with special education. At present, it contributes less than 15% of these expenses [2]. The financial burden on state and local education districts would be alleviated if federal laws that support the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) were adequately funded. This would allow those districts to more effectively provide the requisite tools, services, and accommodations for pupils with disabilities [19].

In order to guarantee that schools have the necessary resources to deliver inclusive education, it is imperative that federal, state, and local administrations collaborate more effectively. To ensure that the genuine cost of educating students with disabilities is covered, the federal government should increase its funding for IDEA. Governments should strive to mitigate disparities in school funding and guarantee that all students, irrespective of their residence, have access to a high-quality education at the state and local levels.

Standardized policies for the implementation of inclusive education can assist in the reduction of disparities between states and districts. The Department of Education has the potential to establish a comprehensive framework that encompasses best practices for inclusion, teacher preparation criteria, and resource allocation by collaborating with professionals [20]. These policies would assist educational institutions in ensuring that students with disabilities are appropriately integrated into general education environments.

3.2. National Level

Developing thorough national strategies and action plans for inclusive education could help to propel structural transformation. Working together, federal agencies can set specific objectives, distribute funds, and track advancement toward inclusion [21].

Working together among the Department of Education and other organizations like the Department of Health and Human Services will help to solve the junction of education and health care. For students with more complicated needs, integrated approaches can support them [22].

Research into inclusive education strategies has to get more financing. By means of research on successful policies, interventions, and strategies, one can help to shape next projects and advance evidence-based practices [23]. Establishing a national database to gather and examine statistics on inclusion rates, educational results, and resource allocation will enable one to spot areas needing work and monitor development over time [24].

3.3. Social Level

Changing society perceptions calls for coordinated efforts under public awareness campaigns. National projects emphasizing the skills and accomplishments of people with disabilities help to reduce stigma and advance an inclusive culture [25]. Positive stories can be spread using media outlets, social media platforms, and local events.

Furthermore important are community involvement initiatives. Schools can help local businesses enable interactions between students with and without disabilities outside of the classroom. Programs supporting social integration and mutual understanding include volunteer work, inclusive clubs, and unified sports [26].

Promoting an inclusive culture is absolutely vital in educational environments. Diversity training for staff members and teachers will help them to have the tools necessary to assist every student in a competent manner. Clearly expressed and implemented inclusive policies covering bullying, discrimination, and accessibility [27]. Including disability studies into the course will also help every student to understand diversity and inclusion.

3.4. School, Family and individual level

Training in self-advocacy will enable disabled students to be more fully involved and confident. Programs guiding students toward better understanding of their rights, clear communication of their needs, and active participation in IEP meetings will help to enhance their learning [28].

Crucially, personalized support services catered to particular needs are Schools should do extensive evaluations to ascertain the particular adjustments and interventions required of every student. This can call for tutoring, counseling, or assistive technologies [29].

Family support is also crucial. Families can negotiate the special education system and advocate for their children by means of resources including parent seminars, support groups, and instructional materials [30]. Schools can set up family liaison roles to help to enhance their correspondence with the homes.

4. Conclusion

Despite federal law requiring inclusive education, socioeconomic barriers prevent students with disabilities from receiving the same education as their peers. Poor funding and unequal resource allocation limit schools' ability to provide necessary accommodations and support. Poor infrastructure and lack of tools and specialized materials hinder inclusion in many schools. Negative attitudes toward handicap and social stigma marginalize students, affecting their self-esteem and school participation. Policy enforcement gaps worsen these issues because unequal IDEA implementation denies many children support.

Overcoming these obstacles requires a multifaceted effort. Policy makers should prioritize funding and the implementation of IDEA so that all the legal mandates linked with it are met. In reality, educators and administrators should develop an inclusive culture by showing trainings and giving tools to teachers and students. Societal attitude change on the part of communities and families should foster acceptance and thereby promote the rights of disabled students.

This paper thus provides a blueprint for the solutions to the complex issues in the field of inclusive education. Legal changes, improved social initiatives, personal empowerment, and strengthening of national strategy together create an educational platform where equal learning opportunities are afforded to all students. Such programs ensure that both ethical and legal imperatives are met while serving to strengthen education for all students through appreciation of diversity and promoting mutual understanding.

Future studies should evaluate the policies, find innovative approaches to engage students with disabilities, and examine the long-term effects that these students face. Research could pinpoint effective inclusive education models and best practices for instructing students with a range of individual needs on a global basis. By advancing justice and equity in society, it would help everyone, including the disabled.