The history of the educational movement for students with severe disabilities began with an emphasis on FAPE, opening the doors to education for all students; progressed to a greater focus on LRE, encompassing the assumption that the default setting ought to be the same one that typically developing peers occupy; and recently arrived at access to the general curriculum, whereby all students are provided the opportunity to meet the same set of academic and social standards. In a sense, Jackson et al. (2009) and Ryndak et al. (2009) have endeavored to prevent "backsliding" as this third movement has taken shape: They argue that separate settings or contexts are antithetical to the concept of access to the general curriculum. They believe that the essence of access requires that students with extensive support needs be educated alongside their typically developing peers and that they have access to opportunities to acquire academic and social skills delivered by general education teachers with content expertise. The comments of the authors of this article encompass three primary questions: (1) To whom should we be addressing our message?; (2) Are we assuming a values- or evidence-based rationale for our approach to inclusion and access?; and (3) Is our current perspective on what constitutes the general curriculum sufficiently broad and inclusive?