Pub Date : 2024-09-06DOI: 10.1177/15407969241279498
{"title":"Corrigendum to “Teacher-Implemented Modified Schema-Based Instruction with Middle-Grade Students with Autism and Intellectual Disability.”","authors":"","doi":"10.1177/15407969241279498","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241279498","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142179401","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-13DOI: 10.1177/15407969241268664
Elizabeth Liffley, Marisa H. Fisher
Children with intellectual and developmental disabilities and extensive support needs (ESN) face a high risk of experiencing traumatic events, which may lead to a myriad of negative mental and physical health and educational outcomes. Identifying symptoms and treating trauma, however, are challenging due to communication difficulties, vague or atypical symptom presentation, and limited assessment and treatment options. Using a community-engaged approach, educators would be beneficial partners for researchers as they are uniquely capable of overcoming these barriers. Due to their prolonged and daily interactions with children with ESN, educators are likely to recognize physical symptoms and changes in behavior that may quickly lead to the identification of trauma. Furthermore, their vast knowledge of children with ESN would help researchers develop and implement feasible school-based trauma treatments. Their capability makes them important partners in future research to address these problems. This Exchange explores the available literature on the identification and treatment of trauma among children with ESN as well as the role of educators in these processes and future research.
{"title":"A Call to Action: Extending the Research on Trauma Assessment and Treatment for Children With Intellectual Disabilities and Extensive Support Needs","authors":"Elizabeth Liffley, Marisa H. Fisher","doi":"10.1177/15407969241268664","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241268664","url":null,"abstract":"Children with intellectual and developmental disabilities and extensive support needs (ESN) face a high risk of experiencing traumatic events, which may lead to a myriad of negative mental and physical health and educational outcomes. Identifying symptoms and treating trauma, however, are challenging due to communication difficulties, vague or atypical symptom presentation, and limited assessment and treatment options. Using a community-engaged approach, educators would be beneficial partners for researchers as they are uniquely capable of overcoming these barriers. Due to their prolonged and daily interactions with children with ESN, educators are likely to recognize physical symptoms and changes in behavior that may quickly lead to the identification of trauma. Furthermore, their vast knowledge of children with ESN would help researchers develop and implement feasible school-based trauma treatments. Their capability makes them important partners in future research to address these problems. This Exchange explores the available literature on the identification and treatment of trauma among children with ESN as well as the role of educators in these processes and future research.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142179402","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-08-01DOI: 10.1177/15407969241267283
Jennifer A. Kurth, Elissa Lockman Turner, Alison L. Zagona, Geonhwa Kim, Roxanne Loyless
Over 90% of students with complex support needs are taught in self-contained (segregated) special education classrooms for most of their school day, despite accumulating evidence these classrooms are not associated with positive student outcomes. Yet placement in these segregated classrooms persists, in part because of assumptions about the degree of specialized, intensive, and individualized instruction that occurs in these settings. We observed a national sample of 30 students with complex support needs using time sampling and fieldnote data in this convergent parallel mixed methods study to describe (a) the ecobehavioral characteristics of classrooms, (b) the learning activities occurring in classrooms, and (c) how the materials, supports, and learning activities explain student experiences in these classrooms. Quantitative time sampling data indicated that students experienced passive learning opportunities and downtime, with few occasions to engage with other peers or grade-aligned content. Qualitative fieldnote data provided context for the quantitative results. These findings provide a picture of the low expectations that persist in segregated classrooms and contradict the need to remove students from general education to learn in segregated classrooms.
{"title":"Experiences of Elementary Students with Complex Support Needs in Segregated Special Education Classrooms: A Mixed Methods Study","authors":"Jennifer A. Kurth, Elissa Lockman Turner, Alison L. Zagona, Geonhwa Kim, Roxanne Loyless","doi":"10.1177/15407969241267283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241267283","url":null,"abstract":"Over 90% of students with complex support needs are taught in self-contained (segregated) special education classrooms for most of their school day, despite accumulating evidence these classrooms are not associated with positive student outcomes. Yet placement in these segregated classrooms persists, in part because of assumptions about the degree of specialized, intensive, and individualized instruction that occurs in these settings. We observed a national sample of 30 students with complex support needs using time sampling and fieldnote data in this convergent parallel mixed methods study to describe (a) the ecobehavioral characteristics of classrooms, (b) the learning activities occurring in classrooms, and (c) how the materials, supports, and learning activities explain student experiences in these classrooms. Quantitative time sampling data indicated that students experienced passive learning opportunities and downtime, with few occasions to engage with other peers or grade-aligned content. Qualitative fieldnote data provided context for the quantitative results. These findings provide a picture of the low expectations that persist in segregated classrooms and contradict the need to remove students from general education to learn in segregated classrooms.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141886869","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-29DOI: 10.1177/15407969241261634
Karolyn J. Maurer, Alexandra Sturm, Connie Kasari
While most students receiving special education services in school are educated with the same general curriculum (i.e., instructional materials) as their peers without disabilities, students with extensive support needs and significant cognitive disabilities may qualify to receive instruction with alternate curricular materials aligned with alternate content standards. Available special education data, however, do not provide information about students who are educated with alternate curriculum specifically. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing special education administrative data from a large urban school district to identify timing, placements, and switching patterns of alternate curriculum participation in elementary school ( N = 11,399). Results indicated the majority of students instructed with alternate curriculum received special education services under intellectual disability, autism, or orthopedic impairment eligibility. Students were mostly educated in traditional public day schools, but nearly 97% of students in the sample had a primary placement of a special education classroom. Over 50% of students started with alternate curriculum instruction in grades transitional kindergarten/kindergarten or first grade. High rates of students educated with alternate curriculum in early elementary grades suggest lack of access to general curriculum and general education classrooms. Implications for future research are discussed.
{"title":"Students Educated With Alternate Curriculum in Elementary School: Timing, Switching, and Educational Placements","authors":"Karolyn J. Maurer, Alexandra Sturm, Connie Kasari","doi":"10.1177/15407969241261634","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241261634","url":null,"abstract":"While most students receiving special education services in school are educated with the same general curriculum (i.e., instructional materials) as their peers without disabilities, students with extensive support needs and significant cognitive disabilities may qualify to receive instruction with alternate curricular materials aligned with alternate content standards. Available special education data, however, do not provide information about students who are educated with alternate curriculum specifically. This study aims to address this gap by reviewing special education administrative data from a large urban school district to identify timing, placements, and switching patterns of alternate curriculum participation in elementary school ( N = 11,399). Results indicated the majority of students instructed with alternate curriculum received special education services under intellectual disability, autism, or orthopedic impairment eligibility. Students were mostly educated in traditional public day schools, but nearly 97% of students in the sample had a primary placement of a special education classroom. Over 50% of students started with alternate curriculum instruction in grades transitional kindergarten/kindergarten or first grade. High rates of students educated with alternate curriculum in early elementary grades suggest lack of access to general curriculum and general education classrooms. Implications for future research are discussed.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141869796","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-28DOI: 10.1177/15407969241263515
Alison L. Zagona, Motoaki Hara, Sheldon L. Loman, Jennifer A. Kurth, Virginia L. Walker
Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is an evidence-based practice that promotes positive academic and behavioral outcomes for all students and is intended to support the needs of all students across three tiers of support. However, research suggests students with complex support needs have limited access to Tier 1 PBIS. Teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of PBIS to meet the needs of students with complex support needs has been hypothesized to impact the extent to which educators provide access to Tier 1. Using data from a national survey of 644 educators, we sought to determine the extent to which educational placement of students with complex support needs impacted teacher perception of the importance of providing Tier 1 PBIS. Our results suggest educators across placements agree students with complex support needs should be involved in PBIS, including acknowledgment systems and response and data plans. Educators differed in their ideas of how to teach school-wide rules and expectations and how to document behavioral violations. We discuss implications of these findings for research and practice.
{"title":"Educators’ Perceptions on the Involvement of Students With Complex Support Needs in PBIS: The Role of Educational Placement","authors":"Alison L. Zagona, Motoaki Hara, Sheldon L. Loman, Jennifer A. Kurth, Virginia L. Walker","doi":"10.1177/15407969241263515","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241263515","url":null,"abstract":"Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is an evidence-based practice that promotes positive academic and behavioral outcomes for all students and is intended to support the needs of all students across three tiers of support. However, research suggests students with complex support needs have limited access to Tier 1 PBIS. Teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of PBIS to meet the needs of students with complex support needs has been hypothesized to impact the extent to which educators provide access to Tier 1. Using data from a national survey of 644 educators, we sought to determine the extent to which educational placement of students with complex support needs impacted teacher perception of the importance of providing Tier 1 PBIS. Our results suggest educators across placements agree students with complex support needs should be involved in PBIS, including acknowledgment systems and response and data plans. Educators differed in their ideas of how to teach school-wide rules and expectations and how to document behavioral violations. We discuss implications of these findings for research and practice.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141796836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-28DOI: 10.1177/15407969241265971
Elizabeth E. Biggs, J. Bumble, Rebecca E. Hacker, Kendra E. Scotti, Caitlin E. Cushing
Paraeducators often work with special education teachers and school teams to support students with disabilities who have complex communication needs (CCN), including students who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) such as speech-generating devices. This study involved surveying 258 paraeducators working with students with disabilities who had CCN (grades PreK–12, along with community-based transition classrooms). Social network analysis was used to examine paraeducators’ professional networks and collaboration patterns, along with how paraeducator professional network size related to their self-efficacy beliefs about working with students with CCN. Findings revealed wide variability in the size and function of paraeducators’ professional networks and their self-efficacy beliefs. Paraeducators generally reported few mutual collaborative relationships with other professionals, receiving support more than they gave support. Many had small networks with few trusted collaborators. Paraeducators’ network size was the strongest predictor of self-efficacy beliefs, beyond their personal characteristics and whether they received AAC-related training. This study informs future research and practice by underscoring the need for paraeducators to work within well-connected teams, and by revealing ways social network analysis can be used to examine issues related to self-efficacy and collaboration.
{"title":"Professional Networks and Self-Efficacy of Paraeducators Working with Students with Learning to Use Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC)","authors":"Elizabeth E. Biggs, J. Bumble, Rebecca E. Hacker, Kendra E. Scotti, Caitlin E. Cushing","doi":"10.1177/15407969241265971","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241265971","url":null,"abstract":"Paraeducators often work with special education teachers and school teams to support students with disabilities who have complex communication needs (CCN), including students who use augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) such as speech-generating devices. This study involved surveying 258 paraeducators working with students with disabilities who had CCN (grades PreK–12, along with community-based transition classrooms). Social network analysis was used to examine paraeducators’ professional networks and collaboration patterns, along with how paraeducator professional network size related to their self-efficacy beliefs about working with students with CCN. Findings revealed wide variability in the size and function of paraeducators’ professional networks and their self-efficacy beliefs. Paraeducators generally reported few mutual collaborative relationships with other professionals, receiving support more than they gave support. Many had small networks with few trusted collaborators. Paraeducators’ network size was the strongest predictor of self-efficacy beliefs, beyond their personal characteristics and whether they received AAC-related training. This study informs future research and practice by underscoring the need for paraeducators to work within well-connected teams, and by revealing ways social network analysis can be used to examine issues related to self-efficacy and collaboration.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141796991","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-07-27DOI: 10.1177/15407969241263519
E. E. Biggs, Lisa S. Zhang, Charis Ling
Parental stress increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Families with children with an intellectual or developmental disability (IDD) and extensive support needs—such as complex communication needs—experienced additional challenges, including service loss and difficulties accessing virtual learning. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of parents ( N = 37) with children with IDD and complex communication needs related to parental stress and family resilience. Qualitative interview and quantitative survey data were collected within a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, with interviews occurring three times across the 2020–2021 school year. The two sets of data were analyzed separately and then integrated using back-and-forth exchanges and a joint display. Findings indicated that families showed resilience through family adaptation and cohesion—creating rhythms and routines that fostered togetherness—and by growing in advocacy and empowerment related to their child’s learning. But, many parents worried that they were not able to do enough for their child. Social support predicted lowered parental stress and stronger family resilience; yet, perceived social support varied widely across families—particularly support from teachers and service providers. This study provides important insight into family experiences during a unique time with the COVID-19 pandemic while pointing to important ways to strengthen family resilience long into a postpandemic future.
{"title":"Stress and Resilience of Families With Children with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities During the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Mixed-Methods Study","authors":"E. E. Biggs, Lisa S. Zhang, Charis Ling","doi":"10.1177/15407969241263519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241263519","url":null,"abstract":"Parental stress increased during the COVID-19 pandemic. Families with children with an intellectual or developmental disability (IDD) and extensive support needs—such as complex communication needs—experienced additional challenges, including service loss and difficulties accessing virtual learning. The purpose of this study was to understand the experiences of parents ( N = 37) with children with IDD and complex communication needs related to parental stress and family resilience. Qualitative interview and quantitative survey data were collected within a convergent parallel mixed-methods design, with interviews occurring three times across the 2020–2021 school year. The two sets of data were analyzed separately and then integrated using back-and-forth exchanges and a joint display. Findings indicated that families showed resilience through family adaptation and cohesion—creating rhythms and routines that fostered togetherness—and by growing in advocacy and empowerment related to their child’s learning. But, many parents worried that they were not able to do enough for their child. Social support predicted lowered parental stress and stronger family resilience; yet, perceived social support varied widely across families—particularly support from teachers and service providers. This study provides important insight into family experiences during a unique time with the COVID-19 pandemic while pointing to important ways to strengthen family resilience long into a postpandemic future.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0,"publicationDate":"2024-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141798007","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-06-22DOI: 10.1177/15407969241259365
Priya Lalvani, Eileen Osieja
This qualitative study examined the experiences of parents who sought inclusive education for their children with intellectual disabilities or extensive support needs. Data were collected from 33 participants in the form of narratives that emerged through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using a phenomenological methodology. Findings revealed the existence of problematic special education practices and illuminated the mechanisms through which ability-based segregation in schools is institutionally sanctioned. Many parents reported that placement in a general education environment with the provision of support was not considered by professionals at their children’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings. Instead, they were informed that education in separate classrooms was in their children’s best interest. Parents pushed back and advocated for access and inclusivity, often investing immense amounts of time and resources toward this end. The findings shed light on special education discourses that are entrenched in ableist notions about disability and uphold an implicit ideology of separate but equal for students with certain disabilities.
{"title":"Battle Fatigue: Parents, Institutionalized Ableism, and the “Fight” for Inclusive Education","authors":"Priya Lalvani, Eileen Osieja","doi":"10.1177/15407969241259365","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241259365","url":null,"abstract":"This qualitative study examined the experiences of parents who sought inclusive education for their children with intellectual disabilities or extensive support needs. Data were collected from 33 participants in the form of narratives that emerged through semi-structured interviews and analyzed using a phenomenological methodology. Findings revealed the existence of problematic special education practices and illuminated the mechanisms through which ability-based segregation in schools is institutionally sanctioned. Many parents reported that placement in a general education environment with the provision of support was not considered by professionals at their children’s Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings. Instead, they were informed that education in separate classrooms was in their children’s best interest. Parents pushed back and advocated for access and inclusivity, often investing immense amounts of time and resources toward this end. The findings shed light on special education discourses that are entrenched in ableist notions about disability and uphold an implicit ideology of separate but equal for students with certain disabilities.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141505890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-06-22DOI: 10.1177/15407969241259386
Frank R. Rusch
{"title":"Tribute to Dennis E. Mithaug","authors":"Frank R. Rusch","doi":"10.1177/15407969241259386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241259386","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141505891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2024-05-27DOI: 10.1177/15407969241252360
Kirsten R. Lansey, Lewis Jackson, Martin Agran, Diane Ryndak, J. Matt Jameson
The least restrictive environment (LRE) mandate has driven classroom placement decisions for the last five decades. It has been measured as the percentage of time students spend in general education contexts (i.e., Placement A: >80%; Placement B: 40-79%; Placement C: <40%). The mandate and its continuum of placements are predicated on the assumption that students can transition to less restrictive contexts, and that each placement will provide students with the skills needed to succeed in less restrictive contexts and, ultimately, in Placement A. Results from this descriptive analysis of survey responses from a sample of teachers and administrators of 98 elementary students with complex support needs indicate that less time in general education (Placements B and C) results in decreased access to single-grade classes, educator expertise, grade-aligned instructional materials, and general education curriculum. Furthermore, for most of the variables analyzed, the data suggest that Placement B is more closely aligned with Placement C than with Placement A, suggesting that it may function as a restrictive placement. We argue that current LRE implementation is resulting in placement and progress stagnation. To allow students with complex support needs to have inclusive and equitable learning opportunities, LRE must shift away from the concept of percentage of time in general education to requirements of student access to instruction on state-adopted grade-level general education standards within general education contexts and curriculum.
在过去的五十年里，"限制最少的环境"(LRE) 的规定一直在驱动着课堂分班决策。其衡量标准是学生在普通教育环境中所占的时间百分比（即 A 级安置：80%；B 级安置：40-79%；C 级安置：40%）。对 98 名有复杂支持需求的小学生的教师和管理人员的抽样调查结果进行的描述性分析表明，在普通教育（安置 B 和 C）中的时间减少会导致学生接触单年级班级、教育专家、与年级一致的教学材料和普通教育课程的机会减少。此外，就分析的大多数变量而言，数据表明，安置 B 与安置 C 的关系比与安置 A 的关系更为密切，这表明安置 B 可能起到限制性安置的作用。我们认为，目前实施的 LRE 造成了安置和进步的停滞。为了让有复杂支持需求的学生获得全纳和公平的学习机会，"本地学习资源分配 "必须从普通教育时间百分比的概念转变为要求学生在普通教育环境和课程中获得州采纳的年级普通教育标准的教学。
{"title":"A Secondary Analysis of Jackson et al. (2022): The Impact of Educational Placement for Students with Complex Support Needs","authors":"Kirsten R. Lansey, Lewis Jackson, Martin Agran, Diane Ryndak, J. Matt Jameson","doi":"10.1177/15407969241252360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15407969241252360","url":null,"abstract":"The least restrictive environment (LRE) mandate has driven classroom placement decisions for the last five decades. It has been measured as the percentage of time students spend in general education contexts (i.e., Placement A: >80%; Placement B: 40-79%; Placement C: <40%). The mandate and its continuum of placements are predicated on the assumption that students can transition to less restrictive contexts, and that each placement will provide students with the skills needed to succeed in less restrictive contexts and, ultimately, in Placement A. Results from this descriptive analysis of survey responses from a sample of teachers and administrators of 98 elementary students with complex support needs indicate that less time in general education (Placements B and C) results in decreased access to single-grade classes, educator expertise, grade-aligned instructional materials, and general education curriculum. Furthermore, for most of the variables analyzed, the data suggest that Placement B is more closely aligned with Placement C than with Placement A, suggesting that it may function as a restrictive placement. We argue that current LRE implementation is resulting in placement and progress stagnation. To allow students with complex support needs to have inclusive and equitable learning opportunities, LRE must shift away from the concept of percentage of time in general education to requirements of student access to instruction on state-adopted grade-level general education standards within general education contexts and curriculum.","PeriodicalId":47213,"journal":{"name":"Research and Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141171536","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：