Pub Date : 2024-04-18DOI: 10.1177/00144029241247032
Laura Kern, Heather Peshak George, Lauren L. Evanovich, Jennifer M. Hodnett, Jennifer Freeman
Restraint and seclusion (R/S) are practices employed by schools to address severe student behavior. Although the use of R/S has been shown to have harmful impact for students, staff, and schools, there is no federal law that addresses its use in schools. A lack of a universal approach leaves each state to determine its own legislation and policy. The current study seeks to extend previous research efforts on state policy guidance and legislation reviews on the use of R/S by reporting on key similarities and differences across states policy guidance and legislation. Specifically, policy guidance and legislation on the school use of R/S are reviewed from the U.S. states and territories, including Washington, D.C.; Puerto Rico; Guam; and the Virgin Islands. Most states and territories were found to have either legislation or policy guidance on the use of R/S in schools. However, there are many differences across the states, including on its use and reporting for students with disabilities. Findings are also compared with the proposed federal bill Keeping All Students Safe Act. Finally, given the lack of passage of the federal law, highlights and recommendations are provided for state leaders on considerations for improvement as R/S remains a state regulated educational issue.
{"title":"A Review of U.S. Policy Guidance and Legislation on Restraint and Seclusion in Schools: Considerations for Improvement","authors":"Laura Kern, Heather Peshak George, Lauren L. Evanovich, Jennifer M. Hodnett, Jennifer Freeman","doi":"10.1177/00144029241247032","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029241247032","url":null,"abstract":"Restraint and seclusion (R/S) are practices employed by schools to address severe student behavior. Although the use of R/S has been shown to have harmful impact for students, staff, and schools, there is no federal law that addresses its use in schools. A lack of a universal approach leaves each state to determine its own legislation and policy. The current study seeks to extend previous research efforts on state policy guidance and legislation reviews on the use of R/S by reporting on key similarities and differences across states policy guidance and legislation. Specifically, policy guidance and legislation on the school use of R/S are reviewed from the U.S. states and territories, including Washington, D.C.; Puerto Rico; Guam; and the Virgin Islands. Most states and territories were found to have either legislation or policy guidance on the use of R/S in schools. However, there are many differences across the states, including on its use and reporting for students with disabilities. Findings are also compared with the proposed federal bill Keeping All Students Safe Act. Finally, given the lack of passage of the federal law, highlights and recommendations are provided for state leaders on considerations for improvement as R/S remains a state regulated educational issue.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"74 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140622909","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 : 2024-04-03DOI: 10.1177/00144029241240615
Kathleen King Thorius, Endia J. Lindo, Patricia Martínez-Álvarez, Amanda L. Sullivan
{"title":"Theoretical and Methodological Diversity of Exceptional Children Scholarship","authors":"Kathleen King Thorius, Endia J. Lindo, Patricia Martínez-Álvarez, Amanda L. Sullivan","doi":"10.1177/00144029241240615","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029241240615","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140533189","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}
The purpose of this quantitative systematic literature review was to identify and describe published mathematics studies from 1980 to 2021 that incorporated a self-monitoring component ( k = 22 studies; N = 1,787 students). We examined specific self-monitoring procedures, instructional contexts, implementation variables, and methodological quality. For inclusion, studies needed to (a) include self-monitoring (defined as students observing, evaluating, and/or recording their behaviors), (b) include co-occurring mathematics instruction, (c) include at least one mathematics outcome measure, (d) occur in a school setting, (e) include students in Grades K–12, and (f) utilize a single-case, experimental, or quasiexperimental design. Variables of interest were coded and methodological quality was assessed using What Works Clearinghouse standards. Our findings suggest that students with and without disabilities generally benefit from embedded self-monitoring procedures across mathematical content areas and tiers of instructional support. Future research should further unpack definitions of self-monitoring and related constructs.
{"title":"A Quantitative Systematic Literature Review of Self-Monitoring Components Within Mathematics Instruction and Intervention","authors":"Marah Sutherland, Cayla Lussier, Gena Nelson, Marissa Pilger Suhr, Janice Fong, Jessica Turtura, Ben Clarke","doi":"10.1177/00144029241230322","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029241230322","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this quantitative systematic literature review was to identify and describe published mathematics studies from 1980 to 2021 that incorporated a self-monitoring component ( k = 22 studies; N = 1,787 students). We examined specific self-monitoring procedures, instructional contexts, implementation variables, and methodological quality. For inclusion, studies needed to (a) include self-monitoring (defined as students observing, evaluating, and/or recording their behaviors), (b) include co-occurring mathematics instruction, (c) include at least one mathematics outcome measure, (d) occur in a school setting, (e) include students in Grades K–12, and (f) utilize a single-case, experimental, or quasiexperimental design. Variables of interest were coded and methodological quality was assessed using What Works Clearinghouse standards. Our findings suggest that students with and without disabilities generally benefit from embedded self-monitoring procedures across mathematical content areas and tiers of instructional support. Future research should further unpack definitions of self-monitoring and related constructs.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140069833","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 : 2024-01-05DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220302
Min Hyun Oh, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez
Under federal law, parents have the right to decline, or waive, English language support services when their child is identified as an English learner (EL) in school. In this study, we focus on this important subgroup of ELs—referred to as waived ELs—at the understudied intersection of EL status and special education (SPED) status. Using longitudinal statewide Tennessee data from 2010 to 2021, we used discrete-time hazard modeling to explore ELs’ representation in SPED services by their English language service waiver status (i.e., ever-waived EL vs. never-waived EL). Results revealed that ELs’ likelihood of placement into SPED services, and specifically for specific learning disability and speech-language impairment, varied by their English language service waiver status. We describe similarities and differences in the timing and likelihood of placement trends and discuss implications for practice and policy.
根据联邦法律，当孩子在学校被认定为英语学习者（EL）时，家长有权拒绝或放弃英语语言支持服务。在本研究中，我们将重点关注这一重要的英语学习者亚群体，即被放弃的英语学习者，他们的英语学习者身份与特殊教育（SPED）身份之间的交叉点尚未得到充分研究。利用田纳西州 2010 年至 2021 年的纵向数据，我们采用离散时间危险模型，根据英语语言服务豁免状态（即曾经豁免的 EL 与从未豁免的 EL）来探讨 EL 在特殊教育服务中的代表性。结果显示，根据英语语言服务豁免状况的不同， ELs 被安置到 SPED 服务，特别是特殊学习障碍和言语障碍服务的可能性也不同。我们描述了安置趋势的时间和可能性的异同，并讨论了对实践和政策的影响。
{"title":"Waived English Learners: The Understudied Intersection of English Learner and Special Education Status","authors":"Min Hyun Oh, Jeannette Mancilla‐Martinez","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220302","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220302","url":null,"abstract":"Under federal law, parents have the right to decline, or waive, English language support services when their child is identified as an English learner (EL) in school. In this study, we focus on this important subgroup of ELs—referred to as waived ELs—at the understudied intersection of EL status and special education (SPED) status. Using longitudinal statewide Tennessee data from 2010 to 2021, we used discrete-time hazard modeling to explore ELs’ representation in SPED services by their English language service waiver status (i.e., ever-waived EL vs. never-waived EL). Results revealed that ELs’ likelihood of placement into SPED services, and specifically for specific learning disability and speech-language impairment, varied by their English language service waiver status. We describe similarities and differences in the timing and likelihood of placement trends and discuss implications for practice and policy.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"45 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-01-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139381721","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 : 2024-01-02DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220308
Li-Chih Wang, Duo Liu, He-Hsiu Lin, Kevin Kien-Hoa Chung, Zhengye Xu
One of the most well-known instructional methods used to enhance Chinese character reading (CCR) is Chinese stem-deriving instruction (CSDI). In this method, CCR is taught via a group of characters (e.g., 清, 情, and 靚) that share the same stem (e.g., 青). However, the effectiveness of CSDI on the CCR of Chinese children with dyslexia remains inconsistent, and the reason may be the diverse designs of this method across studies. Thus, this study aimed to use a quasiexperiment-design study to compare the effects of various forms of CSDI based on the (in)consistency of the extending characters’ sounds, their appearances, and their amount (i.e., how many of them). In total, 122 Chinese third to sixth graders with dyslexia were recruited from primary schools, and they were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (a) visuospatially controlled CSDI ( n = 37; all taught characters shared the same pronunciation), (b) verbally controlled CSDI ( n = 45; all taught characters shared the same structure), and (c) noncontrolled CSDI ( n = 40; all taught characters selected only on the basis of their frequencies). They were tested by CCR and dictation before and after the instruction. We found that CCR was significantly improved in all three CSDI groups, whereas only the verbally controlled CSDI group showed significant improvements in dictation. Furthermore, verbally and visuospatially controlled CSDI earned the greatest benefits in decreasing the visual errors and phonetic errors in CCR and decreasing the radical errors and homophone errors in dictation. Our findings shed light on the effectiveness of CSDI in terms of diverse designs, and frontline practitioners should take our findings into consideration when using CSDI.
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Diverse Designs of Chinese Stem-Deriving Instruction for Chinese Children With Dyslexia","authors":"Li-Chih Wang, Duo Liu, He-Hsiu Lin, Kevin Kien-Hoa Chung, Zhengye Xu","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220308","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220308","url":null,"abstract":"One of the most well-known instructional methods used to enhance Chinese character reading (CCR) is Chinese stem-deriving instruction (CSDI). In this method, CCR is taught via a group of characters (e.g., 清, 情, and 靚) that share the same stem (e.g., 青). However, the effectiveness of CSDI on the CCR of Chinese children with dyslexia remains inconsistent, and the reason may be the diverse designs of this method across studies. Thus, this study aimed to use a quasiexperiment-design study to compare the effects of various forms of CSDI based on the (in)consistency of the extending characters’ sounds, their appearances, and their amount (i.e., how many of them). In total, 122 Chinese third to sixth graders with dyslexia were recruited from primary schools, and they were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (a) visuospatially controlled CSDI ( n = 37; all taught characters shared the same pronunciation), (b) verbally controlled CSDI ( n = 45; all taught characters shared the same structure), and (c) noncontrolled CSDI ( n = 40; all taught characters selected only on the basis of their frequencies). They were tested by CCR and dictation before and after the instruction. We found that CCR was significantly improved in all three CSDI groups, whereas only the verbally controlled CSDI group showed significant improvements in dictation. Furthermore, verbally and visuospatially controlled CSDI earned the greatest benefits in decreasing the visual errors and phonetic errors in CCR and decreasing the radical errors and homophone errors in dictation. Our findings shed light on the effectiveness of CSDI in terms of diverse designs, and frontline practitioners should take our findings into consideration when using CSDI.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"9 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139452364","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 : 2023-12-28DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220309
Allyson Pitzel, Sara Sanders, Kristine Jolivette, Aimee J. Hackney, Ashley S. Virgin
Youth with and at risk for disabilities served in alternative education settings frequently struggle with the writing process, which impedes their ability to communicate ideas and opinions with others. Providing explicit teaching of a writing strategy is necessary for this population of youth. This study examined the effects of self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) with self-determination skills on self-advocacy-focused writing probes (e.g., persuasive) for adolescent female youth in a juvenile justice setting. Emphasis was placed on teaching youth how to use persuasive writing as a tool to self-advocate for things they want or need. The SRSD instructional approach was investigated using a multiple-probe-across-participants design to evaluate the effects. Visual analyses indicated a functional relation between SRSD with self-determination instruction and youth’s writing skills. All youth demonstrated an increase in organizational quality and self-advocacy in writing from baseline to independent practice. Limitations to the current study and future directions are discussed.
{"title":"Self-Regulated Strategy Development: Connecting Persuasive Writing to Self-Determination for Youth in Juvenile Justice Facilities","authors":"Allyson Pitzel, Sara Sanders, Kristine Jolivette, Aimee J. Hackney, Ashley S. Virgin","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220309","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220309","url":null,"abstract":"Youth with and at risk for disabilities served in alternative education settings frequently struggle with the writing process, which impedes their ability to communicate ideas and opinions with others. Providing explicit teaching of a writing strategy is necessary for this population of youth. This study examined the effects of self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) with self-determination skills on self-advocacy-focused writing probes (e.g., persuasive) for adolescent female youth in a juvenile justice setting. Emphasis was placed on teaching youth how to use persuasive writing as a tool to self-advocate for things they want or need. The SRSD instructional approach was investigated using a multiple-probe-across-participants design to evaluate the effects. Visual analyses indicated a functional relation between SRSD with self-determination instruction and youth’s writing skills. All youth demonstrated an increase in organizational quality and self-advocacy in writing from baseline to independent practice. Limitations to the current study and future directions are discussed.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"14 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139152288","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 : 2023-12-28DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220311
Hannah Mathews, Kristabel Stark, Nathan D. Jones, Courtney Bell
As instructional leaders, principals establish a vision of effective instruction in their schools and support that vision through evaluation and development efforts. Thus, their beliefs about instruction in special education may have direct consequences for special educators and their students. Though research suggests principals lack experience and knowledge regarding special education, few studies explore these beliefs in action. Informed by Kennedy's theory of working knowledge, we used two distinct interview methods to tap into principals’ expressed beliefs and beliefs in use when evaluating special education teachers. Findings crack open the “black box” of principals’ working knowledge to highlight how underlying beliefs regarding the purpose of special education and students, teaching, and learning drove principals’ visions of instructional quality more than specific practices did. We end by highlighting implications regarding how to best support school leaders in fostering effective teaching for students with disabilities and next steps for research.
{"title":"Surfacing Principals’ Beliefs About Instruction for Students With Disabilities: A Qualitative Analysis","authors":"Hannah Mathews, Kristabel Stark, Nathan D. Jones, Courtney Bell","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220311","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220311","url":null,"abstract":"As instructional leaders, principals establish a vision of effective instruction in their schools and support that vision through evaluation and development efforts. Thus, their beliefs about instruction in special education may have direct consequences for special educators and their students. Though research suggests principals lack experience and knowledge regarding special education, few studies explore these beliefs in action. Informed by Kennedy's theory of working knowledge, we used two distinct interview methods to tap into principals’ expressed beliefs and beliefs in use when evaluating special education teachers. Findings crack open the “black box” of principals’ working knowledge to highlight how underlying beliefs regarding the purpose of special education and students, teaching, and learning drove principals’ visions of instructional quality more than specific practices did. We end by highlighting implications regarding how to best support school leaders in fostering effective teaching for students with disabilities and next steps for research.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"238 7","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139152805","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 : 2023-12-21DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220307
Marah Sutherland, Derek B. Kosty, Taylor Lesner, Joanna Hermida, K. Smolkowski, Christian T. Doabler, Ben Clarke
The effectiveness of Tier 2 interventions may depend on the variability of student skills within an intervention group. We investigated the effect of pretest variability within intervention groups using data from a large-scale study of ROOTS, a Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Our research questions were as follows: Does mathematics pretest variability within ROOTS groups predict student gains from the intervention, and is this relationship moderated by (a) intervention group size (two- vs. five-student groups), (b) quality of explicit instruction, or (c) group-level initial skill? We found that ROOTS groups with greater pretest variability on a closely aligned mathematics measure experienced smaller gains from the intervention. This association was more impactful in larger intervention groups (i.e., five-student groups compared with two-student groups) and in groups with higher quality of explicit instruction. We unpack these findings and conclude with recommendations for practice and future research.
{"title":"Does Variability Within Tier 2 Mathematics Intervention Groups Affect Students’ Response to Intervention?","authors":"Marah Sutherland, Derek B. Kosty, Taylor Lesner, Joanna Hermida, K. Smolkowski, Christian T. Doabler, Ben Clarke","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220307","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220307","url":null,"abstract":"The effectiveness of Tier 2 interventions may depend on the variability of student skills within an intervention group. We investigated the effect of pretest variability within intervention groups using data from a large-scale study of ROOTS, a Tier 2 kindergarten mathematics intervention. Our research questions were as follows: Does mathematics pretest variability within ROOTS groups predict student gains from the intervention, and is this relationship moderated by (a) intervention group size (two- vs. five-student groups), (b) quality of explicit instruction, or (c) group-level initial skill? We found that ROOTS groups with greater pretest variability on a closely aligned mathematics measure experienced smaller gains from the intervention. This association was more impactful in larger intervention groups (i.e., five-student groups compared with two-student groups) and in groups with higher quality of explicit instruction. We unpack these findings and conclude with recommendations for practice and future research.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":"54 6","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138948691","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 : 2023-12-19DOI: 10.1177/00144029231220303
Marie L. Wagner, Kylene Cosand, Alison L. Zagona, Betsie J. Malone
As more schools adopt inclusive practices, the need for schools to understand how students perceive these practices grows. The current study explores K–12 students’ perceptions of co-teaching through a systematic review and thematic analysis of the literature. Through an analysis of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research from journals and dissertations, this review shows the importance of attending to contextual variables surrounding co-teaching and how these may serve as mediating factors for students’ perceptions. Using an open-ended date range for studies and including gray literature allowed for robust findings that synthesize comprehensively how students view co-teaching. Key findings include students’ perceived success academically and preference for co-teaching. Additionally, results indicated a pattern of students’ negative perceptions of co-teaching when teachers experienced many professional demands. However, the lack of reported socially constructed contextual variables, such as race and gender, limited insights into how students make meaning of co-teaching. On the basis of these findings, we discuss implications for research, policy, and practice.
{"title":"Students’ Perceptions of Instruction in Co-Teaching Classrooms: A Systematic Literature Review and Thematic Analysis","authors":"Marie L. Wagner, Kylene Cosand, Alison L. Zagona, Betsie J. Malone","doi":"10.1177/00144029231220303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231220303","url":null,"abstract":"As more schools adopt inclusive practices, the need for schools to understand how students perceive these practices grows. The current study explores K–12 students’ perceptions of co-teaching through a systematic review and thematic analysis of the literature. Through an analysis of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research from journals and dissertations, this review shows the importance of attending to contextual variables surrounding co-teaching and how these may serve as mediating factors for students’ perceptions. Using an open-ended date range for studies and including gray literature allowed for robust findings that synthesize comprehensively how students view co-teaching. Key findings include students’ perceived success academically and preference for co-teaching. Additionally, results indicated a pattern of students’ negative perceptions of co-teaching when teachers experienced many professional demands. However, the lack of reported socially constructed contextual variables, such as race and gender, limited insights into how students make meaning of co-teaching. On the basis of these findings, we discuss implications for research, policy, and practice.","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":" 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138961538","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 : 2023-12-18DOI: 10.1177/00144029231219344
Kathleen A. K. Thorius, Endia J. Lindo, Patricia Martínez-Álvarez, Amanda L. Sullivan
{"title":"Editorial Perspectives on Critical Issues Affecting Special Education to be Addressed by Exceptional Children","authors":"Kathleen A. K. Thorius, Endia J. Lindo, Patricia Martínez-Álvarez, Amanda L. Sullivan","doi":"10.1177/00144029231219344","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00144029231219344","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":48164,"journal":{"name":"Exceptional Children","volume":" 41","pages":"100 - 109"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8,"publicationDate":"2023-12-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138963402","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：