High Fidelity Co-Teaching Through Collaboration, Varied Co-Teaching Models, and Differentiated Teaching Strategies

2022 ◽  
pp. 67-92
Author(s):  
Randa Keeley

Co-teaching is a service delivery option for students receiving special education services that is characterized by the presence of both a general education and special education teacher providing support in an inclusive classroom. A co-taught classroom can provide access to the general education curriculum to students with disabilities while they are simultaneously being supported by a special education teacher. The inclusion classroom, a classroom in which both students with and without disabilities are instructed, has been suited with the task of upholding the protections put in place by legislation for students with disabilities. A large number of students receiving special education services (64%, approximately 4,600,000) are placed in the general education, inclusion classroom 80-100% of the school day. This chapter will explore the implementation of excellent instructional practices in the inclusion classroom setting to improve outcomes for students with disabilities.

2011 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chad A Rose ◽  
Dorthy L Espelage ◽  
Steven R Aragon ◽  
John Elliott

International research established over a decade ago that students who are en-rolled in special education curricula are victimized and perpetrate more bullying than their general education peers. However, few empirical studies have exam-ined bullying rates among American schoolchildren who receive special education services. In the current study, a sample of middle school students (n = 1009) enrolled in general and special education programs completed the Univer-sity of Illinois bullying, fighting, and victimization scales. As hypothesized, students with disabilities reported higher rates of victimization and fighting be-haviours than students without disabilities. Conversely, students with disabilities and their general education peers reported similar rates of bully perpetration.


Author(s):  
Rashmi Khazanchi ◽  
Pankaj Khazanchi

Inclusive education means educating students with special needs in an age-appropriate general education setting where students receive high-quality, standard-based instructions, interventions, and support that enable them to experience success in the general education classroom. Effective pedagogical practices involve the collaboration of both special education teacher and general education teacher to identify and implement effective teaching practices which enhance student engagement and promote higher-order thinking skills. Special education teacher supports the general education teacher in adapting curriculum and teaching methods, modifying assessments, and providing accommodations to students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Effective pedagogical practices are affected by teacher's belief; students' disabilities; and their roles and responsibilities towards the students with disabilities. This chapter examines previous researches and studies that investigate effective pedagogical practices in inclusive classrooms for students with disabilities.


Inclusion ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Kurth ◽  
Mary E. Morningstar ◽  
Tyler A. Hicks ◽  
Jonathan Templin

AbstractGrounded in research and federal law, inclusive education is a right and preferred placement for all learners with disabilities receiving special education services. However, most students in the U.S. education system do not have access to inclusive education and few models are available to demonstrate how schools can develop and implement inclusive services. The purpose of this study was to describe the outcomes of one such endeavor, the SWIFT technical assistance model, aimed at transforming schools to develop inclusive, effective instruction for all students. Multilevel multinomial modeling was used to predict rates of inclusion over time for a subset of students with disabilities in schools participating in SWIFT technical assistance. The findings suggest schools did become more inclusive in their services, with many students predicted to be served in less restrictive general education placements and others no longer requiring special education services. Implications for inclusive education are provided.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Newton ◽  
Michael J. Kennedy ◽  
Christine Walther-Thomas ◽  
Jake Cornett

Policy makers, university teacher education faculty, school leaders, and government officials are asking the same question: How do we recruit, prepare, and retain effective teachers who will produce desired student outcomes in every classroom? This complex question garners distinct opinions depending on the queried stakeholder, but most agree that significant improvement is needed in the processes of teacher preparation and induction (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Greer & Meyen, 2009; Sykes, Bird, & Kennedy, 2010; Wang, Odell, Klecka, Spalding, & Lin, 2010). An argument can be made that the need for improvement is most urgent within the field of special education teacher preparation (Brownell, Sindelar, Kiely, & Danielson, 2010; Piper, 2007; Pugach, Blanton, & Correa, 2011; Simonsen et al., 2010; Sindelar, Brownell, & Billingsley, 2010) . To illustrate, recent achievement data for students with disabilities provides striking evidence of the critical need for improvement in areas of literacy, graduation rates, and other postsecondary outcomes (e.g. National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2009; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, & Garza, 2006). There is substantial variability in the numerous factors that contribute to the struggles of students with exceptionalities on measures of academic and social success (see Skiba, Poloni-Staudinger, Simmons, Feggins-Azziz, & Chung, 2005; Wagner et al., 2006). Many complex factors influence a teacher's impact on student achievement, which leads to the need for us to continue to examine and reform our current models of teacher preparation. Thus, teacher educators and practitioners must continue to investigate and evaluate the effects of new and existing policies, programmatic structures, and individual practices on outcomes of interest and disseminate those findings. Although calls to reform teacher education and P-12 instruction for children with exceptionalities are not new (Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003), it is clear that new thinking is needed to overcome traditional barriers to academic and social success for individuals with exceptionalities. However, despite the critical need for improvement, teacher preparation models within special and general education largely remain fixed to traditional methods that reflect the status quo as opposed to evidence-based practice (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, & Wycoff, 2009; Brownell, Griffin, Leko, & Stephens, 2011; Sykes et al., 2010).


2022 ◽  
pp. 397-414
Author(s):  
Rashmi Khazanchi ◽  
Pankaj Khazanchi

Inclusive education means educating students with special needs in an age-appropriate general education setting where students receive high-quality, standard-based instructions, interventions, and support that enable them to experience success in the general education classroom. Effective pedagogical practices involve the collaboration of both special education teacher and general education teacher to identify and implement effective teaching practices which enhance student engagement and promote higher-order thinking skills. Special education teacher supports the general education teacher in adapting curriculum and teaching methods, modifying assessments, and providing accommodations to students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Effective pedagogical practices are affected by teacher's belief; students' disabilities; and their roles and responsibilities towards the students with disabilities. This chapter examines previous researches and studies that investigate effective pedagogical practices in inclusive classrooms for students with disabilities.


2012 ◽  
Vol 45 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer R. Newton ◽  
Michael J. Kennedy ◽  
Christine Walther-Thomas ◽  
Jake Cornett

Policy makers, university teacher education faculty, school leaders, and government officials are asking the same question: How do we recruit, prepare, and retain effective teachers who will produce desired student outcomes in every classroom? This complex question garners distinct opinions depending on the queried stakeholder, but most agree that significant improvement is needed in the processes of teacher preparation and induction (Darling-Hammond, 2010; Greer & Meyen, 2009; Sykes, Bird, & Kennedy, 2010; Wang, Odell, Klecka, Spalding, & Lin, 2010). An argument can be made that the need for improvement is most urgent within the field of special education teacher preparation (Brownell, Sindelar, Kiely, & Danielson, 2010; Piper, 2007; Pugach, Blanton, & Correa, 2011; Simonsen et al., 2010; Sindelar, Brownell, & Billingsley, 2010) . To illustrate, recent achievement data for students with disabilities provides striking evidence of the critical need for improvement in areas of literacy, graduation rates, and other postsecondary outcomes (e.g. National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2009; Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Levine, & Garza, 2006). There is substantial variability in the numerous factors that contribute to the struggles of students with exceptionalities on measures of academic and social success (see Skiba, Poloni-Staudinger, Simmons, Feggins-Azziz, & Chung, 2005; Wagner et al., 2006). Many complex factors influence a teacher's impact on student achievement, which leads to the need for us to continue to examine and reform our current models of teacher preparation. Thus, teacher educators and practitioners must continue to investigate and evaluate the effects of new and existing policies, programmatic structures, and individual practices on outcomes of interest and disseminate those findings. Although calls to reform teacher education and P-12 instruction for children with exceptionalities are not new (Vaughn & Fuchs, 2003), it is clear that new thinking is needed to overcome traditional barriers to academic and social success for individuals with exceptionalities. However, despite the critical need for improvement, teacher preparation models within special and general education largely remain fixed to traditional methods that reflect the status quo as opposed to evidence-based practice (Boyd, Grossman, Lankford, Loeb, & Wycoff, 2009; Brownell, Griffin, Leko, & Stephens, 2011; Sykes et al., 2010).


2021 ◽  
pp. 001440292110625
Author(s):  
Tiffany L. Fisher ◽  
Paul T. Sindelar ◽  
Dennis Kramer ◽  
Elizabeth Bettini

Special education teacher employment began to decline in 2006, concurrent with increased paraprofessional employment. At the same time, the prevalence of students with disabilities in several categories changed substantially, and the proportion of students being served in general education settings increased as well. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the decline in special education teacher employment was related to increased paraprofessional employment, and if the increase in paraprofessional employment was related to shifts in the composition of students with disabilities, educational placements, or more general state-level factors. We created a panel dataset for 2006–2015 and analyzed these relationships using a two-way fixed effects model. We found that, although changes in paraprofessional employment were unrelated to changes in special educator employment, they were related to changes in the prevalence of students with autism spectrum disorder. In addition, states with larger populations and higher K12 expenditures employed more paraprofessionals.


Author(s):  
Hannah Morris Mathews

In general education, researchers find candidates’ pre-service experiences are a tool for socialization into the knowledge, norms, and values of the profession. An important aspect of this process is program vision—the collective understanding of teaching put forth by a preparation program. Yet, few investigations in special education examine program vision. Using interviews with candidates across six teacher preparation programs, the author generates theory to understand the role of vision in special education teacher candidates’ professional socialization and how experiences of program vision are associated with their conceptions of their future roles and responsibilities. Candidates’ conception of special educators’ roles reflected three characterizations consistent within, but distinct across programs: Direct Instructor, Supportive Differentiator, and General Responder. Each profile was associated with unique roles and responsibilities for special educators. Findings draw attention to the importance of examining vision as a tool for professional socialization in special education teacher preparation.


1987 ◽  
Vol 53 (4) ◽  
pp. 325-326 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Stephen Lilly

The lack of focus on special education in the Sizer, Boyer, and Goodlad reports, as well as Nation at Risk, is analyzed. It is posited that mere neglect might not account for this lack of attention and that current shortcomings of special education services might lead the authors of the reports to focus on improvement of general education opportunities for all students rather than increased compensatory education. In its current state, special education for the “mildly handicapped” might well be seen by these authors as part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. To remedy this situation, special educators must increasingly see themselves as members of the general education community and work toward more effective integration of special and general education.


2018 ◽  
Vol 100 (3) ◽  
pp. 45-50 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Silverman Schechter

Students with disabilities, especially those with non-apparent conditions, are entering universities in growing numbers. Yet more and more students are going off to college unprepared to manage their disabilities, in part because their high schools are overburdened, understaffed, and uninformed to identify and support them. A recent survey of students receiving disability supports at one public university revealed that the majority of these undergraduates with disabilities did not receive special education services in high school, instead waiting until college to seek help. Respondents reflected on what could have been improved about their high school experience, and they offered advice to school practitioners as to how to support these underserved students for postsecondary success.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document