A Study on Special Education Teachers’ Perceptions of Evaluation for Students with Developmental Disabilities in Inclusive Elementary Schools

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 179-205
Author(s):  
Kyung-Ock Park ◽  
Seonjin Seo
Author(s):  
Delinda van Garderen ◽  
Amy Scheuermann ◽  
Apryl L. Poch

In this article, we present findings that examined special education teachers’ perception of students’ with disabilities ability, instructional needs, and difficulties for using visual representations (VRs) as a strategy to solve mathematics problems. In addition, whether these perceptions differed by instructional grade or setting currently teaching was examined. Survey data from 97 in-service teachers revealed, regardless of instructional setting or grade level taught, that they believe students with disabilities have the ability to learn about and use VRs and need to be taught to use VRs. Furthermore, the special education teachers perceived students with disabilities to have difficulty with all aspects related to using VRs in mathematical problem-solving. Implications for teacher training and development are provided.


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-53
Author(s):  
Linda A. Reddy ◽  
Adam Lekwa ◽  
Elisa Shernoff

Research that examines coaching approaches for special education teachers is very limited. This study, a secondary analysis of a wait-list controlled, randomized trial (106 teachers, 2,195 students, 18 schools), investigated the effects of a data-driven coaching that integrated observational assessment and performance feedback on general education (GE) versus special education (SE) teacher practices and student outcomes in high-poverty urban elementary schools. Coaches used observational data via the Classroom Strategies Assessment System to identify practice needs, set goals, create plans, and monitor progress toward goals. Prior to coaching, GE and SE teachers were observed using evidence-based instructional and behavior management practices; however, some practices were at rates lower than recommended by the research literature. Results suggest that goal selection and frequency and quality of practices were generally comparable between GE and SE teachers. However, SE teachers used 30% fewer behavior corrective feedback statements, on average, than GE teachers ( p = .04). Overall, the effect of the coaching intervention did not differ across GE and SE teachers; both had significantly improved instructional and behavior management practices and student outcomes when compared with teachers in the control condition. Limitations and future directions for research and practice are discussed.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document