Building Integrated Collaborative Relationships for Inclusive Learning Settings 9781799868163, 9781799868187

Citation preview

Building Integrated Collaborative Relationships for Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Dena AuCoin Purdue University Global, USA

A volume in the Advances in Educational Marketing, Administration, and Leadership (AEMAL) Book Series

Published in the United States of America by IGI Global Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global) 701 E. Chocolate Avenue Hershey PA, USA 17033 Tel: 717-533-8845 Fax: 717-533-8661 E-mail: [email protected] Web site: http://www.igi-global.com Copyright © 2021 by IGI Global. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or distributed in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, without written permission from the publisher. Product or company names used in this set are for identification purposes only. Inclusion of the names of the products or companies does not indicate a claim of ownership by IGI Global of the trademark or registered trademark.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: AuCoin, Dena, 1975- editor. Title: Building integrated collaborative relationships for inclusive learning settings / Dena AuCoin, Editor. Description: Hershey, PA : Information Science Reference, [2021] | Includes bibliographical references and index. | Summary: “This book provides background information on special education law, inclusion, and strategies for integrated collaborative relationships that include creation of Inclusion Professional Learning Communities and a map for intended collaboration”-- Provided by publisher. Identifiers: LCCN 2021005787 (print) | LCCN 2021005788 (ebook) | ISBN 9781799868163 (hardcover) | ISBN 9781799868170 (paperback) | ISBN 9781799868187 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Inclusive education. | Students with disabilities--Education. | School improvement programs. | Professional learning communities. Classification: LCC LC1200 .B85 2021 (print) | LCC LC1200 (ebook) | DDC 371.9--dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021005787 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2021005788

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

This book is published in the IGI Global book series Advances in Educational Marketing, Administration, and Leadership (AEMAL) (ISSN: 2326-9022; eISSN: 2326-9030) British Cataloguing in Publication Data A Cataloguing in Publication record for this book is available from the British Library. All work contributed to this book is new, previously-unpublished material. The views expressed in this book are those of the authors, but not necessarily of the publisher. For electronic access to this publication, please contact: [email protected].

Advances in Educational Marketing, Administration, and Leadership (AEMAL) Book Series ISSN:2326-9022 EISSN:2326-9030 Editor-in-Chief: Siran Mukerji IGNOU, India Purnendu Tripathi IGNOU, India Mission

With more educational institutions entering into public, higher, and professional education, the educational environment has grown increasingly competitive. With this increase in competitiveness has come the need for a greater focus on leadership within the institutions, on administrative handling of educational matters, and on the marketing of the services offered. The Advances in Educational Marketing, Administration, & Leadership (AEMAL) Book Series strives to provide publications that address all these areas and present trending, current research to assist professionals, administrators, and others involved in the education sector in making their decisions. Coverage

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• Technologies and Educational Marketing • Consumer Behavior • Enrollment Management • Marketing Theories within Education • Students as Consumers • Advertising and Promotion of Academic Programs and Institutions • Educational Management • Faculty Administration and Management • Educational Leadership • Academic Administration

IGI Global is currently accepting manuscripts for publication within this series. To submit a proposal for a volume in this series, please contact our Acquisition Editors at [email protected] or visit: http://www.igi-global.com/publish/.

The Advances in Educational Marketing, Administration, and Leadership (AEMAL) Book Series (ISSN 2326-9022) is published by IGI Global, 701 E. Chocolate Avenue, Hershey, PA 17033-1240, USA, www.igi-global.com. This series is composed of titles available for purchase individually; each title is edited to be contextually exclusive from any other title within the series. For pricing and ordering information please visit http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advanceseducational-marketing-administration-leadership/73677. Postmaster: Send all address changes to above address. Copyright © 2021 IGI Global. All rights, including translation in other languages reserved by the publisher. No part of this series may be reproduced or used in any form or by any means – graphics, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping, or information and retrieval systems – without written permission from the publisher, except for non commercial, educational use, including classroom teaching purposes. The views expressed in this series are those of the authors, but not necessarily of IGI Global.

Titles in this Series

For a list of additional titles in this series, please visit: http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advances-educational-marketing-administration-leadership/73677

International Beliefs and Practices That Characterize Teacher Effectiveness Leslie W. Grant (School of Education, William & Mary, USA) James H. Stronge (School of Education, William & Mary, USA) and Xianxuan Xu (Virginia Department of Education, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 365pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799879084) • US $195.00 Women and Leadership in Higher Education During Global Crises Heidi L. Schnackenberg (State University of New York at Plattsburgh, USA) and Denise A. Simard (State University of New York at Plattsburgh, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 256pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799864912) • US $195.00 Empowering Formal and Informal Leadership While Maintaining Teacher Identity Bryan S. Zugelder (James Madison University, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 326pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799865001) • US $195.00 A Cultural Historical Approach to Social Displacement and University-Community Engagement Emerging Research and Opportunities Charles Underwood (University of California, Berkeley, USA) Mara Welsh Mahmood (University of California, Berkeley, USA) and Olga Vásquez (University of California, San Diego, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 300pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799874003) • US $175.00 Emerging Strategies for Public Education Reform Marquis Carter Grant (Grand Canyon University, USA) Information Science Reference • © 2021 • 339pp • H/C (ISBN: 9781799856955) • US $185.00

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

For an entire list of titles in this series, please visit: http://www.igi-global.com/book-series/advances-educational-marketing-administration-leadership/73677

701 East Chocolate Avenue, Hershey, PA 17033, USA Tel: 717-533-8845 x100 • Fax: 717-533-8661 E-Mail: [email protected] • www.igi-global.com

Editorial Advisory Board

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Brian Berger, Purdue University Global, USA Donna Cohn, Pima Community College, USA Tiffany Hamlet, American College of Education, USA Jessica Hammond, Purdue University Global, USA Misty LaCour, Purdue University Global, USA Kelly Ann Larkin, Southern Arizona Association for the Education of Young Children, USA Julia Nyberg, Purdue University Global, USA Lisa Wright, Purdue University Global, USA

Table of Contents

Preface.................................................................................................................. xv Section 1 Benefts, Challenges, and Strategies for Inclusive Communities Chapter 1 Challenges to Inclusion...........................................................................................1 Angela Chen, Independent Researcher, USA Chapter 2 Leadership Challenges to Inclusion: Students With Disabilities in Higher Education..............................................................................................................23 Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu, University of South Africa, South Africa Sithabile Ntombela, University of South Africa, South Africa Chapter 3 Efective and Efcient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings..................................................................................................................40 Lara Gentilini, Independent Researcher, USA

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 4 Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Diferentiated Instruction........77 Alpana Bhattacharya, Queens College and Graduate Center, CUNY, USA Chapter 5 Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships.........................100 Jamie Mahoney, Murray State University, USA Carol A. Hall, University of Phoenix, USA



Section 2 Implementation and Facilitation of Inclusive Communities Through Collaborative Constructs Chapter 6 Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings.................................................132 Dena AuCoin, Purdue University Global, USA Brian Berger, Purdue University Global, USA Chapter 7 Specifc Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program: An Analysis of a Case Study...............................................................................161 Georgios A. Kougioumtzis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece Maria Sofologi, University of Ioannina, Greece Argyro Fella, University of Nicosia, Cyprus Isidora Kaliotsou, Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus Christiana Koundourou, Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus Eleni Bonti, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece Georgia Papantoniou, University of Ioannina, Greece Chapter 8 Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings: Providing Reasonable Accommodations............................................................181 Shigeru Ikuta, Otsuma Women’s University, Japan Yu Takagaki, FukuyamaKita School for Special Needs, Japan Reiko Sone, Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan Keiko Ozaki, Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan Shinya Abe, Gridmark Inc., Japan

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Section 3 Considerations for Inclusive Communities Chapter 9 Professional Learning Communities: An Inclusive Solution for Engagement and Collaboration................................................................................................216 Lindsey Jarvie, Purdue University Global, USA Jason Waldow, Purdue University Global, USA



Chapter 10 Instruction Expanded: Culturally-Mediated Talent Development and Inclusive Access..................................................................................................240 Jessica Manzone, University of Southern California, USA Julia Nyberg, Purdue University Global, USA Compilation of References............................................................................... 266 About the Contributors.................................................................................... 307

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Index................................................................................................................... 315

Detailed Table of Contents

Preface.................................................................................................................. xv Section 1 Benefts, Challenges, and Strategies for Inclusive Communities In this section readers will review the challenges for practitioners and leaders for inclusion of students with special needs. An overview of efective practice and strategies for collaborative inclusion is provided. Chapter 1 Challenges to Inclusion...........................................................................................1 Angela Chen, Independent Researcher, USA

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The expansion of inclusion practices has led to an increase in the integration of special education learners into general education classrooms. In order to meet the needs of all learners within inclusion classrooms, general and special education teachers must combine their respective teaching expertise. However, there are signifcant challenges to inclusion opportunities arising from a variety of sources. These major barriers to integration are described as environmental, knowledge-based, and relationshipbased challenges. Examples of these challenges are discussed with respect to issues related to inclusion faced by both general and special education teachers. Chapter 2 Leadership Challenges to Inclusion: Students With Disabilities in Higher Education..............................................................................................................23 Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu, University of South Africa, South Africa Sithabile Ntombela, University of South Africa, South Africa Higher education institutions have a responsibility to address past and present social inequalities, one of which is the marginalization of people with disabilities in education. The chapter explores and highlights leadership challenges to the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education (HE). A qualitative approach and interpretive paradigm will be used to review the literature and analyze documents



as data generation methods. The chapter will contribute to the debate on the role of leadership in the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. Aspects such as the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral factors are key in understanding the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE. Some of the leadership challenges to the inclusion of students with disabilities, amongst others, include institutional and architectural barriers, leadership strategies, and institutional policies. Policy and practice may serve to obscure the challenges of inclusion. Chapter 3 Efective and Efcient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings..................................................................................................................40 Lara Gentilini, Independent Researcher, USA Given the increasing diversity of students included in general education classrooms in public schools, the feld must establish a clearer defnition of what successful inclusion entails. This endeavor involves an analysis of best practices for inclusion, taking into account the knowledge and skillset required of teachers in their roles as instructional experts. With limited time and resources, teachers are challenged to maximize opportunities for individualized learning without creating the need for additional teacher-directed instruction. Teachers must therefore enact classroom practices in which students and their peers serve as mediating agents in their own learning. In addition, special and general education teachers must collaborate with one another, as well as with all members of the larger school community, in order to provide students with the least restrictive classroom placement along a continuum of options. All those involved must believe in, and advocate for, successful inclusion practices to support an increasingly diverse and accepting public sector.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 4 Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Diferentiated Instruction........77 Alpana Bhattacharya, Queens College and Graduate Center, CUNY, USA This chapter illustrates pedagogical practices from an undergraduate educational psychology course focused on preparing preservice teacher candidates for inclusive education in grades 7-12 general classes. First, literature related to teacher preparation for multi-tiered inclusive education is reviewed. Next, an inclusive instructional project is showcased to pinpoint pedagogical approaches used for promoting preservice teacher candidates’ capabilities for diferentiated instruction and technology-enhanced instruction in general education. Finally, implications of pedagogical practices for promoting preservice teacher candidates’ aptitude for teaching diverse students via diferentiated instruction are discussed, and future research directions for examining efectiveness of teacher preparation in general education for inclusive education are suggested.



Chapter 5 Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships.........................100 Jamie Mahoney, Murray State University, USA Carol A. Hall, University of Phoenix, USA This chapter examines the roles and responsibilities of general education and special education teachers in the inclusion model of teaching. Providing students with disabilities services within the inclusion model of services requires both teachers to use specialized strategies and methods such as the co-teaching models ensuring all students are successful within the classroom. These models include the one teach one observe, one teach one assist, station teaching, parallel teaching, alternative teaching, and teaming. Kagan provides collaborative teaching strategies to assist in helping students to learn to work together in during projects and other classroom activities. Students must learn to work in a cooperative manner to be prepared for future essential life skills and jobs. Employers are seeking students who can get along with others and work in group settings to accomplish tasks in a competitive feld. Section 2 Implementation and Facilitation of Inclusive Communities Through Collaborative Constructs In this section, readers will gain understanding of the established constructs for collaborative relationships. A case study will be reviewed to analyze interventions and consider accommodations in inclusive settings.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 6 Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings.................................................132 Dena AuCoin, Purdue University Global, USA Brian Berger, Purdue University Global, USA Inclusion is built on the idea that all students are valuable and signifcant members of their community and should be accepted in general education settings. Inclusion is a term that can defne classroom practices, but it is also a valued system where all students have a sense of belonging. Collaboration between teachers can efectively support students with special needs (SSN) in inclusion, ofering insight into student needs and providing valuable information for supporting students. Research has identifed the efective collaborative constructs of (1) shared planning, (2) frequent communication, (3) shared vision, (4) mutual respect, and (5) joint trust. This chapter will investigate the real-life issue of collaboration needs and defne the established collaborative constructs for practice.



Chapter 7 Specifc Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program: An Analysis of a Case Study...............................................................................161 Georgios A. Kougioumtzis, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece Maria Sofologi, University of Ioannina, Greece Argyro Fella, University of Nicosia, Cyprus Isidora Kaliotsou, Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus Christiana Koundourou, Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus Eleni Bonti, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece Georgia Papantoniou, University of Ioannina, Greece Over the past three decades, the interest of teachers and parents has focused on a variety of learning difculties that students face in school settings. A signifcant number of students systematically fail in school, as they lack early detection of learning difculties or efective intervention. This case study examines an elementary school student within a more general context, taking into account essential parameters such as family, school, and social environment. Furthermore, the authors thoroughly describe his difculties in practical terms, as well as ways to address them through the implementation of an individual intervention program that responds to the needs of the student. Finally, reference is made to signifcant evidence that cooperation with parents as well as with a number of institutions strengthens and enhances intervention.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 8 Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings: Providing Reasonable Accommodations............................................................181 Shigeru Ikuta, Otsuma Women’s University, Japan Yu Takagaki, FukuyamaKita School for Special Needs, Japan Reiko Sone, Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan Keiko Ozaki, Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan Shinya Abe, Gridmark Inc., Japan One of the authors (Shigeru Ikuta) has organized a collaborative learning community with schoolteachers to provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities using newly developed multimedia-enabled dot codes. He created “PostIt-like” sticker icons on which dot codes were printed; each sticker icon could be linked with up to four multimedia mediums, in addition to up to four voices/sounds. Touching a dot code icon with a speaking-pen enables audios to be replayed and touching a dot code icon with a dot-code reader enables multimedia to be replayed. Four software packages to create self-made contents were developed by Gridmark Inc. The sticker icons, a speaking-pen and dot-code reader, and software packages are distributed to schoolteachers for free; they can now create original teaching materials



for students in classes. The present newly developed software and tools are quite useful to support the students with various difculties in inclusive learning settings. Section 3 Considerations for Inclusive Communities In the fnal section of this book, readers will consider professional learning communities and expansion of practice for inclusion. Chapter 9 Professional Learning Communities: An Inclusive Solution for Engagement and Collaboration................................................................................................216 Lindsey Jarvie, Purdue University Global, USA Jason Waldow, Purdue University Global, USA Thriving in today’s global society means meeting the demands for success by simple provisional steps or internal and organizational paradigm shifts. As organizations command numerous departments, oversee a diverse workforce, and have various agendas and goals, creating and maintaining a culture of collaboration and inclusion is vital but challenging. Professional learning communities (PLCs) are a way for colleagues from all areas of an organization to connect. PLCs have been a proven strategy for fostering collaboration, expanding scholarship, and enhancing professional efcacy. The intention of a PLC is to confront a challenge, meet a goal, or implement a change for the good of the organization while also building a sense of community through collaboration. This chapter will emphasize how PLCs contribute to experiential learning, inclusive learning settings, and address common communication challenges.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Chapter 10 Instruction Expanded: Culturally-Mediated Talent Development and Inclusive Access..................................................................................................240 Jessica Manzone, University of Southern California, USA Julia Nyberg, Purdue University Global, USA The concept of inclusiveness encompasses more than just the integration of students with special needs into the general education setting. It involves modifying and reorienting access to the curriculum so that the learning experience encourages talent development that reinforces scholarly traits that are refective of the needs, interests, abilities, and cultural backgrounds of the learners in the classroom. In this chapter, the authors overlay two instructional strategies for classroom teachers—scholarly traits and the talent development model—and articulate how they can reinforce the building blocks of a culturally mediated and inclusive learning environment that broadens access to the curriculum. The goal of this chapter is to model how research-based pedagogical strategies can be altered to intersect, tailored to reinforce,



and reworked to be responsive using aspects of universal design for learning and culturally-mediated instructional practices to create inclusive learning experiences for all students. Compilation of References............................................................................... 266 About the Contributors.................................................................................... 307

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Index................................................................................................................... 315

xv

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Preface

The education of students with special needs has been a focus of educational reform throughout history. At the core of the debate is transitioning from a separated teaching style to an inclusive setting alongside typical peers (Cochrane, 2016). The issue of inclusion began with passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) in 1975, which made education free and mandatory for all children with special needs (Blanton & Pugach, 2017; Tahir et al., 2019). The objective of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA, 2004), which was the most recent subsequent amendment for the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (P.L. 94-142), is to ensure that students with disabilities be offered a free appropriate public education (FAPE) no matter what their abilities. Inclusion of students with special needs transcends the K-12 school setting and spans the lifetime of people with special needs, from preschool to higher education and from classroom settings to virtual settings. Educators are faced with upholding educational responsibility, evidence-based education, efficient schools, and inclusion of students with special needs in all environments. IDEIA (2004) has increased the number of students with special needs in typical classrooms and in general the push for inclusivity has required that inclusive practices become standard in addressing the needs of all students, which includes collaboration between educators and practitioners (Tahir et al., 2019). The settings for education continue to evolve, including online settings, and now more than ever, educators should be experts in building collaborative relationships for inclusivity. The perceived positive benefits of collaboration among teachers for inclusive settings creates a topic of interest. This book brings focus to deep, or integrated, collaborative relationships between educators and the use of inclusivity to support practice.

Preface

THE CHALLENGES Inclusion can be defined as an education setting in which all students are offered meaningful opportunities to access curriculum in general education classrooms with instruction provided by a general education teacher. Inclusion culminates into not only describing teaching practices, but also a principled system where all students are made to feel as if they belong and are an important part of the group. This is essential to considerations in multiple settings, both brick-and-mortar and online (Cochrane, 2016; Tahir et al., 2019). Inclusion is built on the idea that all students are valuable in their abilities, that they should be considered important members of the community. It goes without saying that inclusion of students with special needs into education settings can introduce significant challenges to educators. The attempt to deal with inclusion and collaboration demands an adequate understanding of the challenges that exist in all education settings. Such challenges can be classified into four categories: • • • •

The challenge of facilitating inclusive learning settings. The challenge of educator understanding on how to build collaborative relationships to meet student needs in inclusion. The challenge of leadership assistance to build inclusive settings and inclusive school culture. The challenge of inclusive access for all through collaborative relationships.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. The Challenge of Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings The role of educators is integral in inclusion, and preparation for facilitating inclusive learning settings is a cause for concern (Majoko, 2017). Teachers and administrators report that inclusion has the potential to inform practice and improve outcomes for students with special needs. While many in the field agree the inclusive practices can offer benefits to students with special needs, some also feel that inclusion can be at the expense of typical student achievement. In this context, inclusion of students with special needs has faced many challenges in its implementation among which teacher relationships and proper training present major barriers (Cochrane, 2016; Tahir et al., 2019). However, the barriers to implementation of inclusive education include lack of parental support, lack of training, and lack of equipment for adaptations (Tahir et al., 2019). Schools must face these challenges and build physical learning spaces, provide resources, and train teachers in classroom practices that support and at times discouraged the students with special needs in an inclusive setting.

xvi

Preface

2. The Challenge of Educator Understanding on How to Build Collaborative Relationships to Meet Student Needs in Inclusion There are three main issues that contribute to weak collaborative relationships: (1) different pedagogical influences between general and special education, (2) negative associations with the term ‘disability’ or special needs, and (3) fear of not being able to meet inclusive student needs (Pugach, 2017). The historic divide between general and special education often allows teachers to default to individual work with ‘my’ or ‘their’ students. Instead, educators must find ways to collaborate and build deep relationships to meet all student needs (Tahir et al., 2019). Inclusive education must represent connection and collaboration between general and special education teachers, along with provision of resources, curriculum, and support (Makjoko, 2017).

3. The Challenge of Leadership Assistance to Build Inclusive Settings and Inclusive School Culture The acceptance of inclusion and collaboration must be supported by administration, and administration must lead by their behavior and example. Administration will face challenges in inclusive education and programming, given the high levels of accountability and expectations in schools. To address these challenges, a priority should be placed on hiring competent professionals for students with special needs and creating a culture of acceptance in schools (Tahir et al., 2019). Leadership investment is needed across general and special education for inclusive initiatives, including the need for time and space to create collaborative relationships. In the absence of this responsibility, collaborative opportunities are failed from the start (Pugach, 2017).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

4. The Challenge of Inclusive Access for All Through Collaborative Relationships A traditional view of teaching as an individual activity contradicts the reality of modern, collaborative educational practices that most meaningfully influence student outcomes. Rather than student success being chiefly a function of individual teachers it is also influenced by educators’ collaborative efforts (Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Schools should provide teachers and support staff opportunities to collaborate on a regular basis, planning together and developing appropriate lessons for all students, with each teacher holding an equal role (Tahir et al., 2019). Administration is challenged to provide time for teachers and support staff to collaborate, to discuss the individual and group needs of all students. Professional xvii

Preface

development should be provided to the schools to promote collaboration methods (Tahir et al., 2019). To combat the traditional perspective of teaching as an individual activity, there must be support for teachers to view themselves as part of a community of professionals (Pugach, 2017). This viewpoint should help address the challenge of building collaborative relationships and expand opportunities to bridge the divide and share understanding of all practice from an inclusive perspective.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

SEARCHING FOR A SOLUTION Research indicates there are higher levels of trust and job satisfaction in schools with greater collaboration. However, despite the benefits of teacher collaboration, there are still teachers who work in isolation (Blanton & Pugach, 2017; Tichenor & Tichenor,2019). How might we more consistently push back against the default view of teaching as an individual practice? Differences of opinions on the placement of students with special education needs could be the result of many factors such as school culture, general attitudes towards disability and overall acceptance of collaborative needs. In the previous section the problems with establishing collaborative relationships for inclusion was mentioned. Clearly adopting inclusive settings will go a long way in establishing good teaching and collaborative practices and will set the culture for acceptance. The most important element of inclusive educational settings is the collaboration of professionals, and this takes a direct approach to understanding collaboration, identifying leadership needs, and building inclusive access for all through collaboration (Cochrane, 2016; Tahir et al., 2019). Inclusive education is comprised of understanding that all students can learn and need support, that diverse methods should be used to meet student needs, and acknowledging the individual strengths of each student. Through inclusive practices, all students are able to develop academically, while fostering growth of adaptive skills and belonging. Building Integrated Collaborative Relationships for Inclusive Learning Settings provides background information on special education law, inclusion, and strategies for integrated collaborative relationships that include the creation of inclusion professional learning communities and a map for intended collaboration. Moreover, the book provides insights and supports professionals concerned with the evolving environment of schools and education and how to best meet the needs of all learners. This book is intended for teachers, special education teachers, counsellors, professionals, and researchers working in the field of education, and in-service and preservice teachers, administrators, teacher educators, practitioners, researchers,

xviii

Preface

academicians, and students looking to improve their understanding on how to build and maintain practices to support inclusive learning settings.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ORGANIZATION OF THE BOOK The book is organized into 10 chapters. A brief description of each of the chapters follows: Chapter 1 identifies the existing challenges for expanding inclusive practices to meet the needs of all learners. In particular the chapter identifies barriers to integration that surround environmental and relationship-based challenges. Examples of challenges are provided from the perspective of both general and special education teachers. Chapter 2 establishes the need to identify leadership challenges in higher education as it relates to social inequalities. The authors of this chapter contend that by debating the role of leadership regarding inclusion, a greater understanding can be developed regarding policy and practice. Chapter 3 takes philosophical orientation and debates about increasing diversity of students included in general education classrooms in public schools. The author examines specific ideas of what defines successful inclusion in public schools and identifies needs for educators. The overall aim of the chapter is to recognize challenges educators face and how to advocate for effective inclusion practices. Chapter 4 reviews the pedagogical elements in the preparation of preservice teacher candidates for inclusive education. The author presents a review of pedagogical approaches use to promote preservice teacher candidates’ capabilities for differentiation. They further discuss implications of the project and future research possibilities. Chapter 5 reviews the roles and responsibilities of teachers in inclusion. The authors offer discussion on specialized strategies and methods for successful inclusion. The authors, following their identification of various co-teaching methods, identify needs for students beyond education. Chapter 6 presents an analysis of collaboration needs for inclusive settings. The authors provide a definition of the established collaborative constructs for practice. The constructs are classified into five elements and the authors explore what each construct is and strategies for meeting them. Chapter 7 addresses the issue of students and difficulties in school. Specifically, the authors focus on an elementary student and that student’s family and school environment. They review implementation of an intervention program responding to the needs of the student and the need for collaboration with parents and the community. xix

Preface

Chapter 8 analyses a collaborative learning community and a newly developed multi-media enabled dot codes for students with disabilities. The process of intervention is provided, and the results of newly developed software and tools are shared. Chapter 9 reviews the potential surrounding professional learning communities relating to diversity and inclusion. The authors argue that professional learning communities can provide a means for a collaborative culture and enhance professional efficacy. They present an array of ideas for how professional learning communities contribute to experiential learning and inclusive settings. Chapter 10 concludes and discusses inclusiveness beyond the integration of students with special needs into the general education setting. The authors, following their identification of approaches to modifying curriculum, present instructional strategies for teachers to create inclusive learning experiences. Dena AuCoin Purdue University Global, USA

REFERENCES Blanton, L. P., & Pugach, M. C. (2017). A dynamic model for the next generation of research on teacher education for inclusion. In L. Florian & N. Pantić (Eds.), Teacher education for the changing demographics of schooling: Issues for Research and Practice (pp. 215–228). Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-54389-5_15 Cochrane, K. (2016). Inclusive education: The least dangerous assumption. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 8(2), 23–26. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (2004). Public Law No. 108-447.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Majoko, T. (2019). Teacher key competencies for inclusive education: Tapping pragmatic realities of Zimbabwean special needs education teachers. SAGE Open, 9(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/2158244018823455 Pugach, M. C. (2017). The edTPA as an occasion for structuring faculty dialogue across the divide? A “checklist manifesto” for a more inclusive teacher education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(4), 314–321. doi:10.1177/0888406417705320 Tahir, K., Doelger, B., & Hynes, M. (2019). A Case Study on the Ecology of Inclusive Education in the United States. Academic Press.

xx

Preface

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Tichenor, M., & Tichenor, J. (2019). Collaboration in the elementary school: What do teachers think? Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 8(54), 54. Advance online publication. doi:10.5430/jct.v8n2p54

xxi

Section 1

Benefits, Challenges, and Strategies for Inclusive Communities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

In this section readers will review the challenges for practitioners and leaders for inclusion of students with special needs. An overview of effective practice and strategies for collaborative inclusion is provided.

1

Chapter 1

Challenges to Inclusion Angela Chen Independent Researcher, USA

ABSTRACT The expansion of inclusion practices has led to an increase in the integration of special education learners into general education classrooms. In order to meet the needs of all learners within inclusion classrooms, general and special education teachers must combine their respective teaching expertise. However, there are signifcant challenges to inclusion opportunities arising from a variety of sources. These major barriers to integration are described as environmental, knowledge-based, and relationship-based challenges. Examples of these challenges are discussed with respect to issues related to inclusion faced by both general and special education teachers.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION The movement to offer equitable learning opportunities for students with disabilities has increasingly shifted the educational landscape toward providing inclusive opportunities with their general education peers (McLeskey, et al., 2012). Data trends from the emergence of this movement show a steady increase in the percentage of time spent by students with disabilities in regular education classes (Williamson et al., 2019). In light of this shift toward greater accessibility in general education placements, there is a need for establishing more inclusive practices in the classroom setting. The benefits to placement in an inclusion classroom or opportunities in an inclusive setting have been demonstrated across students with and without disabilities (Burstein et al., 2004; Dessemontet, 2012). In order to create an integrated and inclusive learning environment, it is necessary for general and special education DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch001 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Challenges to Inclusion

teachers to work closely together. Collaborative effort must be made in order to have a cohesive educational plan, engage in open communication, share ideas and strategies, and demonstrate mutual respect. However, there are substantial challenges to the creation and continuation of inclusive opportunities that offer benefits to typically developing students and their atypical peers. This chapter aims to describe possible roadblocks on the path to collaborative inclusion opportunities in schools. These hurdles are separated into three categories: environmental, knowledge-based, and relationship-based. Environmental challenges include external circumstances outside the control of educators. Consider the lack of physical accommodations for students with disabilities that restricts access to parts of a classroom. The accessibility of the school building is the first step to inclusion opportunities. Challenges stemming from the environment also encompasses limited curricular resources available to educators and more importantly, the time and opportunity for collaboration. Knowledge-based obstacles include misconceptions about inclusion from parents, students, or teachers. This also takes into account the lack of teacher training or experience on effective educational strategies and tactics resulting in limited adaptability to novel teaching situations. This is applicable to general education teachers who may lack a depth of knowledge about specific disabilities or vice versa, to special education teachers who have not experienced difficulties found in a general education classroom. Without a collaborative effort, teachers do not have the opportunity to supplement their weaknesses with another’s strength. The potential lack of partnership may also result from relationship-based challenges between educators. Teachers that are divided by their differences or do not have adequate time to develop a positive rapport limit the potential for successful inclusion experiences. It acts as a barrier to forming integrated relationships between educators necessary to create comprehensive educational planning for students. Classrooms can experience part or all of these challenges to some degree. In order to create a collaborative and effective environment for all learners, steps must be made to identify and overcome the barriers that impede progress. The obstacles to creating a successful inclusion classroom can be daunting to any single educator but it highlights the importance of building collaborative relationships resulting in benefits to all learners. Disjointed approaches to teaching may impede a successful learning environment and impede student progress. Emphasis is placed on the limitations of time and its ramifications on relationship building and collaboration between teachers. This chapter concludes with a summary and suggestions on overcoming the challenges to effective inclusion in classrooms.

2

Challenges to Inclusion

BACKGROUND Who are Included? Students who are provided with special education services include those that have physical, developmental, intellectual, or multiples disabilities. In order to learn, they require differentiated education outside the scope that is generally taught in a general education classroom. However, with the support of a special education teacher, paraprofessionals, and related service providers, students with disabilities can participate in a variety of school settings with their typically developing peers. In the United States, 13 types of disabilities are defined under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) across six different educational environments. The vast majority of those students are educated in a regular school setting, with greater than 63% of those students spending 80% or more of their time in a general education setting (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2017). The importance of inclusive educational opportunities is clear for student with disabilities who are attending schools that are able to meet their needs. Table 1. Percentage of students with disabilities served under IDEA across different educational settings Type of Educational Setting

Percentage of Students with Disabilities

Regular school

95

Separate school for students with disabilities

2.8

Separate residential facility

0.2

Private schools

1.4

Homebound/hospital placement

0.4

Correctional facility

0.2

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Source: (U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2017).

3

Challenges to Inclusion

Table 2. The percentages of time spent in general education classes by students with disabilities across types of disabilities Time in General Education Classes

Type of Disability

40%

40-79%

80%

All students with disabilities

13.3

18.3

63.4

Autism

33.2

18.3

39.7

Deaf-blindness

36.7

12.6

23.6

Developmental disability

14.7

19.0

64.7

Emotional disturbance

17.7

17.5

48.5

Hearing impairment

10.8

15.1

62.4

Intellectual disability

49.0

27.2

16.9

Multiple disabilities

45.6

17.1

13.7

Orthopedic impairment

22.5

15.5

53.6

Other health impairment

8.7

20.7

66.6

Specific learning disability

4.8

21.9

71.4

Speech or language impairment

4.0

4.8

87.4

Traumatic brain injury

19.6

21.7

50.8

Visual impairment

9.4

12.3

67.9

Source: (U.S. Department of Education. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, 2017).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

What Defines an Inclusive Setting? In a public school setting at the elementary level, there are multiple types of classrooms that offer a range of inclusion opportunities to students with disabilities. Students, depending on their needs, can be enrolled in either a general education classroom or a special education classroom. However, they can also have a wide range of inclusion opportunities. This may include spending a portion of their school day with a general education classroom during special subject area classes such as art, music, or physical education and also during lunch and recess periods. The configuration of a student’s school day is dependent on his or her IEP (Individualized Education Plan) and as such, inclusion opportunities can be unique to each student. The challenges to inclusion described in this chapter encompasses the experiences of students with disabilities who are enrolled either full time in general education classrooms or experience at least part of their school day with their general education classmates. The configuration of their learning environment can also be differentiated by the needs of each individual student. If a student with disabilities can be accommodated in a general education classroom, the class may be taught by a single teacher or it 4

Challenges to Inclusion

may be co-taught by a general education teacher and a special education teacher. Students may also be assigned a paraprofessional across either general education or special education settings. In the full-time general education classroom model, the student spends all of his or her classroom among general education peers. On the other end, students may be enrolled full time in a self-contained classroom if they require an intensive level of behavioral or academic support without inclusion opportunities. There is also an array of inclusion possibilities that exist between these two dichotomies (see Figure 1). Students that require additional support from a special education teacher, speech language pathologist, occupational therapist, or physical therapist, can receive push-in or pull-out services for one or more content area classes. This can either take plan in their classroom (push-in) or they may go to a different room with other students who are receiving similar services (pull-out). Students may also spend most of their day in the self-contained setting but integrate with an equivalent grade-level class during lunch, recess, or special content area classes. These different classroom configurations provide multiple opportunities for students with disabilities to participate with their peers, but it can also lead to a multitude of challenges for educators. These barriers to successful inclusion experiences are described in the following chapter.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. Examples of times spent by students with disabilities across general education and self-contained settings

5

Challenges to Inclusion

MAJOR CHALLENGES TO INCLUSION Environmental In order for students to be part of a learning environment, they must be able to participate in basic school-related activities. A student’s typical educational setting includes the classroom, playground, related subjects, transportation, transitions, field trips, mealtime, and bathrooms (Egilson & Traustadottir, 2009). Simeonsson et al. (2001) found a relationship between higher levels of participation in school activities and high quality of life scores as rated by teachers. However, research shows overall lower instances of participation across school activities in students with disabilities (Coster et al., 2013; Eriksson et al., 2007; Simeonsson et al., 2001). Everything from access to a school bus, navigating the school building and the playground during recess, sitting in a lunchroom or during an assembly, participating in music or physical education classes, or going on a field trip can be considered typical school activities. Being in the same physical space and engaging the same activities regardless of ability provides the basis for more in-depth inclusion opportunities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Physical Barriers Some schools may not be physically accessible to students with disabilities who may otherwise be academically on-par with their peers. Lack of wheelchair access, elevators, appropriate playground equipment, and many more environmental restrictions can deter the potential inclusion for students who require such services or accommodations. Even having a school nurse who can provide necessary medication can be an environmental limitation for some students. For students with developmental or physical disabilities, there can be barriers that prevent them from even getting into the school building. Heavy doors, distance between classroom settings, uneven surfaces make it more difficult for students with mobility differences to access their learning environment (Egilson & Traustadottir, 2009; Hemmingsson & Borell, 2002; Pivik, et al., 2002). Loud bells or bright lights might affect students with sensory needs. Lack of large font texts or microphones and speakers can affect the participation of visually impaired or deaf/hard of hearing students in the classroom. Accessible playground equipment, ramps, elevators, chairs, tables, writing instruments, and technology are among some of the many environmental variables that may hinder participation in a successful learning environment. Although it is possible for creative teachers to create or adapt necessary materials from items they have in supply, it takes time and effort away from other teaching duties. Moreover, the structural makeup of the school building is often dependent on its original construction. Older buildings may not have accessibility functions such as automatic doors or accessible restrooms 6

Challenges to Inclusion

without requiring major renovation. The physical layout of the school can act as a major barrier to the availability of inclusion opportunities. The educational setting of a student encompasses not only their physical spaces but also his or her learning environment. In order to have a positive and inclusive learning space, there are certain considerations that classrooms and school building must have. In terms of physical space in a classroom, modifications are necessary to allow for the participation of students that may have mobility or fine-motor needs. Students should be able to not only navigate the school building but also access areas of their classroom to retrieve necessary supplies and participate in the typical goings on of a classroom (e.g., moving from their desk area to a reading space or group area). Such limitations to their learning environment can impact successful integration and engagement with peers and education opportunities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Resources At the classroom level, barriers to inclusive education include having specific materials and resources available to meet the needs of students with disabilities. Examples include having assistive technology devices, communication devices, specialty pencils, adaptive art or sports equipment. The availability of these resources may shift the way students are able to participate and learn in the classroom setting. However, there may be a lack of appropriate resources or easily available teaching materials to meet the specific needs of an individual student. Accessing gradelevel curricula may require adapting teaching materials and making appropriate modifications. This may result in teachers creating visual, hands-on, or interactive materials that can be labor and time intensive. Students with disabilities have Individualized Education Plans (IEPs) which function as a blueprint for special education services containing educational goals, supports, services, modifications and/or accommodations needed for that individual student to make meaningful progress in school. Additionally, some students with disabilities are served by a 504 plan, derived from Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), which details how schools can provide accommodations and remove barriers that may interfere with a student’s ability to learn in a general education classroom. Students with disabilities who are accessing curricular content benefit from specific modifications and accommodation aimed at supporting their individual needs. Studies have documented increased academic responses and engagement and decreases in problem behavior when applying modifications to instruction (Lee et al., 2006; Lee, et al., 2010). However, research shows that the policies and practices of providing access to a general education curriculum is not always easily understood (Soukup, et al., 2007; Taub et al., 2017). Providing access to curricula and inclusion opportunities can be interpreted as physical placement into general 7

Challenges to Inclusion

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

education classrooms without considering how to reconfigure the general education setting to meet the needs of all of its learners. The onus of establishing such inclusive classroom communities falls on the teachers to modify the both learning environment and learning content. It is clear that providing instructional support and accommodations is essential for student progress, they also pose significant challenges for both general and special education teachers. Schumm and Vaughn (1991) measured the desirability and feasibility of adaptations for students with disabilities placed in general education classrooms. Their results showed that while modifications to classroom routine and instruction were desirable, many were not perceived by teachers to be feasible. Though many of the issues surrounding funding and resources function at a nation-wide level the effects are still felt by educators at the school level. The realities of the current educational landscape is that teachers are often expected to fill the gaps toward individualizing curricular content and modifying materials to meet student needs. Though it can be extremely challenging to modify content or create new materials on an individualized level that allow students with disabilities to access grade-level curriculum, there are compelling arguments to the importance of continued push for access (Browder et al., 2006; Browder et al., 2007; Jackson et al., 2010). Of the many challenges facing educators, one of the most significant challenges educators is time. According to results found in the 2012 Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS), full-time teachers spent 52 hours per week on all school-related activities out of a contracted, 38-hour work week (Goldring, et al., 2013). Teachers need time to plan, collaborate, make materials, modify materials, participate in meetings, complete paperwork, and so much more. This is all in addition to actual teaching. For general education teachers who have students with disabilities in their classroom, additional time is needed to learn about and provide appropriate modifications or accommodations needed for their students. Even more time is needed create or adjust instructional materials to meet the required needs of their students. A study conducted by Kurth and Keegan (2014) found that educators spent a mean of 59.1 minutes to adapt material for an assignment. The limited amount of planning and preparation time in a teacher’s schedule typically would not allow for such time-intensive individualization of materials, especially given a teacher’s caseload or class size.

Time Time, or the lack thereof, also acts as a major barrier when scheduling the daily activities and services for students with disabilities. At the elementary level, special education teachers often have a caseload of students that include students who spend a majority of their day in the inclusion setting or students that are enrolled in the self8

Challenges to Inclusion

contained classroom. These students may also be comprised of multiple grade level therefore special education teachers must coordinate with the corresponding general education teachers to ensure accurate scheduling. In addition to managing student schedules, they may also have a number of paraprofessionals that provide additional support for students. Teachers must also collaborate with paraprofessionals to specify duties and assign students. If a student receives speech, occupational, or physical therapy in the school setting, teachers must also consider time in the schedule for the corresponding related service personnel. Scheduling and paperwork adversely affects special education teachers who are required to ensure the a student’s IEP is being followed and that his or her progress is adequately documented. They also need to find the time to coordinate lessons or planning with their general education colleagues. Oftentimes, they may have students across multiple grades and thus have to find the time to remain in contact with all appropriate parties. All of these considerations must be taken into account in order to provide special education students with maximal inclusion opportunities. Outside of time taken for lesson planning, adapting materials and paperwork, teachers also need time to develop and deepen their expertise. This includes relevant professional development opportunities and time to collaborate with other staff members. Have opportunities to learn and grow are not only applicable to the students but also to the educators that work together to build an effective learning community.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Knowledge-Based The network of support that surrounds students with disabilities is comprised of many individuals from their family members to everyone in their school community. This complex landscape typically includes general education teachers, special education teachers, paraprofessionals, related service providers, school administers, and also their classroom peers. A lack of knowledge about inclusion and its importance can hinder a collaborative effort if all parties are not in agreement or have limited understanding of student needs. Not only may there be disagreement on an inclusive effort from teachers, but students also may not be welcoming to peers with disabilities. Additionally, negative parental attitudes toward inclusion can work to curtail efforts at building inclusive classrooms. Having buy-in from all parties involved in student development and schooling is necessary to create a positive learning environment for all.

9

Challenges to Inclusion

Figure 2. A visual depiction of a student’s support system within the school community

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Changing Attitudes The key to changing the attitudes of those stakeholders is by teaching them why inclusion matters and how it can be done successfully. Results from studies suggest that knowledge of and experience working with students with disabilities can shift the attitudes and perspectives of new teachers who may be initially hesitant in welcoming the special needs population in their classrooms. There may be some bumps along the way, but the first step to welcoming students with disabilities is changing negative perceptions or attitudes about inclusion. This applies to not only general education teachers who have adapt new strategies and practices but also special education teachers who must recognize the benefits of inclusion practices. Results from various surveys and studies have found a range of attitudes and perceptions regarding inclusion (Fuchs, 2010; Gal, et al., 2010; Galaterou, & Antoniou, 2017; Hernandez, et al., 2016). Although many teachers agreed with or felt positively about the practice of inclusion, they also had concerns about the realities of its implementation. Among general education teachers, considerations included class 10

Challenges to Inclusion

size, amount of resources, expertise, and training. There were also additional divides across the level of disability with teachers considering less accessibility of inclusion classrooms for students with more severe disabilities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Teacher Training and Expertise As the understanding of inclusion and its values continue to progress, the knowledge of practices that best serve students with disabilities are also expanding. However, one of the most oft mentioned barriers to the application of such practices is teacher training and competency (Fuchs, 2010; Lindsay, et al., 2013; Lohrmann & Bambara, 2006). Results from surveys and interviews conducted with pre-service teachers suggest that they feel unprepared in meeting the needs of students with disabilities in adapting curricular content and utilizing behavior management strategies to meet their behavioral needs. This is especially prevalent with general education teachers. However, after completing coursework and additional training opportunities, teachers reported a decrease in negative perceptions and a greater sense of competence. However, the realities of teaching are often more complex than the solutions offered in teacher preparation programs or during the limited inservice professional development sessions provided by school districts. McLeskey (2011) found that traditional in-service training for educators in which invited experts speak to a crowd had little impact on teacher practices. Instead, effective professional development opportunities came from a learner-centered approach that targets the specific needs of the teacher. Inclusive teaching, encompassing all learners with and without disabilities, requires a breadth of knowledge that carries across the training for general and special education programs. Mock and Kauffman (2002), offer a critique comparing the requirements for inclusion teachers to that of medical doctors who must complete both general practice and specialization training. Ensuring that teachers are capable of becoming proficient at teaching every single student regardless of their ability, however impactful their need, is inherently an impossible task for one person. It is therefore important to consider the work of inclusion to be a collaborative learning experience. The benefit of a team approach to education is the potential for sharing resources. Special education teachers can be great assets for making curricular modifications and adapting materials to meet the needs of students with disabilities. General education teachers can provide support on accessing specific curricular content. However, continued educational and professional development opportunities are critical in applying best practices toward inclusion. Increases in the placement of students with disabilities in mainstream classrooms necessitates additional training and support for general education teachers. Students with severe needs or the presentation of behavioral challenges may be formidable to any teacher but especially 11

Challenges to Inclusion

to general education teachers that may not have had specific training with targeted populations. Challenges to inclusion reported by these educators include managing problem behavior, lack of training, and resources (Lindsay et al., 2013; Lohrmann & Bambara, 2006). While general education teacher benefit from increased awareness on the challenges facing students with disabilities, special education teachers can learn ways to support students in setting where they are integrated with their typical peers. General education teachers may also have different insights or concerns for students with specials needs and what they need to function within a larger classroom setting. Collaboration with others who may have greater experience or expertise in managing challenges specific to their environment can expand an educator’s repertoire and mitigate those difficulties. Increased awareness and training is necessary to bridge the knowledge gaps between general and special education classrooms. Greater understanding of the principle of inclusion and its practices is important not only to the classroom teachers but also to other education professionals such as paraprofessionals, school principals, classroom peers, and the families of students. Though paraprofessionals have increasingly been assigned to work alongside students with disabilities, they receive limited training and supervision (French, 2003; Marks et al., 1999; Pickett, et al., 2003). The presence of paraprofessionals also have a mixed effect on student growth as they increasingly provide direct instruction but can also lead to an overdependence on an adult presence, inhibiting independence and peer interactions. In order for paraprofessionals to be effective members of a student’s team, their roles and duties need to be clearly defined and they have opportunities to learn additional strategies to aid in their supportive role.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Peers Walking into an inclusive classroom or school, one hopes to see children of all abilities working together or playing with each other. Peer support is a vital component to an inclusive classroom that supports all learners. Students act as peer models and provide a multitude of social and educational support. However, children that have not had broad experiences with individuals with disabilities may not know how to interact or avoid contact altogether. Results from past studies show that students held a variety of beliefs and feeling toward their peers with disabilities, ranging from positive to neutral to negative (de Boer et al., 2012). Typical developing peers who lack knowledge and hold negative views towards those with disabilities may result in adverse relationships inhibit socialization opportunities. Research shows that the risk of bullying and victimization of students with disabilities are significantly higher than their nondisabled peers (Rose, et al. 2011). However, there have been promising results from interventions targeting the increase of information and 12

Challenges to Inclusion

promoting understanding toward people with disabilities (de Boer et al. 2014; Krahé & Altwasser, 2006). The importance of teaching tolerance and understanding of disabilities cannot be overstated to students as negative peer attitudes can result in detrimental inclusion experiences and cause lasting harm.

Families Outside of the school setting, family support for inclusion and positive parental attitudes are essential for the implementation of inclusive education. Parents who support inclusion practices may influence their children towards a more accepting stance on peers with differences. Negative perceptions can interfere with potential progress or overall implementation of inclusion practices within their schools. The views of parents among those with children with disabilities can be varied among types of disabilities. More parents of students with mild or severe disabilities supported inclusion practices as they may recognize the positive effects of peer support (Leyser & Kirk, 2004). On the other hand, parents also express concern over possible loss of services or decrease in the quality of instruction if delivered by general education teachers that do not specialize in special education. Some are uncertain of their children’s potential for social isolation or difficulty in cultivating peer friendships. Additionally, there is the potential for a lack of communication or miscommunication between schools and parents. Consistent exchange of information about student progress is especially important with students with disabilities as it opens the doors for parent interest and acceptance. Parental understanding of inclusion, what it entails, and its benefits can lead to greater support and awareness of the classroom experiences of their child.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Relationship-Based In discussing the numerous members of a student’s learning environment, it is clear that successful inclusion classrooms require a continuum of support encompassing educational professionals, families, and classroom peers. It takes more than a village to sustain effective and long-lasting change. Though there have been shifts in recent years towards supporting more inclusionary practices in education, there is still much left to be done towards comprehensive school reform on a nationwide level. Looking closer at the school-level, the steps for building a supportive learning environment requires establishing a community approach established through reciprocal relationships. Starting with an understanding school administration and all the way down to each individual learner. Positive relationships between each member of the educational team can build a stronger system to provide effective support for the learning opportunities of students with disabilities. 13

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Challenges to Inclusion

The relationship between the general and special education teacher remains at the core of the student’s learning environment. However, it would be remiss to overlook all the other supportive figures who are also involved: the student’s family who form the foundation of their daily experiences, the paraprofessional who often is the person working directly with the students, their classmates who can act as peer models and with whom they can develop reciprocal friendships, the school principal who sets the tone of the inclusive practices for the school, the case manager who ensures that the learning goals and supports are in place and manages the yearly IEP process, or the lunch aides who might give a little extra time to a student on line when choosing their meal. It takes the efforts of many individuals coming together to create a positive environment for all. Inclusion does not just occur in each separate classroom; it should be the norm across the entire school environment. Historically, the view of teachers is one in which there is single teacher, alone in his or her own classroom domain looking over the class of students. For special education teachers, that view be even more isolating. Often the only special education teacher in a school, they operate on their own classroom island. One that might at times be a little crowded, depending on the number of paraprofessionals and service providers that might be working with the students. With the push toward greater inclusion, not only is there a shift to the student landscape, but there are also changes to the way teachers must interact with other educational professionals. Looking closer at the critical relationship between a general education teacher and a special education teacher, there is a variety of team approaches that can take shape. Depending on the individual school or district, general and special education teachers might have separate classrooms where students have opportunities to integrate from one class to the other. In other schools, general and special education teachers function as co-teachers working together with an integrated class. In other instances, general education teachers may have students with disabilities integrated into their class and with consultation from a special education teacher. For students with disabilities, expertise from both teachers are necessary to meet their needs. However, the realities of the teaching world reflect an enormous spectrum of differences in the types of relationships and working environments that surround the collaborating teachers. Some veteran teachers may have a long history and great working relationships with longtime teaching partner. But often, teachers get reassigned or work with new teachers each year. Special education teachers who may have a multi-grade class can have students across many different teachers, each spending different amount of time in every class. This leads to the potential for a slew of mixed working relationships. Also consider that across all these settings, other educational professionals – related service staff and paraprofessionals are additional contributing team members that need to be included. All of these professionals must work hand-in-hand in order to 14

Challenges to Inclusion

meet the needs of the students. However, relationships between teachers are complex and there are risks of conflicting personalities, teaching styles, disproportionate workloads, impossible expectations, and lack of support that can create toxic working environments. In co-teaching environments, teachers emphasized the importance of compatibility and communication as central tenets to an effective partnership (Keefe & Moore, 2004). However, teachers do not often have a choice in either participating in an inclusion classroom or who they will teach with. Furthermore, Fennick & Liddy (2001) reported little to no mutual planning time between teachers during school hours. With regard to classroom responsibilities, open communication and allocation of teaching duties is also essential. Without clear delegation or openness to collaboration, teachers may fall prey to teaching disparities or create a classroom that does not hold to inclusion practices. Teachers may unintentionally turn to the population that they were originally trained to work with and create two separate classrooms inhabiting one physical space. Although both teachers hold expertise in their respective fields, the underlying basis of inclusion is that of unity and creating a space that is open to all.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS As inclusion opportunities grow and greater numbers of students with disabilities continue to be taught general education classrooms, challenges to effective inclusion persist and evolve. Just because students are included does not mean that they will thrive in that environment. Participation in an inclusive setting does not necessarily mean that students will make educational or social and emotional gains. It requires considerable effort from educators and stakeholders to provide the appropriate support to meet the needs of students with special needs. In order to overcome the many barriers to a positive and inclusive learning environment, there are a number of matters to consider. Setting apart the changes that need to occur at the federal and state level to prioritize funding and educational research, there are steps that can be taken by educators to promote inclusive opportunities at the school level. As a collaborative experience, educators from all backgrounds need to build on the strengths of one another and share in their expertise. Gaps that might be found in the teacher repertoires of their general and special education counterparts can be filled through reciprocal cooperation. Most importantly, teachers need to find the time to collaborate and stay up to date regarding students that they serve. With the widespread use of technology, teachers no longer need to meet face-to-face or over the phone. They can update each other and collaborate through video conferencing or a shared online document and potentially squeeze in more time for shared planning 15

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Challenges to Inclusion

and collaboration. New technology can not only aid teachers but can also provide greater accommodations to students without high effort by teachers. Technology can assist students with fine motor difficulties who can type responses if they struggle with writing. Computers and tablets can be utilized as learning and communication tools. They can circumvent limited curricular resources and adapt to the needs of each student. Although many environmental barriers to inclusion require substantial effort to remediate, there are other strategies schools can take to bolster the potential for inclusion opportunities by increasing the proficiency of its teachers. Results from numerous studies show that one of the most effective and influential tools to creating inclusive classrooms is teacher training and sustained professional development (Busby et al., 2012; Kurniawati et al., 2017). This is especially true of training preservice teachers who are developing their knowledge and skills. Research conducted before and after taking coursework on integrating students with disabilities suggest higher levels of proficiency and more positive attitudes toward inclusion practices (McCray & McHatton, 2011). Having appropriate field and practicum experience also affects the proficiency of teachers especially when working with students with disabilities (Swain et al., 2011). Not only is it important to come to the classroom well trained in your field, but it is also necessary to support the growth of your knowledge and experiences. Positive attitudes toward inclusive practices and a willingness to adapt and collaborate is also vital to being able to meet the needs of diverse learners. Burgeoning research into the establishment of inclusive schools may also push for additional support in a more far reaching manner. Instead of having one model inclusion classroom, opening the entire school to an inclusion framework may help ameliorate the pressures felt by isolated teachers. One school has taken this approach by integrating all learners regardless of disability across classrooms (McLeskey et al., 2012). Results from this case study are promising with a high level of inclusion operating with resources typical to average schools. Teachers reported a focus on professional development that targets practical strategies for inclusion and a deliberate, collaborative effort toward best practices for all learners. Building an inclusive schoolwide community with the cooperation and efforts of all staff may provide a solution to some of the challenges faced by inclusion classrooms. Extending past the scope of schools, developing a positive home-school partnership between families and school personnel can also expand the range of an inclusive learning experience. Consistent effort and open communication are necessary to build a foundation of trust between both parties. This requires active engagement not only towards student goals from home and school but also between parents and educators. Communication remains at the forefront of effective collaboration. Establishing open dialogue allows either parties to provide support and aid to the 16

Challenges to Inclusion

other, especially if there are successful strategies that can carry across environments. Teachers may have information or resources to community support networks. Parents can provide useful insights about their child. Additionally, increasing sensitivity toward perspectives from the other party is important to understand and respect each other’s experiences (Mann & Gilmore, 2021). Collaborative relationships require participation and continuous input to create and maintain an inclusive environment where expectations are shared across school and home. The goal for parents and teachers alike are for students to succeed and have a positive learning experience.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Education research highlights the demand for a cohesive, on-the-ground strategies for teachers to use in classrooms. However, limited resources, teaching materials, and time leave teachers with few resources toward creating successful inclusive practices. The capacity for adapting instruction to include students across a spectrum of abilities requires additional research toward effective intervention practices. Current research includes teacher perspectives on inclusion which informs what educators need (e.g., additional training, shared planning time, etc.) but future research should focus on how (e.g., specific interventions) educators can provide effective inclusion opportunities. There are many surveys on teacher concerns toward inclusion but less about effective teaching strategies that incorporate collaborative efforts from both general and special education teachers. Research highlights the importance of inclusion but there is little on what can be done in classrooms to increase the scale of its practices. More research is necessary to determine the characteristics of effectiveness of inclusive schools and whether or not results can be replicated across different communities. Additionally, questions about the learning outcomes of students participating in inclusion classrooms also need to be investigated to determine the impact of integrated learning. The expansion of inclusion practices must consider the long-term effects of students who are enrolled. Comparison models between types of inclusion classrooms may also help to identify the most effective framework for shared learning experiences. Past studies have also focused on teacher perspectives toward inclusion, but additional research is needed on the perspectives of students enrolled in classrooms. Self-advocacy and classroom choices for students with and without disabilities remain to be explored.

17

Challenges to Inclusion

CONCLUSION It is clear that making inclusion work comes with immense challenges for educators. Some of those challenges such as physical barriers or lack of funding for materials and supplies are hurdles that cannot be tackled by the efforts of individual teachers. Change may come one day but until then, teachers must focus on working together and combining resources to build greater opportunities for learners of all abilities. General and special education teachers can supplement and balance each other’s strengths and weaknesses. Educators and administrators need to adequately provide additional training, time, materials, and overall support for teachers in order to create more inclusive classrooms. The future of inclusion continues to expand and take shape as it spreads to a greater number of schools. Adults working in school need to act as collaborative models for inclusion, demonstrating to their students firsthand that working together creates a stronger community no matter your differences.

REFERENCES Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., Wakeman, S., Trela, K., & Baker, J. N. (2006). Aligning instruction with academic content standards: Finding the link. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(4), 309–321. doi:10.1177/154079690603100404 Burstein, N., Sears, S., Wilcoxen, A., Cabello, B., & Spagna, M. (2004). Moving toward inclusive practices. Remedial and Special Education, 25(2), 104–116. doi: 10.1177/07419325040250020501 Busby, R., Ingram, R., Bowron, R., Oliver, J., & Lyons, B. (2012). Teaching elementary children with autism: Addressing teacher challenges and preparation needs. Rural Educator, 33(2), 27–35.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Coster, W., Law, M., Bedell, G., Liljenquist, K., Kao, Y. C., Khetani, M., & Teplicky, R. (2013). School participation, supports and barriers of students with and without disabilities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 39(4), 535–543. doi:10.1111/ cch.12046 PMID:23763254 de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2012). Students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities: A review of the literature. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 59(4), 379–392. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2012.723944

18

Challenges to Inclusion

de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., Minnaert, A., & Post, W. (2014). Evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention program to influence attitudes of students towards peers with disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(3), 572–583. doi:10.100710803-013-1908-6 PMID:23982486 Dessemontet, R. S., Bless, G., & Morin, D. (2012). Effects of inclusion on the academic achievement and adaptive behaviour of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56(6), 579–587. doi:10.1111/j.13652788.2011.01497.x PMID:22044586 Egilson, S. T., & Traustadottir, R. (2009). Participation of students with physical disabilities in the school environment. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63(3), 264–272. doi:10.5014/ajot.63.3.264 PMID:19522135 Eriksson, L., Welander, J., & Granlund, M. (2007). Participation in everyday school activities for children with and without disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 19(5), 485–502. doi:10.100710882-007-9065-5 Fennick, E., & Liddy, D. (2001). Responsibilities and preparation for collaborative teaching: Co-teachers’ perspectives. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 229–240. doi:10.1177/088840640102400307 French, N. K. (2003). Paraeducators in special education programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 36(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.17161/foec. v36i2.6869 Fuchs, W. W. (2010). Examining teachers’ perceived barriers associated with inclusion. SRATE Journal, 19(1), 30-35. Gal, E., Schreur, N., & Engel-Yeger, B. (2010). Inclusion of children with disabilities: Teachers’ attitudes and requirements for environmental accommodations. International Journal of Special Education, 25(2), 89–99.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Galaterou, J., & Antoniou, A. S. (2017). Teachers’ Attitudes towards Inclusive Education: The Role of Job Stressors and Demographic Parameters. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 643–658. Gehrke, R. S., & Cocchiarella, M. (2013). Preservice special and general educators’ knowledge of inclusion. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(3), 204–216. doi:10.1177/0888406413495421

19

Challenges to Inclusion

Goldring, R., Gray, L., & Bitterman, A. (2013). Characteristics of public and private elementary and secondary school teachers in the United States: Results from the 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Survey. First Look. NCES 2013-314. National Center for Education Statistics. Hernandez, D. A., Hueck, S., & Charley, C. (2016). General Education and Special Education Teachers’ Attitudes towards Inclusion. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 79-93. Jackson, L. B., Ryndak, D. L., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2008). The dynamic relationship between context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a research-based practice. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 34(1), 175–195. doi:10.2511/rpsd.33.4.175 Krahé, B., & Altwasser, C. (2006). Changing negative attitudes towards persons with physical disabilities: An experimental intervention. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 59–69. doi:10.1002/casp.849 Kurniawati, F., De Boer, A. A., Minnaert, A. E. M. G., & Mangunsong, F. (2017). Evaluating the effect of a teacher training programme on the primary teachers’ attitudes, knowledge and teaching strategies regarding special educational needs. Educational Psychology, 37(3), 287–297. doi:10.1080/01443410.2016.1176125 Kurth, J. A., & Keegan, L. (2014). Development and use of curricular adaptations for students receiving special education services. The Journal of Special Education, 48(3), 191–203. doi:10.1177/0022466912464782

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Lee, S. H., Amos, B. A., Gragoudas, S., Lee, Y., Shogren, K. A., Theoharis, R., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2006). Curriculum augmentation and adaptation strategies to promote access to the general curriculum for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 199–212. Lee, S. H., Soukup, J. H., Little, T. D., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2009). Student and teacher variables contributing to access to the general education curriculum for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 43(1), 29–44. doi:10.1177/0022466907313449 Lee, S. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Soukup, J. H., & Palmer, S. B. (2010). Impact of curriculum modifications on access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76(2), 213–233. doi:10.1177/001440291007600205

20

Challenges to Inclusion

Leyser, Y., & Kirk, R. (2004). Evaluating inclusion: An examination of parent views and factors influencing their perspectives. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 51(3), 271–285. doi:10.1080/1034912042000259233 Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Thomson, N., & Scott, H. (2013). Educators’ challenges of including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 60(4), 347–362. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2013.846470 Lohrmann, S., & Bambara, L. M. (2006). Elementary education teachers’ beliefs about essential supports needed to successfully include students with developmental disabilities who engage in challenging behaviors. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(2), 157–173. doi:10.1177/154079690603100208 Mann, G., & Gilmore, L. (2021). Barriers to positive parent-teacher partnerships: The views of parents and teachers in an inclusive education context. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–13. doi:10.1080/13603116.2021.1900426 Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999). Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings: Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Exceptional Children, 65(3), 315–328. doi:10.1177/001440299906500303 McHatton, P. A., & Parker, A. (2013). Purposeful preparation: Longitudinally exploring inclusion attitudes of general and special education pre-Service teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(3), 186–203. doi:10.1177/0888406413491611 McLeskey, J. (2011). Supporting improved practice for special education teachers. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1). McLeskey, J., Landers, E., Williamson, P., & Hoppey, D. (2012). Are we moving toward educating students with disabilities in less restrictive settings? The Journal of Special Education, 46(3), 131–140. doi:10.1177/0022466910376670

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (2006). Comprehensive school reform and inclusive schools. Theory into Practice, 45(3), 269–278. doi:10.120715430421tip4503_9 Mock, D. R., & Kauffman, J. M. (2002). Preparing teachers for full inclusion: Is it possible? Teacher Educator, 37(3), 202–215. doi:10.1080/08878730209555294 Pickett, A. L., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2003). The employment and preparation of paraeducators. The State of the Art. Pivik, J., McComas, J., & Laflamme, M. (2002). Barriers and facilitators to inclusive education. Exceptional Children, 69(1), 97–107. doi:10.1177/001440290206900107

21

Challenges to Inclusion

Rose, C. A., Monda-Amaya, L. E., & Espelage, D. L. (2011). Bullying perpetration and victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32(2), 114–130. doi:10.1177/0741932510361247 Ross‐Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188–198. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x Shin, M., Lee, H., & McKenna, J. W. (2016). Special education and general education preservice teachers’ co-teaching experiences: A comparative synthesis of qualitative research. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(1), 107–191. doi:10.10 80/13603116.2015.1074732 Simeonsson, R. J., Carlson, D., Huntington, G. S., McMillen, J. S., & Brent, J. L. (2001). Students with disabilities: A national survey of participation in school activities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23(2), 49–63. doi:10.1080/096382801750058134 PMID:11214716 Siperstein, G. N., Parker, R. C., Bardon, J. N., & Widaman, K. F. (2007). A National Study of Youth Attitudes toward the Inclusion of Students with Intellectual Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 435–455. doi:10.1177/001440290707300403 Soukup, J. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Bashinski, S. M., & Bovaird, J. A. (2007). Classroom variables and access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 101–120. doi:10.1177/001440290707400106 Taub, D. A., McCord, J. A., & Ryndak, D. L. (2017). Opportunities to learn for students with extensive support needs: A context of research-supported practices for all in general education classes. The Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127–137. doi:10.1177/0022466917696263

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Williamson, P., Hoppey, D., McLeskey, J., Bergmann, E., & Moore, H. (2020). Trends in LRE placement rates over the past 25 years. The Journal of Special Education, 53(4), 236–244. doi:10.1177/0022466919855052

22

23

Chapter 2

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion: Students With Disabilities in Higher Education Vimbi Petrus Mahlangu https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8251-750X University of South Africa, South Africa Sithabile Ntombela https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4196-9769 University of South Africa, South Africa

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT Higher education institutions have a responsibility to address past and present social inequalities, one of which is the marginalization of people with disabilities in education. The chapter explores and highlights leadership challenges to the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education (HE). A qualitative approach and interpretive paradigm will be used to review the literature and analyze documents as data generation methods. The chapter will contribute to the debate on the role of leadership in the inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. Aspects such as the cognitive, emotional, and behavioral factors are key in understanding the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE. Some of the leadership challenges to the inclusion of students with disabilities, amongst others, include institutional and architectural barriers, leadership strategies, and institutional policies. Policy and practice may serve to obscure the challenges of inclusion.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch002 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION The South African Department of Education (1997) and Angelides (2011) note that universally, education system in democratic societies seek to provide their learners with equal opportunities to quality education to enable them to reach their full potential. These are opportunities to learn, develop and participate in curricular and extracurricular activities as young people are prepared for meaningful citizenship. However, despite these noble intentions, there are many students who do not benefit from education because they experience barriers to learning. Barriers to learning, development and participation are those factors that prevent the system of education from accommodating diversity, thus causing learning breakdown or limiting learners’ access to education (DoE, 1997). Barriers to learning are sometimes located within students (disabilities, psychological and/or emotional issues) and sometimes external to students (negative attitudes, inaccessible learning environments, rigid teaching methods, etc.) (DoE, 1997). Regardless of their location, it is important for educational institutions to find ways to minimize the impact of these barriers on the teaching and learning process. This realization led to The Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) which called for governments to develop responsive and inclusive systems of education where all students, regardless of differences, are valued and able to participate. Addressing issues of diversity is one of the key goals and responsibilities of universities. This chapter focuses on the education of people with disabilities as an aspect of diversity agenda or what Adserias, Charleston and Jackson (2017:316) refer to as “identity-based social inequities”. We concur with Salmi & D’Addio (2021) that attaining a higher education qualification has enormous benefits potential to improve the quality of life for all young people. The benefits are even bigger for people with disabilities who generally struggle to access and success in higher education. Therefore, the full inclusion of students with disabilities should be prioritized in Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) to ensure that they, like other students, can have positive educational outcomes and enjoy social and private benefits that accrue. However, Adserias et al., (2017) maintain that universities tend to be change resistant, therefore, implementing a diversity agenda is not easy. They add that leadership is critical in changing the culture/climate within organisations. Bunescu (2021) shares the same sentiments, arguing that the support of institutional leadership is important for the development of strategy as well as for the provision of resources to ensure sustainability of diversity initiatives. The intention of this chapter is to contribute to Building Integrated Collaborative Relationships for Inclusive Learning Settings. The number of university students with disabilities is increasing in many countries. The United Nations Human RightsOffice of the High Commission (2020) asserts that persons with disabilities face 24

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

discrimination and barriers that restrict them from participating in society on an equal basis with others every day. They are often denied the right to be included in education, including Higher Education (HE). Facilitating their access to and participation in education is not just placing them in the same classroom as other students without disabilities but, as Ntombela and Mahlangu (2019) maintain, requires systematic reforms that support their inclusion. Unfortunately, this support is often lacking, even in the context of inclusion. In essence, inclusive education remains a contested concept, and its implementation within HE and across countries arguably differs and continues to be met with challenges. Collaborative leadership and collaborative practices are widely accepted as tenets for supporting inclusive education (Bhroin and King, 2020). Collaborative leadership, also called facilitative leadership, adaptive leadership, integral leadership, and catalytic leadership, focuses on power sharing among groups, units, and organizations (Hsieh & Liou, 2018). Collaborative leadership in decision-making and problem-solving ought to be at the core of inclusive education for all students, especially those with disabilities. The culture of HE may result in some students feeling lonely, marginalized, and even pushed-out. In this chapter, the term inclusion will be underpinned by assumptions of social interaction (Tobbell, Burton, Gaynor, Golding, Greenhough, Rhodes, & White, 2020). Also, attempts will be made to operationalise the term to feature social structures of students with disabilities in HE. Against this backdrop, this chapter attempts to highlight the role of leadership in promoting acceptance and support for diversity. It also argues that lack of collaborative leadership could entrench resistance to the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE, thus causing barriers to learning.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Method The chapter intends to investigate ‘Leadership Challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education settings’. A qualitative approach and interpretive paradigm will be used in understanding the challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in HE settings from the leadership perspective. Methods to be used in gathering information will consist of a literature review and document analysis. The three main documents to be reviewed are the Education White Paper 3 - A programme for the transformation of higher education (DoE, 1997), the Higher Education Act (Republic of South Africa, 1997) and the National Plan for Higher Education (DoE, 2001). The focus of these proclamations is the transformation of HE so that past inequalities can be addressed.

25

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

PURPOSE OF THE CHAPTER The transformation of institutions depends much on how those in leadership understand and embrace the transformation agenda. Successful transformation also depends on how leadership is effective is sharing their vision such that those they lead buy into it as their own. The purpose of this chapter is to understand and highlight leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. Arguments in this chapter aim at encouraging positive leadership change by indicating the challenges to improve inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. HE student population may include students from a range of socio-economic groups, ethnicities and genders but that does not mean that all students will be integrated within HE. Policy and practice may serve to obscure the challenges that leadership experience to inclusion of students with disabilities in HE because embracing diversity does not inevitably lead to inclusion (Tobell, et al. 2020).

Research Question The overarching questions this chapter is trying to understand are: What leadership style/s are effective in promoting inclusion in education? What are the leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education? Borland and James (1999) believe that higher education institutions will only admit students if they are convinced that the students will be able to cope with their disabilities irrespective of their level of academic achievement.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Theoretical Background The theoretical context shedding light on the issue of this chapter draws from literature on leadership and the philosophy of inclusion. This literature informs the conceptual framework for understanding leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in HE. Endres and Weibler (2020) believe that leadership is a dynamic, socially constructed influence process that must be used in dealing with the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE. To them, leadership will only occur when others grant or ascribe leadership, and that individuals construct and internalise a leader. In support of Weibler (2020); DeMatthews (2014) think that in developing a high-quality, critical, strategy to inclusion of students with disabilities in HE requires strong leadership and can be problematic for those leaders who lack appropriate skills. An effective leader must be aware of different leadership theories, and accurately selects appropriate leadership responses that are in part guided by theory. Theories and concepts associated with social justice leadership provide insight and a foundation for how leadership should be applied in HE to 26

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

accommodate those students with disabilities. Social justice leadership theories emphasize the role of the leaders in dismantling barriers and obstacles to equity for disabled student groups. Therefore, in this chapter social justice leadership must be the exercise of altering HEIs arrangements by actively engaging in reclaiming, appropriating, and advancing inherent human rights of equity, equality, and fairness in accommodating disabled students.

International Perspectives: Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in Higher Education Internationally, there is acknowledgement that learners are diverse in many ways and inclusive education has become an accepted educational response thereto (Hongbiao & Ching-sing, 2020). Pavonne, Bellacicco & Cinotti (2019) remind us that inclusion is a human rights issue and that the guiding principles in the Salamanca Statement, particularly the inclusive approach, has influenced university life and lifelong learning. Morina & Perera (2020) argue that it is a constant struggle to meet the needs of students with disabilities in universities, not only because of architectural barriers that tend to limit their movement and participation, but also because of limitations in accessing the curriculum and related resources.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

What Leadership Style/s are Effective in Promoting Inclusion in Education? In this chapter Inclusive leadership is seen as effective in promoting inclusion in education. These are leaders who exhibit openness, accessibility, and availability in their interactions with followers. These three aspects of inclusive leadership not only reflect the leader’s care and concern for the follower, but also allow inclusive leaders to communicate their desirable expectations with followers effectively. In other words, inclusive leaders are open, willing to listen to employees and discuss new ways for achieving the work goals and paying attention to new opportunities. They encourage open communication to invite inputs from followers, have concern for the interests, expectations, and feelings of followers, and are available and willing to help followers. It is expected that inclusive leadership should help to shape team members’ beliefs that their voices are genuinely valued (Choi, Tran, & Kang, 2017). Echols (2009) believe that no strong consensus on the definition and praxis of leadership exists because of the difficulty of predicting the effect of a particular leadership stance in combination with an incalculable number of random factors that make up the leadership moment. The inclusive leader influences and empowers constituents for the betterment of all without negative repercussions on the individual or groups. The inclusive leader must reject the notion that certain groups have no 27

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

place at the table in regard to decision making. Leaders who practice inclusion often believe it is not only morally wrong to marginalize certain groups of students in education, but it is a grossly ineffective means of leadership that will minimize or even destroy the potential energy and creativity of any student. Randel, Galvin, Shore, Ehrhart, Chung, Dean and Kedharnath (2018) think inclusive leadership enables the effective functioning of diverse work groups in ways that are not sufficiently addressed by other forms of leadership. Inclusive leadership as a set of leader behaviors that are focused on facilitating group members feeling part of the group (belongingness) and retaining their sense of individuality (uniqueness) while contributing to group processes and outcomes. Inclusive leadership must be about supporting individuals as group members, ensures justice and equity and shares in decision-making. Fang, Chen, Wang and Chen (2019) believe that inclusive leadership style was initially studied in the field of Western education. People of different races and abilities should be educated inclusively. It is believed that inclusive leadership in education requires the following: (1) an equal collective leadership process and must be seen as the presence of a learning leader. Leaders should listen to the opinions of all students, attach importance to encouragement of them, and show their recognition when students make achievements; (2) Leaders should respect and treat all students fairly. That is, the leaders can treat disabled students fairly, and justly respect their suggestions. (3) Leaders should rationally understand employees and tolerate their failures. That is, when disabled students make mistakes, leaders can rationally tolerate and understand them. In HE, inclusive leadership can be judged from the interaction between leaders and students and that inclusive leadership need to be open, effective, and accessible through the process of open communication with all students. Sergiovanni (1992) cited in Kugelmaas (2003) regards leadership as action and ideas. Ashikali, Groeneveld and Kuipers (2020) believe that to encourage feelings of inclusion in HE, a climate needs to be created where diverse students have the opportunity to be themselves and are treated as insiders, as well as learning from and utilizing the differences among them. To experience inclusion, disabled students need to feel they belong to the group, meaning that each of them is treated as an insider, while having the opportunity to sustain and express their unique identities. This requires differences among students to be valued; everyone is encouraged to remain their authentic self, rather than being stimulated to adhere to the culture or norms of dominant groups within HE (Ashikali, Groeneveld & Kuipers, 2020). Similarly, Angelides (2011) maintains that when leadership is distributed, it facilitates student improvement and educational change. Also, inclusive leadership must not be in terms of capabilities of individual students but as a collective process in which every student is included or fairly represented. There is a strong correlation 28

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

between leadership style and practice and institutional culture (Carter & Abawi, 2018). In HE distributed leadership structure must be used as a strategy to empower others to lead and to establish structures that promote inclusivity. There are leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education. Morina & Perera’s study (2020) found that even though students with disabilities declare the nature and severity of their disability when applying for admission, this information seldom reaches academics which leaves them clueless as to how to plan for their classes or to support these students. If such information does not reach academics, then who uses it and for what purposes?

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaboration for Inclusion Collaboration can be explained as ‘an interactive method where a number of people with particular expertise come together as equals to generate appropriate strategies or solutions to problems’.. Collaboration must be seen as an integral to the inclusion of students with special educational needs, and leadership with specialists’ knowledge are expected to find solutions for all students and those with disabilities within the higher education systems (Bhroin and King, 2020). Similarly, Emmers, Baeyens and Petry (2020) believe that leadership in HE is expected to create an inclusive culture, such as inclusive values and an open climate where all students are welcome. Also, they believe that to implement inclusive leadership practices leaders must use inclusive strategies and collaboration to support students with disabilities and create an inclusive policy. However, the importance of these factors is little researched at the level of HE; as a result, there is no overarching overview, and students with disabilities still experience problems with each of these aspects. Whist leadership has a critical role to play in promoting an inclusive culture in HE, it is also important that we all become proactive and collaborate in identifying barriers that could be limiting the access of some groups to educational opportunities in higher education. Ainscow (2016) suggests that we should also identify resources that are available locally and nationally which could be instrumental in overcoming those barriers. In her leadership for inclusion study, Kugelmaas (2003:11-12) concludes that inclusive cultures develop through “shared commitment by staff to processes that produced an overall enhancement in participation among everyone at an institution.” She adds that collaboration promotes appreciation for individual differences and how these offer “opportunities for enrichment” (Kugelmaas, 2003:13) Kugelmaas’ study (2003) shows that developing inclusive culture is a product of staff’s shared commitment to enhance the participation of all. She found that collaboration indicates the presence of inclusive values, that it redefines and

29

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

distributes leadership, “reinforcing a sense of community and of mutual trust’ Kugelmaas, 2003: 19).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Barriers to Inclusion This section explores the role of leadership in addressing some of these barriers to promote the inclusion of students with disabilities. Inclusion is a philosophy based on values aiming to maximise the participation of all in society and education by minimising exclusionary and discriminatory practices. The definition and practice of inclusive education, however, can vary significantly not only between cultures and educational systems but also within cultures and educational system. inclusive education is not limited to the inclusion of those children or young people with disabilities. Inclusion is inclusion of all regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, gender, sexual orientation, language, socio-economic status, and any other aspect of an individual’s identity that might be perceived as different (Polat, 2011). According to the United Nations Human Rights (2014), discrimination against persons with disabilities has a long history and takes various forms. These range from invidious discrimination, such as the denial of educational opportunities, to more subtle forms of discrimination such as segregation and isolation achieved through the imposition of physical and social barriers. Some obstacles encountered by students with disabilities in HE, amongst others, include institutional barriers, architectural barriers (lighting, acoustics, furniture, etc.) and those linked to faculty members, such as teaching methodology, attitude toward disability, lack of reasonable adjustments, and the need for disability training (Moriña & Perera, 2020). Many researchers believe that attitudes ought to consist of three components: cognitive, emotional, and behavioral. The cognitive component affects the beliefs teachers hold about students with disabilities, while the emotional component deals with teachers’ feelings regarding students with disabilities and inclusion. The behavioral component refers to teachers’ actions based on their beliefs and feelings (Pelt, 2020). Although Hongbiao & Ching-sing (2020) focused on school-level and not university education, there are similarities between the two levels. Besides, it is important to offer quality education at all levels of education, thus promoting what Pavone, Bellacicco & Cinotti (2019:124) regard as “transition between levels of study”. Hongbiao & Ching-sing (2020) maintain that creating inclusive learning cultures is not easy, that it requires the development of professional learning communities where teachers can be supported. This is important as those who teach might not understand the learning needs of students with special needs. Higher education institutions are no different and the need for faculty to create responsive learning environments is just as urgent as it is at school level.

30

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Ntombela (2020) cites the SAHRC (2018) which posits that students with disabilities discontinue their studies because there are no reasonable accommodations but persistent lack of knowledge and general ignorance about disabilities. Due to this lack of support in higher education, fewer students with disabilities pursue postgraduate studies. It is in this regard that the educational experiences of students with disabilities are said to be significantly different from their peers without disabilities (RSA, 2016). Pavone et al., (2019) note that although there are improvements in some areas, what remains missing in institutional policies and procedures is support for these students. The dominance of the medical model also continues to create barriers in that individual support is prioritized instead of transforming the system by mainstreaming disability. In a study conducted in Tanzania from 1998-2008 (Lehtomäki, Tuomi & Matonya, 2014), it was found that accessibility of children with disabilities to education was hindered by the following:

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. The inappropriate architectural design of school buildings made them inaccessible, especially to children with visual and physical impairments. 2. Teachers, school administrators and the public at large, failed to identify children with disabilities and their needs. 3. Many teachers lacked training, knowledge and experience regarding disability and, consequently, considered inclusive education, that is, having children with disabilities in their school, to be beyond their professional capacity. 4. The lack of the essential teaching and learning materials and facilities. The report concluded that perhaps the largest obstacle is that ‘‘not much concerted institutionalized efforts are being made to break these barriers. Similarly, Glazzarda (2011) found that the following barriers affect inclusion in education:(a) attitudinal barriers: Inclusion will remain a signiðcant challenge if practitioners are not committed to its principles and it will be impossible if practitioners fail to embrace their responsibilities for the education of all children; (b)One-to-one support: Support away from the classroom is detrimental to pupils’ self-esteem and fosters a climate of dependency; (c)Teamwork: Effective inclusion depends on the availability of support in the classroom; (d)Standards agenda: Standards agenda may prevent practitioners from effectively implementing inclusion; (e)Training: Inadequate trained teachers to educate children with special educational needs is a challenge; (f) Parental resistance: Parents are likely to be resistant to the inclusion of children with social, emotional and behavioural difðculties in education; and (g) Resources: Lack of resources is a barrier to effective inclusion of disabled student in education. 31

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Also, common curricular goals may pose a serious difficulty for disabled students in education. For example, teachers may have difficulties in providing disabled students with a curriculum content identical to that of abled students in HE; Contexts is a challenge because it will pose a difficulty of giving disabled students individual attention in the classroom.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Inclusion Strategies in HE Inclusion must be understood as a social justice construct that interrupts the legacy of racial, language, cultural and disability and it equalizes opportunities for marginalised students in HE. This definition is informed by the democratic principles of belonging, critical dialogue; and the stakeholders’ perspectives being valued in the decisionmaking process. When applied to HEIs situations, inclusion challenges the extent to which those deemed as ‘others’ have been excluded from participating in higher education, e.g. the disabled students (Temple & Ylitalo, 2009). The Higher Education Act (Council on Higher Education, 1997) spearheaded the implementation of inclusive education in HE, South Africa. As such, there has been a gradual increase in the enrolment of students with disabilities in South African HE institutions. In addition to providing access to these students, Ntombela and Mahlangu (2019:203), suggest that HEIs should “be equipped with the necessary resources, knowledge and desire to create inclusive learning environments for all students.” This, in our view, is the role of leadership. The question is how can leadership encourage such a culture? One way may be to promote a collaborative culture amongst faculty. Co-teaching is collaboration strategy that can be used to support inclusive education. Collaboration between lecturers can have a beneficial effect on developing inclusive learning environments. Hansen, Carrington, Jensen, Molbæk and Schmidt (2020) believe that the inclusion of students with disabilities is the responsibility of leadership in negotiating policies that will enable these students’ individuality and collectivity to be accommodated in HE. Temple & Ylitalo, (2009) believe that since universities are considered political environments where power, resources, relationships, and cultures are interwoven into the organisational theory, the ideals of inclusion cannot be without the leaders’ willingness to change. Inclusion is about transformation. There is a need for this transformation to take place in higher education (HE). The Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994) promotes equality of access and opportunities for all. It stresses the significance of getting the perspectives of people with disabilities, highlighting the need to weave a thread from school to university and work context (UNESCO, 1994). Ainscow (2016) reminds us that education “is a basic human right and the foundation for a more just society”, and he cites the vision of Education for All declaration (1990) which is promotion of equity through universalization of access to children, youth and 32

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

adults. Similarly, Pavone et al (2019) view the Salamanca Statement as a reminder that inclusion addresses the issue of human rights and fights discrimination. They add that this statement urges higher education institutions to incorporate the perspectives of people with disabilities in their research and training. The Salamanca Statement advocates for inclusion, a concept that frames the transformation of education systems in the quest to become responsive and equitable (Ainscow, 2016). In motivating for inclusive education, he provides educational, social and economic justifications. Educationally, he states the importance of developing teaching strategies that benefit all and socially, he advocates for non-discrimination and acceptance of difference. The economic justification of this is that it costs less both emotionally and economically (Ainscow, 2016). In general, access to HE is important for all. However, it is even more important for people with disabilities as Morina and Perera (2020) remind us that university education has potential to improve the quality of life of people with disabilities. Although there is increase in the number of students with disabilities accessing HE, the number of SWD remains much smaller than that of students without disabilities (Pavone et al, 2019). Pavone et al, (2019) stress the importance of providing PWD with quality education at all levels to facilitate their active citizenship. This is possible through the provision of reasonable accommodations and targeted support to promote learning and participation (ibid, 2019). However, Morina and Perera (2020) caution that universities are also discriminatory institutions in that they are selective who has access and who is retained to complete their studies. Some of the strategies that can be used in dealing with inclusion are the following: 1. Pedagogy is one strategy of dealing with inclusion. A specialist esoteric pedagogy can be used to meet the needs of students with SEN; 2. Specialist teaching materials. The availability of equipment and extra funding in HE can help with equipment, computers or anything that might be there that would keep disabled students occupied. 3. Interactions with non-disabled peers. Integration with nondisabled peers can help disabled students with inclusion in HE. 4. Knowledge of learning disability. Those students without disability may confuse learning disability with mental health disability. 5. Understanding of learning disability. Understanding by nondisabled students of the implications of learning disability for disabled students can help these students with a learning disability to be understood (Ring & Travers, 2005). These strategies highlight the need for HEIs to adopt the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) approach. UDL is a framework that promotes the creation of flexible teaching and learning designs, allowing all learners to make progress from 33

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

where they are instead of where we think they should be. There are varied options to do this, thereby providing effective instruction to all learners (CAST, 2011). This framework acknowledges diversity and discredits the “one size fits all” mentality, thus bringing to the centre all learners, especially those vulnerable to exclusion (Cast, 2011). UDL suggests “flexible goals, methods, materials, and assessments that empower educators to meet these varied needs” (CAST, 2011:4).

Theoretical Implications The chapter recognizes leadership as critical to the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE. Leadership strategies that can be used to promote the inclusion of students with disabilities should be inclusive and collaborative in nature to support students. Leadership is a critical component in mitigating the challenges of inclusion of disabled students in higher education settings. Inclusive classes in higher education can provide opportunities to individuals with disabilities to be accepted by their peers. The inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education requires a policy framework that will acknowledge that contexts differ from institution to institution. The absence of support from institutional leadership and the absence of institutional policy on inclusion may lead to disconnected and unsustainable activities (Bunescu, 2021). As such, these would fail to bring about the desired cultural changes in how students with disabilities are viewed and supported in higher education.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Practical Implications Like Salmi & D’Addio (2021:68), who advocate that “greater priority must be given to students with disability in terms of defining their needs, providing sufficient resources, and empowering higher education institutions to place this dimension high on their agenda.”, we concur that this matter requires a wholistic approach as inclusion and equity are two sides of the same coin. We also realize that there is no magic bullet that will guarantee the inclusion of disabled students in HEIs. Hence, it is important for leaders in HE to recognize the differences in student population and frame policies that promote respect, participation, and equitable admission practices at universities. The strategy should be based on systematic and ongoing dialogue to include these students. HE institutions should develop policies that are inclusive and ensure that faculty has supported. Inclusive education can provide prospects for students with disabilities to study together with those students without disabilities. The chapter has some significant implications for HE leadership. The lack of knowledge and understanding of disabled students’ plight in higher education is a barrier to leadership to make inclusion a reality. It is important for leaders to create inclusive educational environments where all participants feel valued, welcomed 34

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

and supported to succeed. In addition, we argue that the inclusion of students with disabilities in HE should be driven by economic imperatives to enable them to attain economic independence. When HE institutions adopt curricula that is created using UDL, from the outset it is designed to meet the needs of all learners, thus removing the need to make costly adjustments later (CAST, 2011). However, leadership is not a panacea for all challenges in HEIs. It does not come with a problem-solving strategy. But it has the benefit of provoking discussion and demands the courage from leadership to face challenges, adapt, and cultivate changes in HE. Temple and Ylitalo (2009) believe that using a social justice framework, leaders can be transformational leaders and can blur the boundaries of race, language, culture, and disability to include disabled students and to change institutional structures. Inclusion of disabled students in HE can be enhanced by a leader who promotes inclusiveness through open communication and flexibility in policy implementation. HEIs interested in mitigating leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities should consider reaching out to local organizations that support individuals with disabilities.

CONCLUSION Our thesis is that although leaders can be radical change agents that define organizational agendas, addressing leadership challenges to inclusion of students with disabilities in HE must be a collaborative effort. It is the responsibility of leadership to develop policies and promote practices which promote inclusion of students with disabilities and to create inclusive cultures where students with disabilities can achieve positive academic outcomes.

REFERENCES

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Adseriaas, R. P., Charleston, L. J., & Jackson, J. F. L. (2017). What style of leadership is best suited to direct organizational change to fuel institutional diversity in higher education? Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 315–331. doi:10.1080/1361332 4.2016.1260233 Ainscow, M. (2016). Diversity and Equity: A global education challenge. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 51(2), 143–155. doi:10.100740841-016-0056-x Angelides, P. (2011). Forms of leadership that promote inclusive education in Cypriot Schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40(1), 21–36. doi:10.1177/1741143211420614

35

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2020). The Role of Inclusive Leadership in Supporting an Inclusive Climate in Diverse Public Sector Teams. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 1–23. doi:10.1177/0734371X19899722 Bhroin, Ó., & King, F. (2020). Teacher education for inclusive education: A framework for developing collaboration for the inclusion of students with support plans. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 38–63. doi:10.1080/02619 768.2019.1691993 Borland, J., & James, S. (1999). The Learning Experience of Students with Disabilities in Carter, S. & Abawi, L-A (2018). Leadership, inclusion, and quality education for all. Australian JOURNAL of Special and Inclusive Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1017/jsi.2018 Borland, J., & James, S. (1999, January). Higher Education. A case study of a UK university. Disability & Society, 14(1), 85–101. doi:10.1080/09687599926398 Bunescu, L. (2021). Achieving inclusion in higher education by design. University World News: The global window of higher education. https://www. universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20210215140003124 CAST. (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Author. Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., & Kang, S. W. (2017). Inclusive Leadership and Employee Well-Being: The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(6), 1877–1901. doi:10.100710902-016-9801-6 Council on Higher Education. (1997). Higher Education Act 101. Government Printers.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

DeMatthews, D. E. (2014). How to Improve Curriculum Leadership: Integrating Leadership Theory and Management Strategies, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies. Issues and Ideas, 87(5), 192–196. doi:10.1080/000986 55.2014.911141 Department of Education. (1997). Quality education for all: Overcoming barriers to learning and development – Report of the National Commission on special needs in education and training (NCSNET) and National Committee on education support services (NCESS). Government Printers. Department of Education. (1997). Education White Paper 3 – A programme for the transformation of higher education. Government Printers: Pretoria. Department of Education. (2001). National Plan for Higher Education. Government Printers. 36

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Echols, S. (2009). Transformational/Servant Leadership: A potential Synergism for An Inclusive Leadership Style. Journal of Religious Leadership, 8(2), 85–116. Emmers, E., Baeyens, D., & Petry, K. (2020). Attitudes and self-efficacy of teachers towards inclusion in higher education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), 139–153. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1628337 Endres, S., & Weibler, J. (2020). Understanding (non)leadership phenomena in collaborative interorganizational networks and advancing shared leadership theory: An interpretive grounded theory study. Bus Res, 13(1), 275–309. doi:10.100740685019-0086-6 Fang, Y.-C., Chen, J.-Y., Wang, M.-J., & Chen, C.-Y. (2019). The Impact of Inclusive Leadership on Employees’ Innovative Behaviors: The Mediation of Psychological Capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1803. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01803 PMID:31447740 Glazzard, J. (2011). Perceptions of the barriers to effective inclusion in one primary school: Voices of teachers and teaching assistant. Support for Learning, 26(2), 56–63. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9604.2011.01478.x Hansen, J. H., Carrington, S., Jensen, C. R., Molbæk, M., & Schmidt, M. C. S. (2020). The collaborative practice of inclusion and exclusion. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 47–57. doi:10.1080/20020317.2020.1730112 Hongbiao, Y & Ching-sing, Y. (2020). catering for learner diversity: issues and Trends. ECNJJ Review of Education, 1-3. Doi; doi:10.1177/2096531120927620 Hsieh, J. Y., & Liou, K. T. (2018). Collaborative Leadership and Organizational Performance: Assessing the Structural Relation in a Public Service Agency. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(1), 83–109. doi:10.1177/0734371X15623619

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kugelmaas, J. W. (2003). Inclusive leadership: leadership for inclusion. Full International Practitioner Enquiry Report, Spring 2003. National College for School Leadership. Lehtomäki, E., Tuomi, M. T., & Matonya, M. (2014). Educational research from Tanzania 1998–2008 concerning persons with disabilities: What can we learn? International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 32–39. doi:10.1016/j. ijer.2013.10.005 Letseka, M., & Pitsoe, V. (2014). The challenges and prospects of access to higher education at Unisa. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1942–1954. doi:10.1080 /03075079.2013.823933 37

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Morina, A. (2017). Inclusive education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32(1), 3–17. doi:10 .1080/08856257.2016.1254964 Moriña, A., & Perera, V. H. (2020). Inclusive Higher Education in Spain: Students With Disabilities Speak Out. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(3), 215–231. doi:10.1177/1538192718777360 Ntombela, S. (2020). Teaching and learning support for students with disabilities: Issues and perspectives in open distance e-learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 18–26. doi:10.17718/tojde.761919 Ntombela, S., & Mahlangu, V. P. (2019). The Inclusion and Support of Students with Disabilities in the South African Higher Education System: Supporting Students with Disabilities. In R. Jeffries (Ed.), Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity in Contemporary Higher Education (pp. 195–210). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5724-1.ch012 Pavone, M., Bellacicco, R., & Cinotti, A. (2019). The inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education 25 years since the Salamanca Statement: Overview and highlights. Italian Journal of Special Education for Inclusion, 7(2), 124-140. Pelt, R. M. (2020). Teachers’ Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in the General Education Classroom in a Rural School District (PhD thesis). Virginia Commonwealth University. Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 50–58. doi:10.1016/j. ijedudev.2010.06.009 Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., & Kedharnath, U. (2018). Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 190–203. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.07.002

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Republic of South Africa. (1997). Act 101: Higher Education Act. Government Gazette, 19 December 1997. Republic of South Africa. (2016). White paper on the rights of persons with disabilities. Gazette No. 39792. Pretoria: Government Printers. Ring, E., & Travers, J. (2005). Barriers to inclusion: A case study of a pupil with severe learning difficulties in Ireland. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(1), 41–56. doi:10.1080/0885625042000319070

38

Leadership Challenges to Inclusion

Salmi, J., & D’Addio, A. (2021). Policies for achieving inclusive education in higher education. Policy Reviews in Education, 5(1), 47–72. doi:10.1080/23322969.202 0.1835529 Temple, J. B., & Ylitalo, J. (2009). Promoting Inclusive (and Dialogic) Leadership in Higher Education Institutions. Tertiary Education and Management, 15(3), 277–289. doi:10.1080/13583880903073024 Tobbell, J., Burton, R., Gaynor, A., Golding, B., Greenhough, K., Rhodes, C., & White, S. (2020). Inclusion in higher education: An exploration of the subjective experiences of students. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2020.1753180 United Nations Human Rights. (2014). The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Training Guide Professional Training Series No. 19. United Nations. United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action in Special Needs Education. UNESCO.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

United Nations Human Rights-Office of the High Commission. (2020). Human rights of persons with disabilities. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disability/ Pages/DisabilityIndex.aspx

39

40

Chapter 3

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings Lara Gentilini Independent Researcher, USA

ABSTRACT

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Given the increasing diversity of students included in general education classrooms in public schools, the feld must establish a clearer defnition of what successful inclusion entails. This endeavor involves an analysis of best practices for inclusion, taking into account the knowledge and skillset required of teachers in their roles as instructional experts. With limited time and resources, teachers are challenged to maximize opportunities for individualized learning without creating the need for additional teacher-directed instruction. Teachers must therefore enact classroom practices in which students and their peers serve as mediating agents in their own learning. In addition, special and general education teachers must collaborate with one another, as well as with all members of the larger school community, in order to provide students with the least restrictive classroom placement along a continuum of options. All those involved must believe in, and advocate for, successful inclusion practices to support an increasingly diverse and accepting public sector.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch003 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

INTRODUCTION

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Defining Successful Inclusion in the Classroom Lipsky and Gartner (1994) defined inclusion as “the provision of service to students with disabilities, including those with severe disabilities, in their neighborhood schools, in age-appropriate regular education classes, with the necessary support service and supplementary aids–for both children and teachers” (p. 36). Inclusive pedagogy more broadly involves the meaningful participation of students with a range of individual differences, including race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, language, or socioeconomic status (Polat, 2011), as well as gifted learners (Callahan et al., 2020). That is, inclusive practices are those that address the needs of all learners (Loreman, 2017). The primary goals of inclusion are (a) merging special and regular education to create one cohesive system; (b) increasing access to general education classrooms for students with diverse learning needs via a full-scale approach; and (c) enhancing the academic achievement of all students (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994). The aims of inclusion extend to typically-developing students as well: educators within an inclusive model are responsible for supporting children with disabilities in the development of critical social skills, as well as facilitating changes in attitudes amongst nondisabled students (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000). At least some degree of placement in general education classrooms is necessary for the fulfillment of these goals, primarily due to the presence of age-appropriate, typically-developing peers (Lipsky & Gartner, 1991; Stainback & Stainback, 1992). However, inclusion must be interpreted in a broader context than the physical placement of a student with disability in a general education setting (Love & Horn, 2021); as proposed in the Regular Education Initiative (REI) of 1985, mere physical presence in the general education classroom is not enough, replacing the 1960s and 1970s push for increased access to the mainstream classroom via a reformed, unified system of inclusion (Davis, 1989; Skrtie, 1987). That is, it is insufficient for students to simply exist in the general education classroom; rather, children in inclusive classrooms must be actively primed for success by the entire school community within a unitary public school system (Fisher & Frey, 2001). Critical elements of meaningful inclusion involve participation in the general education classroom; a sense of belonging in the classroom and school community; and shared responsibility among faculty in educating all students (Stainback & Stainback, 1992; Voltz et al., 2001). School constituents must persistently work to advance the principles of inclusion, and should continuously measure the outcomes of their efforts to ensure that students are both actively participating in and benefitting from their classroom setting (Fisher & Frey, 2001; Fisher et al., 2003). 41

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Special education cannot be distilled to a placement or a room, but should rather be presented as a continuum of services tailored to the developmental, behavioral, emotional, and/or physical needs of each student (Love & Horn, 2021). Likewise, inclusion should not be interpreted as an all-or-nothing approach, but should instead exist along a range of special education placement options, including but not limited to the general education classroom (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000; Vaughn et al., 2018). Teachers in each of these placements should offer intensive and individualized instruction that is closely aligned to the general education curriculum, and must practice and prioritize inclusion from the outset to maximize positive outcomes for all students (Snyder et al., 2001).

BACKGROUND

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The Rise of Inclusion in Public Schools Being entitled to public education has not always translated to being included. For more than 100 years (Johnson, 1962), separate classes for students with disabilities have been supported by the rationale that these children would be best served when educated away from their typical peers, by a teacher with a specialized skillset (Williamson et al., 2006). Less than half of all students with disabilities received educational services prior to the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 (Douvanis & Hulsey, 2002). Even as of the late 1990s, students with disabilities were commonly educated within separate classrooms and settings (Polloway et al., 1997). However, there was a major rise in general education classroom placements for students with disabilities throughout the decade (even as identification rates stabilized), suggesting the beginning of a shift towards more widespread inclusion (Williamson et al., 2006). This is particularly true for students with mild or moderate disabilities, who are more likely to be educated in inclusive settings than those with more significant disabilities (Kurth et al., 2014; Rhoad-Drogalis & Justice, 2020). As of the 2018-2019 school year, almost 95% of students ages 6 to 21 served under the Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) were enrolled in standard public schools (U.S. Department of Education, 2020). The majority (64%) of those students spent at least 80% of the school day in general classrooms, an increase of nearly 20% from the previous two decades (U.S. Department of Education, 2020). Given this rise in inclusive practices in public school settings, it is essential that the benefits of inclusion are understood, supported, and pursued by all members of the public school community, beginning with an understanding of what successful inclusion entails.

42

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Planning for Successful Inclusion in Public Schools Inclusion can produce meaningful benefits for all children when marked by full student and school participation (Kochhar & West, 1996). Such benefits include enhanced social participation; increased access to general education curriculum; learning and generalization of new skills; and improved quality of objectives within the IEP for students with disabilities (Gee et al., 2020; Hunt et al., 2003; Zagona et al., 2017). Children with mild to moderate disabilities in integrated classrooms often succeed to a greater extent, both socially and academically, than their peers in classrooms that are segregated by ability (Freeman & Alkin, 2000; Gee et al., 2020). While academic outcomes are variable amongst students with more severe diagnoses, these students reap similar social gains from full inclusion (Fisher & Meyer, 2002; Matzen et al., 2010; Mu et al., 2000), as do their nondisabled peers (Hunt et al., 2003; Peck et al., 2004). Students without disabilities experience the development of positive social traits such as sensitivity, empathy, and acceptance, in addition to increased exposure to cooperative learning opportunities and assistive technology as a function of participating in inclusive classrooms (Hunt et al., 2003). While an understanding of these benefits is crucial when designing inclusive classrooms (Salend, 2001; Taylor et al., 1997), one must also acknowledge obstacles to successful inclusion, including a lack of understanding of the required prerequisites; difficulty in differentiating instruction to the necessary degree; and a lack of support and collaboration amongst members of the school community. Inclusive placements are only successful if special and general education teachers work together to accelerate movement along the continuum of restrictiveness, which requires inventiveness in instruction supported by ongoing collaboration between teachers and the school community at large (Da Fonte & Barton-Arwood, 2017; Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

SOULTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Understanding Prerequisites for Success Both special and general education teachers require a firm grasp of the academic and social skills necessary for success in inclusive classroom placements (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000; Zagona et al., 2017). Such prerequisites for successful inclusion include observational learning, or the ability to acquire new operants from the observation of one’s peers (Catania, 2007; Greer, 2002). The majority of what children acquire 43

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

in general educational settings is attributed to observational learning, rather than through direct instruction (Delgado & Greer, 2009). Observational learning should therefore be regarded as the basis for inclusive and less restrictive settings, as full participation in a general education classroom requires that students learn through observation of their peers receiving reinforcement or corrections (Greer & Ross, 2008; Greer et al., 2006; Lanter & Singer-Dudek, 2020). A common argument made in support of inclusion is that students with disabilities should be included in general education classrooms because they can benefit from observing appropriate models amongst their non-disabled peers (Stainback & Stainback, 1991). However, we cannot assume that all children with disabilities are able to benefit from indirect contact with contingencies, or observational learning (Gautreaux, 2005); it has been demonstrated that most students with ASD between 5 and 16 years of age do not reap the benefits of observation, in terms of being able to acquire new behaviors from the observation of others being reinforced or corrected for those same behaviors (Varni et al., 1979). A student without the capability for observational learning will not be able to acquire new skills from observing the consequated learning of his or her peers. This student will therefore need to be directly taught and consequated, making it difficult for her to learn via the type of small-group instruction that is a hallmark of many inclusive classrooms (Singer-Dudek et al., 2013). A child with observational learning in repertoire can learn from observation of his peers via indirect contact with instruction and contingencies, thus allowing him to learn without the need for direct instruction through methods such as peer tutoring, peer monitoring, and group instruction using choral responding (Greer et al., 2006; Singer-Dudek et al., 2013). In an inclusive classroom, instruction delivered to one student in the group essentially becomes an instructional opportunity delivered to all students in the group once observational learning has been acquired (Greer & Ross, 2008; Greer et al., 2006); observational learning is therefore critical to educational success in inclusive classroom settings, where children must learn from the instruction received by others. Considering the amount of indirect learning necessitated by group instruction in inclusive classroom settings, observational learning is one of the foremost indicators of educational success, and must therefore be established for students without this capability in repertoire (Delgado & Greer, 2009; Greer, 2002; Greer et al., 2006). Research has demonstrated the acquisition of observational learning via tactics such as peer-yoked contingencies and peer monitoring; thus, successful incorporation of these tactics by classroom teachers is essential to ensure success in inclusion settings. A student is considered to have acquired observational learning when they are able to learn new operants by observing their peers following the intervention, after not having been able to do so prior (Gautreaux, 2005). For a peer-yoked contingency game board, a student observes a peer confederate being taught something new, and 44

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

the target student is then required to emit the new skill correctly in order for the pair to jointly receive reinforcement (Rothstein & Gautreaux, 2007). A student acquires observational learning by learning how to monitor a peer’s responses to instruction as part of peer monitoring, including monitoring training under peer tutoring conditions (Gautreaux, 2005; Delgado & Greer, 2009). With both the peer-yoked contingency game board and peer monitoring procedures, students acquire observational learning more quickly when observing their peers receive a correction (Greer, Singer-Dudek, & Gautreaux, 2006). After the acquisition of observational learning, the student can acquire the target behavior from the observation of the contingencies delivered to other students, with the observational learning capability therefore lending itself to the type of teaching and learning necessitated in inclusive classroom settings. Another prerequisite for successful inclusion is the ability to learn incidentally, referred to as ‘bidirectional Naming’ within the theory of verbal behavior development (Barnes-Holmes et al., 2001; Catania, 2007). Naming is the ability to hear someone say something, see what it is that he or she is talking about, and know the name of that object simply by having been exposed to the stimulus name on multiple occasions through natural exposure–with no prompting or reinforcement necessary (Greer et al., 2017; Greer & Ross, 2008). This capability provides the means to expand form and function with minimal and incidental exposure, and should also be in repertoire if students are to reap the full benefit of inclusion in a general education classroom (Greer & Ross, 2008; Hranchuk et al., 2018). Therefore, Naming as a higher order operant and a relational frame provides the means to expand form and function incidentally, without the need for direct instruction (Greer et al., 2011, 2017; Miguel, 2016). The Naming capability is particularly important in an inclusive classroom setting, as it allows the student to learn more efficiently and effectively in group lectures or through model demonstrations (Hranchuk et al., 2018); it has been demonstrated that once Naming is acquired, students can learn two to four times faster than when a model was not presented (Greer et al., 2011). Naming has been acquired in typically developing children and children with language delays and other developmental disabilities though multiple-exemplar instruction (MEI): a procedure in which different responses to a single stimulus are rotated (e.g., match, point, vocally label), resulting in untaught responses to novel stimuli (Greer & Ross, 2008). More specifically, MEI to induce full Naming capabilities promotes the ability to acquire new object-names incidentally through listener responses, or through general exposure to the environment, thus allowing for the proliferation of vocabulary without the need for further prompting or instruction, and providing a framework for more complex verbal repertories (Greer et al., 2005). Research has also demonstrated the emergence of observational learning as a function of the Naming intervention (Rothstein & Gautreaux, 2007), allowing for even more generative learning. Observational learning and Naming are just two of 45

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

the many repertories that teachers must understand and acknowledge as prerequisites for successful inclusion.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Taking a Proactive Approach In addition to preemptively preparing students for success in inclusive settings through an emphasis on educational prerequisites, public schools striving to become more inclusive must also take a proactive approach in their behavioral and instructional techniques through evidence-based tiered systems such as the Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) and Response to Intervention (RTI) models. The PBIS framework is a systemic approach to social, emotional, and behavioral support designed to proactively promote a positive school climate (Horner, 2016; Sugai & Horner, 2002, 2006). At Tier 1, universal supports are provided to all students in the school based on fulfillment of behavioral expectations (Noltemeyer et al., 2019). Based on progress monitoring, more concentrated support may be implemented for students not responding successfully to Tier 1 strategies, and may include supplemental supports such as social skills groups (Tier 2) or more intensive and individualized supports such as behavior intervention plans (Tier 3) (Noltemeyer et al., 2019). When implemented with fidelity on a school-wide level, PBIS is associated with positive behavioral outcomes for students, although research on academic achievement measures is mixed (Childs et al., 2016; Houchens et al., 2017; Noltemeyer et al., 2019; Pas et al., 2019; Petrasek et al., 2021). Similarly, RTI is a multi-tiered system of proactive inclusion that considers whether a target problem is within the student, or within the quality of teaching they are receiving (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2006). In this model, the performance of all students is screened and monitored on a frequent, if not continuous, basis; it is in this way that RTI reduces the number of special education referrals by providing more immediate, proactive remediation by placing top priority on teaching methods that have been empirically identified as having a positive effect on educational outcomes (Jimerson et al., 2007). As opposed to replying on a “wait to fail” model, students who are not meeting expected progress with standard general-education instructional strategies are then provided with additional, targeted small-group instructional time as part of RTI, with this intervention usually still taking place within the general education setting (Jimerson et al., 2007). If students succeed within this tier of RTI, they return to receiving standard instruction. If they fail to make adequate progress in their targeted academic areas while receiving intensive and individualized instruction, the interventionist would then suggest additional supports, which may include referral for special education services (Jimerson et al., 2007). Even broader than the RTI model is the idea that teachers can and should proactively design learning experiences that minimize barriers and maximize access 46

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

to the subject matter for all students, which aligns to the philosophy of a Universal Design for Learning (UDL) (Canter et al., 2017). Maximizing accessibility can entail changing the what (modifications) or changing the how (accommodations), with students’ need for these changes preemptively lowered through the use of differential instruction that allows for individualization for all. In both the RTI model and the use of a UDL (or differentiated instruction more generally), teachers must be intentionally responsive to the needs of the diverse range of students who comprise an inclusive classroom. Despite the fact that all students within a given class are rarely, if ever, performing at the same academic level, teachers have historically struggled to differentiate their instruction to the degree necessary for optimal inclusion (Baker & Zigmond, 1990; Fuchs et al., 1992; McIntosh et al., 1993). This tendency to present the same instructional materials to all students stems, at least in part, from “a limit to how much a classroom can be expected to change and how many students any teacher can responsibly teach” (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2000, p. 80). However, in addition to understanding the skills and capabilities required for effective inclusion in less restrictive settings, teachers must be well versed in the implementation and analysis of tactics and protocols that promote increased rates of learning and independence. This issue becomes especially important when considering that a negative impact on teachers’ time to work with all students in the classroom is a significant barrier to their support of inclusion (Bruneau-Balderrama, 1997; Mastropieri & Scruggs, 2000; Salend, 2001). Special and general education teachers must combine their skillsets to prioritize the development and evaluation of instructional interventions that are feasible for implementation in the classroom. This requires them to allocate learning responsibilities to different mediating agents, including teachers, peers, and students themselves, as outlined in Table 1.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Teacher-Mediated Strategies Teachers must understand the objective implications of their methods in terms of which teaching practices reliably lead to relevant gains in knowledge and ability, and which of these methods work in the shortest amount of time and with the least amount of resources expended. When designing teacher-mediated strategies to promote inclusion, one must acknowledge the time and resources available in general education classrooms and plan according to what is feasible–especially within the financial constraints of public schools.

47

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Table 1. Overview of strategies for successful inclusion across various mediating agents Mediating Agent

School

Strategy

Definition

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS)

A tiered model of school-wide and individualized support designed to reinforce behavioral expectations based on students’ needs

Response to Intervention (RTI)

A tiered model of proactive remediation that utilizes research-based instructional interventions

Universal Design for Learning (UDL)

A flexible approach to teaching that allows for meaningful provisions so that all learners can meaningfully access and participate in the classroom

Token Economy

A positive reinforcement technique to promote correct responding and self-management via the delayed consumption of back-up reinforcers

Active Engagement

A practice by which students are consistently presented with relevant opportunities to respond, promoted by tactics such as choral responding and response boards

Classwide Peer Tutoring (CWPT)

A peer-mediated strategy by which students are trained to deliver instruction to one another; sometimes includes a peer observer

Peer-Directed Social Skills Training

A strategy by which students are trained on various social concepts that translate in structured and unstructured settings for both disabled and non-disabled peers

Personalized System of Instruction (PSI)

An approach to teaching in which students progress through individualized instructional objectives at their own pace

Teacher

Peer

Student

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Designing and Implementing Systems of Reinforcement A simple strategy for successful inclusion is the use of positive reinforcement: contingent positive reinforcement for desired behaviors increases the likelihood of the individual engaging in the targeted behavior under similar conditions in the future, and is an effective educational tactic for motivating students to participate in academic activities (Cooper et al., 2020). The use of positive reinforcement tactics may be especially critical to inclusion success for children with developmental disabilities, who are all-too-often described as ‘unresponsive’ or ‘unmotivated’ to engage in educational activities (Dunlap & Koegel, 1980; Egel, 1981; Koegel & Egel, 1979). Children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), in particular, tend to exhibit disruptive behavior as a means of avoidance or escape when presented with novel or difficult tasks, which can significantly interfere with and interrupt the 48

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

efforts of the teacher, as well as the acquisition of educational objectives by these students (Egel, 1981; Koegel et al., 2010). This apparent lack of ‘motivation,’ manifested as a lack of academic engagement and disruptive behavior, is also partially mediated by the frequency with which these students contact reinforcement. It has been demonstrated that when children with ASD worked on tasks for which their responses were typically incorrect, their attempts at responding significantly decreased; children with ASD and other developmental disorders may be more likely than their typically-developing peers to provide an incorrect response to a task, which may result in a lower frequency of reinforcement (Koegel & Egel, 1979). However, in terms of the availability of reinforcers as related to children’s responding and persistence in academic tasks, the converse may also be true: a treatment procedure focused on increasing reinforcement for correct task completion should not only improve correct responding, but should also affect the child’s rate learning, with the type of reinforcement used, as well as the variation in reinforcement, mediating the overall effectiveness of the reinforcer in producing the desired outcome (Koegel & Egel, 1979). One easy and efficient form of positive reinforcement includes behavior-specific praise. Teachers who praise students contingently and frequently (while ignoring inappropriate behavior) are more likely to produce targeted behavior and correct responding, as compared to teachers who emit more disapprovals than behaviorspecific approvals (Madsen et al., 1968). Praise is especially effective when it has acquired reinforcement value through repeated pairing with other positivelyreinforcing stimuli, and when it is used to vicariously reinforce an appropriate behavior when another child is misbehaving (Becker et al., 1967). The use of a token economy as a form of reinforcement has been demonstrated to be another effective way to sustain students’ attention, especially when back-up reinforcement is available and accessible without significant delay, and when students are able select their own back-up reinforcer (Tarbox et al., 2006). A token economy is another instructional tactic that is often used to increase students’ appropriate behavior and correct responding in academic settings. It allows participants to earn generalized reinforcers, or conditioned reinforcers (e.g., points, plastic tokens, check marks, counts) that are not specified by a particular antecedentbehavior relationship or dependent on a specific establishing operation, and which affect a wide variety of behaviors (Catania, 2007; Cooper et al., 2020; Greer, 2002). A token economy was developed as a tactic in the applied sciences to permit the delayed consumption of reinforcement without compromising the effectiveness of the reinforcement, as the effects of immediate consumption of reinforcement are maintained without the need for frequent interruption of the learning process (Ayllon et al., 1972; Greer, 2002). This strategy may therefore be of particular significance to

49

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

teachers in inclusive classroom settings, where reinforcers for appropriate behavior are often provided after a lengthy delay. As part of a token economy, students can accumulate, and later exchange, their tokens for a variety of items and activities from a menu of back-up reinforcers. Tokens are most likely to remain effective in maintaining increased response rates and rates of correct responding when teachers vary the available selection of backup reinforcers (Milo et al., 2010), and when back-up reinforcement occurs without significant delay (Tarbox et al., 2006). Teachers can provide tokens for correct moment-to-moment learning outcomes based on performance at each student’s particular level, and can also use tokens to reinforce social behavior and behavior in accordance with the classroom rules (Greer, 2002). However, the frequency of reinforcement for social behavior should be thinned as students come increasingly under the control of their correct academic responding, which better allows for the use of token economies in classrooms that promote a personalized system of instruction (PSI), peer-tutoring, and self-management instruction (Greer, 2002). The reinforcing effect of a token economy in establishing and maintaining behavior has been empirically demonstrated to be effective across various grade levels, school populations, and targeted behaviors (e.g., Ayllon & Azrin, 1968; Higgins et al., 2001; Shook et al., 1990; Swain & McLaughlin, 1998; Tarbox, Ghezzi, & Wilson, 2006). The implementation of a token economy has also been demonstrated to increase the amount of directed and non-directed participation across students in a general education setting, with students twice as likely to raise their hands following a question posed by the teacher, as well as twice as likely to ask questions and make spontaneous comments relating to class content as compared to the no-token baseline condition (Boneicki & Morre, 2003). It is in this sense that a token economy can minimize the concentration of classroom participation among a particular cluster of students, allowing for more active participation among students of all abilities in an inclusion setting (Nelson, 2010). A token economy is also an effective tactic for decreasing students’ inappropriate behaviors (e.g., calling out, leaving one’s seat without permission), as well as increasing the accuracy with which students with developmental disabilities answer questions related to academic content (Higgins et al., 2001; Knapczyk & Livingston, 1973). It has also been demonstrated that academic performance and token-administration accuracy remains unchanged when the responsibility of record keeping is shifted from teachers to students, suggesting the effectiveness of a point system in which students administer their own generalized reinforcers at the permission of the teacher in an inclusive classroom (Knapczyk & Livingston, 1973). A token economy typically involves the delivery of actual tokens for younger students, in which the tokens are represented by any item that can be accumulated in a container on the student’s desk, to remind the student of how well they are doing on a moment-to-moment 50

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

basis; the same tactic is also appropriate for students who are entering the selfediting stages of instruction (Greer, 2002). It is at this stage that the tokens serve as reinforcement when the automatic consequences of the child’s responding are not reinforcing (Greer, 2002). For students at a more advanced level of verbally-governed behavior and self-editing independence, the teacher can shift the use of physical manipulates, such as tokens, to a tally of points administered by the student (Greer, 2002). A point system can be used to increase the frequency of correct responding during academic instruction, and is also considered to be a critical component of developing and promoting self-management (Greer, 2002). Teachers should consider having more advanced students set their own goals, determine their reinforcers, and measure their own progress, as such tactics have been demonstrated to increase the effectiveness of a point system (Greer, 2002).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Promoting Active Engagement Another teacher-mediated strategy that applies to both self-management and academics include tactics to promote active responding (Armendariz & Umbreit, 1999), as there is a clear link between active academic engagement and student achievement (Hattie, 2009; MacSuga-Gage & Simonsen, 2015; Wallace et al., 2002). Students who receive more opportunities to respond emit more correct responses, suggesting that students learn more in classrooms with continuous opportunities to respond (Greenwood, Hart, Walker, & Risley, 1994). In order to promote such active engagement, general education teachers can utilize choral responding and response boards in order to maximize the total number of instructional opportunities presented to a diverse range of learners. Students’ rate of responding is higher when using response boards as compared to hand raising, with increased accuracy on assessments for these students (Narayan et al., 1990). Similarly, choral responding provides students with increased opportunities to respond, and promotes higher levels of academic engagement and responding and decreased levels of off-task or inappropriate student behavior (Kamps et al., 1994a). Choral responding is especially beneficial for students who frequently display difficulty staying on task when completing independent work, and who benefit from continuous opportunities to respond and receive reinforcement (Kamps et al., 1994a). Before implementing choral responding, a teacher should consider conducting clicker training: a tactic used for shaping behavior using conditioned reinforcement in the form of an auditory stimulus (Pryor, 1999). Clicker training is a sciencebased system for shaping behavior using the principle of positive reinforcement as the principle of behavior, as the teacher pairs other forms of reinforcement with the click sound such that it becomes a conditioned reinforcer through the stimulusstimulus pairing procedure (Pryor, 1999). The clicker provides students with a signal 51

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

that reinforcement will follow the behavior being performed in the presence of the click, and is used for choral responding during direct instruction in a group setting to ensure that all students are answering at the same time (Pryor, 1999).

Peer-Mediated Strategies While choral responding and response boards can be utilized as a teacher-mediated inclusion strategy to efficiently and effectively increase response opportunities, teachers should also delegate responsibility to the students themselves, including the use of peers as instructional agents.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Peer-Tutoring One such system of peer-mediated learning is classwide peer tutoring (CWPT). The role of the teacher within this peer-directed initiative is to (a) design and alter the sequence of instruction based on the needs of individual students; (b) monitor and reinforce tutoring, self-tutoring accuracy, and the accuracy of tutor data collection; (c) identify students who are encountering learning obstacles, and implement strategic analyses and tactics to eliminate such difficulties; and (d) ensure that positive reinforcement is present and students are making progress with as few errors as possible (Greer, 2002; Greer et al., 2004). Teachers must train students in the tutoring procedure prior to the implementation of CWPT so that they can administer instruction accurately and fluently as tutors (Greer, 2002). Based on a wide range of educational research, the peer-mediated teaching strategy of CWPT decreases the need for teacher-directed learning, with demonstrated effectiveness in increasing academic achievement and improving social-skill interaction for students with and without disabilities in inclusive settings (e.g., Berliner, 1990; Carr & Darcy, 1990; Cooke et al., 1982; Franca et al., 1990; Maheady et al., 1988; Shore, 1987). In addition, there has been a demonstrated effectiveness for CWPT on the acquisition, generality, and maintenance of targeted skills, not only for the students being tutored (i.e., the tutees), but for the tutors themselves (e.g., Bar-Eli & Raven, 1982; Barbeta et al., 1991; Greer et al., 2004; Johnson & Bailey, 1974; Kamps et al., 1989; Trapani & Gettinger, 1989). Furthermore, the use of peer tutoring is also advantageous for those students observing tutoring sessions if they have observational learning in repertoire (Dineen et al., 1977; Greer et al., 2004). Interestingly, the source of learning for the tutors and observers are the operations and experiences involved in the correction procedure; observing corrections or providing tutoring corrections are the key factors in the tutor or observer learning, as compared to only administering or observing reinforcement (Greer et al., 2004). Teachers can therefore utilize peer tutoring as a peer-mediated teaching strategy that 52

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

multiplies the number of instructional opportunities presented without increasing the need for teacher-directed instruction, as this lends itself to both academic instruction and classroom management in inclusive settings (Armendariz & Umbreit, 1999; Greer et al., 2002; Werts et al., 1996). Peer tutoring multiplies the effect of instruction, leading to increased learning for the tutees, tutors, and observers across academic goals, problem-solving repertoires, and responses that lead to novel applications of tutored responses (Greer et al., 2004). The implementation of a peer-tutoring tactic can, in turn, increase the number of instructional opportunities presented without increasing the need for teacher-mediated instruction, and is adaptable to the diverse range of students that comprise inclusive public school settings (Greer et al., 2004). Research also provides support for the implementation of CWPT in increasing the number and duration of social interactions among students with and without disabilities in the classroom (Kamps et al., 1994b), which is of the utmost importance: even when students with developmental disabilities are able to perform academically with minimal support, they may struggle with social success in inclusive classrooms, which is why peerdirected strategies for social engagement are critical if students are to reap the full benefits of inclusion.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Peer-Directed Social Skills Training In addition to CWPT–which has collateral effects on improving and increasing social interactions during free time immediately following peer tutoring sessions– teachers should consider the use of peer-directed social skills training for fostering a meaningful social dynamic amongst all students. This training can include objectives ranging from initiating and maintaining interactions, to actively including others in activities (Kamps et al., 1992). For example, one study of peer-mediated social skills training focused on the social skills concepts of sharing, suggesting play ideas, assisting, and being affectionate (Lee et al., 2007). Each training session in this study began with a verbal discussion of the importance of play with friends, as well as a description of the behavior to be learned on that day. The teacher then modeled the target behavior with one child, who played the role of the child with autism. Models were provided for both positive examples and nonexamples of the behavior, and the teacher and the peer then switched roles so that the peer buddy had the opportunity to practice the social behavior himself. Peers then practiced the skills with the other peers in training, with feedback and praise provided during this practice (Lee et al., 2007). Within this study, and other using similar tactics (e.g., Kamps et al., 2002), social engagement of children with development disabilities increased during the structured-play intervention session as a result of their participation in the peer53

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

initiation intervention, with collateral decreases in their stereotypic behavior (Lee et al., 2007). The majority of social interactions were by trained peers; untrained peers made few initiations towards the children with autism, and would often give up trying to play with the children with autism after making one initiation and not receiving a response, according to anecdotal teacher reports (Lee et al., 2007). The results of this study are educationally significant in that they provide support for the implementation of peer-mediated interventions in increasing the social engagement of children with and without disabilities when in structured and generalized play settings. In addition, the results of this study demonstrate collateral decreases in stereotypic behavior with increased frequency of peer social engagement, which may be of particular significance to the teachers of children with autism who are trying to minimize such behaviors in inclusive classrooms. Considering that stereotypic behavior and impaired social interaction are often considered defining deficits of autism and various other disabilities, a peer-mediated social skills intervention can be utilized in a classroom setting to functionally address both behaviors without the need for continual teacher prompting (Kamps et al., 1992; Lee et al., 2007).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Self-Mediated Strategies Teachers can also fulfill the need for differentiated instruction required in inclusive classrooms by making students accountable for their own individual learning goals. Behaviorist Fred S. Keller developed the concept of PSI: a critical part of a system of schooling in which students are consistently presented with individuallyappropriate instructional opportunities, and in which each student progresses through scientifically-based curricula at his or her own pace (Greer, 1991; Twyman, 1998). Self-paced instruction necessitates the implementation of PSI through worksheets and other means of independent learning, to maximize instruction while minimizing the need for teacher assistance within an inclusive classroom setting. The implementation of PSI allows a classroom to be inclusive of all students and simultaneously tailored to each student’s learning needs. Educators can therefore utilize PSI as an effective tactic for facilitating self-management and decreasing students’ prompt dependence on adults in inclusive classroom environments (Bryan & Gast, 2000; Oliver et al., 2015). However, some students lack self-management skills in the absence of constant feedback (Koegel et al., 1992), which may be why students with developmental disabilities are oftentimes perceived as distractible and as lacking prerequisite skills to remain engaged during passive seatwork activities (Bryan & Gast, 2000; Rock & Thead, 2009). A dependence on teachers for staying on-task, completing activities, and transitioning between activities makes it difficult for students with developmental disabilities to successfully function in general education classrooms, 54

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

where a large portion of instructional time is comprised of independent seatwork (Bryan & Gast, 2000; Rock & Thead, 2009). Educators must therefore implement tactics for facilitating self-management during independent seatwork in inclusive environments, especially in those classroom utilizing a PSI approach to differentiation (Bryan & Gast, 2000).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Emphasizing Self-Accountability The implementation of behavior management strategies is one such means by which to promote successful inclusion (Wallace et al., 2002). An emphasis on self-management in inclusive classroom settings lends itself to students who are not dependent on direction and feedback for every learning task, especially if they have been taught to evaluate their own performance and provide their own feedback (Cooper et al., 2020). More specifically, self-management interventions allow individuals to better regulate their own behaviors, in part by discerning between appropriate and inappropriate behaviors, accurately monitoring and recording their own behaviors, and providing self-reinforcement after meeting a pre-established behavior criterion (Busick & Neitzel, 2009; Neitzel & Busick, 2009). Self-management strategies can be used to both increase desired academic and social behaviors (e.g., rule-following, sharing, conversation initiation), as well as decrease behaviors that interfere with success in inclusive settings (e.g., vocal or physical noncompliance), thereby contributing to more efficient and effective classrooms (Neitzel & Busick, 2009). A student’s ability to be self-directed in their own learning has historically been considered the ultimate goal of education (Cooper et al., 2020), with John Dewey (1939) suggesting that “the ideal aim of education is the creation of self-control” (p. 75). Types of strategies for development such self-management repertories include antecedent interventions (in which one manipulates events or stimuli prior to the behavior targeted for change), self-monitoring (whereby a person observes and records his own behavior), and self-administered consequences (for which one provides oneself with reinforcement contingent upon meeting a predetermined goal) (Cooper et al., 2020). Regardless of the specific intervention selected, the general steps of incorporating self-management strategies in inclusive classrooms include: (1) designing and preparing the system to be implemented (e.g., creating a clear definition of the target behavior so the student knows what is expected), (2) training the student to use the system (e.g., teaching them how to emit the correct behavior, discriminate between the correct and incorrect behavior, and utilize the self-recording system), (3) implementing the system with support, and (4) strategically shifting the responsibility for implementation from the teacher to the student, as they become more fluent with the system (Busick & Neitzel, 2009; Neitzel & Busick, 2009). Students who can continue learning effectively (e.g., those who can score and correct their 55

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

own work using answer keys within PSI) and behaving appropriately without the need for constant teacher guidance allows teachers to provide more individualized instruction in inclusive classroom (Cooper et al., 2020).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Utilizing a Collaborative Approach Teachers are undoubtedly the instructional experts when it comes to designing and implementing teacher-, peer-, and self-mediated strategies for differentiated instruction, as outlined in Table 1. The success of students with disabilities in inclusive settings largely depends on the ability of regular classroom teachers and special educators to engage in ongoing collaborative teamwork. However, with students at the heart of the system, the individualized instruction of each child has an effect on the behavior of the school community–such that the success of one component is derived from, and dependent on, the success of all other aspects of the system (Lamm & Greer, 1991; Singer-Dudek et al., 2010). Collaborating is therefore an essential element of successful inclusion, if not the most important component. Effective collaboration involves coordinating the efforts of all members of the educational team, so that the various members of the school system can be unified in their goal for inclusion and success for all (Giangreco et al., 2000; Snell & Janney, 2000). As students with disabilities are increasingly included in general education classroom, the need for continuous collaborative teaming continues to grow (Hunt et al., 2003). However, the level of collaborative problem solving required for success is often cited as a major strain on inclusion (Santoli et al., 2008; Wood, 1998). Schools should therefore consider implementing the collaborative teaming process, which consists of frequent and meaningful opportunities for all involved to “share knowledge and skills to generate new and novel methods for individualizing learning, without the need for dual systems of general and special education” (Villa & Thousand, 2000, p. 255). Moreover, the collaborative approach of creating a unified plan of educational and social supports has been demonstrated to promote achievement and engagement of students with disabilities (Hunt et al., 2001, 2002, 2003). Irrespective of the specific avenue taken, all members of the school community must advocate for successful inclusion practices; that is, they must share a common vision for inclusion if they are to achieve total inclusivity (Snell & Janney, 2000; Villa & Thousand, 2000). Students, parents, teachers, support staff, and administrators must work together to proactively plan, develop, and implement learning experiences that minimize barriers and maximize access to the subject matter, as the success of inclusive schooling is contingent upon the ability of these groups to collaborate successfully (Fisher et al., 2003). In line with Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979) theory of systems interactions, educational institutions must consider interdependent relationships between all components of a student’s educational system when reflecting 56

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

upon how to ensure the success of inclusion. A truly inclusive school community is a cybernetic system, the functioning of which is contingent on the interlocking relationship between all of its components (Keller, 1968; Lamm & Greer, 1991).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Attitudes Towards Inclusion The common goal of those involved in inclusion in the public school setting should always be centered on providing the highest quality services to fit the need of each learner as an individual (Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). The degree to which this aim is enacted depends largely on educators’ and practitioners’ attitudes towards inclusion. For example, teachers’ attitudes toward students with disabilities in their classrooms has an effect on student success, satisfaction, and social-emotional wellbeing (Cook et al., 2000; Hammond & Ingalls, 2003; Heyder et al., 2020; Monsen et al., 2014; Saloviita, 2019). Perhaps even more influential is principals’ knowledge of (Kavale & Forness, 2000; Patterson et al., 2000), and attitude towards (Horrocks et al., 2008), special education and inclusion. Principals have a considerable influence on school culture (Dodd, 2000; Patterson & Protheroe, 2001; Welch et al., 2001); it is therefore no surprise that a principal’s belief in the possibility of effective inclusion is one of the most significant factors in predicting a positive attitude toward inclusion and higher recommendations of general education placements for students with disabilities (Horrocks et al., 2008). Teachers cite a lack of support, planning time, and collaboration as sources of difficulty in inclusive settings (Snyder et al., 2001), which are rooted, in part, in insufficient administrative support (Bruneau-Balderrama, 1997; Santoli et al., 2008). The relation between collaboration and attitudes in the context of inclusion is likely cyclical. Those with more opportunities for constructive collaboration may have more success with inclusion, and may in turn have more positive attitudes towards inclusive practices. Likewise, those who understand the importance of inclusion may be more likely to value the role of collaboration in the success of students with disabilities in general education classrooms. When students’ perceptions of their role in an inclusive system are considered, we imagine a similar cycle (Miller et al., 2005): students in inclusive classrooms have more positive self-perceptions of inclusion (Fitch, 2003), which increases their engagement and performance in the classroom, and influences their teachers’ practices (Klinger & Vaughn, 1999; Vaughn et al., 1993). Likewise, proximity and contact with peers of differing abilities has been associated with more favorable attitudes towards inclusion by typically-developing peers (Hong et al., 2014; Reina et al., 2019; Vignes et al., 2009). Taking student voices and personal experiences into account therefore allows for more successful inclusion practices (Miller et al., 2005). Parent perspectives should also be considered when planning for inclusive practices, as supportive communication is thought to be 57

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

critical for both the initiation and development of successful inclusion (Frederickson et al., 2004). This is true for parents of students with (Leyser & Kirk, 2004) and without disabilities (Paseka & Schwab, 2020; Peck et al., 2004), as all members of the school community must advocate for successful inclusion practices to promote achievement and engagement of all students.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaboration in the Digital Age Collaboration between all members of the public school system becomes even more important–and arguably more difficult to coordinate–with a shift to online teaching, as teachers work to maintain inclusive practices in the digital domain. The use of inclusive digital practices has become especially pressing with worldwide educational crisis brought about by the 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19). The sudden shift to emergency remote education has been accompanied by unprecedented academic and social challenges (Bozkurt & Sharma, 2020), especially for students with special educational needs who are disproportionately impacted by the lack of socialization and specialized services in the virtual domain (Soudien, 2020). As Burgstahler explains, “people with disabilities who are on the right side of the first digital divide, too often find themselves on the wrong side of the second digital divide. They have technology but do not have full access to all of the benefits it delivers to others” (Burgstahler, 2005, p. 84). Especially when using preconstructed e-learning platforms, it is essential that teachers and administrators coordinate ways to provide individualized, accessible, and flexible learning options to students with diverse learning needs, who can otherwise all-too-easily fall through the cracks in the transition to distance learning (Burgstahler, 2015). It is therefore more necessary than ever to exploit the opportunities for individualized and immersive experiences afforded through the intentional use of technology (Loreman, 2017). This entails utilizing digital learning platforms for the purposes of ongoing formative feedback; self-paced, student-directed learning; and collaborative work (McGhie-Richmond & de Bruin, 2015). However, it also as involves continuing to provide students with the modifications and accommodations they need and deserve through the use of digital applications, so that students with diverse learning needs can continue to access the material and participate with their peers in a way that is relevant and meaningful to them.

58

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Putting Theory into Practice In the ongoing quest for inclusion in public schools, and taking into account best practices for in-person and online inclusion, we must look to existing models of success. One such exemplar is the empirically-supported Comprehensive Application of Behavior Analysis to Schooling (CABAS®) Accelerated Independent Learner (AIL) (www.cabasschools.org) model of education, which emphasizes an individualized system of instruction to promote accelerated learning for a wide range of students at varying academic and verbal level (Greer, 2002; Greer et al., 2002 Singer-Dudek et al., 2010). More specifically, this student-centered approach emphasizes the promotion of self-management and the establishment of prerequisites (e.g., observational learning, Naming) for increased rates of learning and independence for a diverse range of students via the strategies described herein. The model also prioritizes the development and evaluation of instructional practices and interventions that are feasible for implementation in the general education classroom setting, including the previously discussed initiatives for teachers, peers, and students. The model was developed using a behavior-analytic, inductive scientific process to address inefficiency and ineffectiveness in the way that schools teach students of increasingly diverse backgrounds (Greer, 1997). The field of behaviorism attributes the cause of all behavior to the individual’s history of reinforcement and punishment, as mediated by the establishing operations and controlling stimuli in one’s environment (Skinner, 1974). In nonbehavioral models, the blame for the inappropriate behavior is all-too-often placed on some inherent quality within the student, and descriptions are used to depict the behavior patterns of the student (i.e., “hyperactive” or “aggressive”) rather than addressing the actions involved; on the other hand, the behavior-analytic viewpoint provides practical solutions to instruction and avoids unscientific, over-generalized labels to describe student behavior. The CABAS® model purports that one must adjust the other components of the interdependent system of the education community in order to change a student’s behavior, since children’s behavior is not attributed to internal causes (i.e., ‘The student is always right’) (Greer, 2002). If a student is not learning, it is the responsibility of teachers and supervisors to make changes to the student’s environment to ensure that they learn within the known constraints of the science; students can learn only as fast as their teachers can teach them (Greer, 2002). Similarly, blame for students’ undesirable behavior should not be placed on parents (Greer, 1991, 2002). Instead, parents should be trained to effectively implement evidence-based pedagogical and measurement strategies in the home setting, and must receive frequent and objective feedback (Greer, 1991, 2002). 59

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Additionally, far too often the excuse is used that the aim of education is too abstract to condense into a simple definition of teaching as successful or unsuccessful. However, when action (i.e., changes in behavior) is assumed as the goal of education, such measurement issues become obsolete, and the accountability of teachers becomes objectively quantifiable and transparent. Rather than simply presenting students with information and assuming they are learning, the CABAS® model allows teachers to document their use of measurably effective teaching procedures, with such teachers designing and manipulating circumstances that quantifiably change the way their students think and behave in a systematic, effective, and efficient way. Recommendations for more inclusive teaching practices within the cybernetic CABAS® approach include implementing teaching practices that use replicated findings from the applied and scientific literature, and continuously collecting data on students’ responses to this instruction (Greer, 1991, 2002; Greer et al., 2002). More specifically, teachers utilizing this model present their students with continuous and consequated opportunities to respond to strategically-sequenced and operationally-defined objectives (Albers & Greer, 1991; Greer et al., 2002). All objectives are taught to pre-defined mastery and fluency criteria dependent on the progress and performance of each individual student, and the behavior of each student is continuously measured and displayed in real time (Greer et al, 2002; Greer & Ross, 2008). Furthermore, all instruction within these public school classrooms is differentiated and individualized based on the prerequisites and performance of the student, which has resulted in improved instruction as well as more precise measures of such teaching procedures (Singer-Dudek et al., 2010). This model has also produced effective tools for teacher training, a more comprehensive assessment of student repertoires and subsequent objectives, and ultimately better outcomes for students in classrooms in which the CABAS® model is implemented (Greer et al., 2002; Singer-Dudek et al., 2010). We must look toward this model, and other examples of inclusion success, to change our own models of thinking about inclusion, and to apply their practices on a broader scale.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION Systems of general and special education must not be treated by the school as separate entities, but rather as a spectrum of means by which the entire school community can provide each student with the education they deserve. Public schools are a microcosm of the public sphere and set the stage for a success much larger than academics alone. Considering that a “goal of inclusion is to prepare students to participate as full and contributing members of society,” (Lipsky & Gartner, 1994 60

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

p. 36), public schools must prioritize effective and efficient inclusive practices to confer legitimacy in all individuals’ belonging in society. This includes devising systems of classroom management to alleviate the readjustment and resources required on behalf of the classroom teacher, as well as understanding the contexts and prerequisites that promote success for a diverse range of learners and enacting peer- and student-directed tactics to allow for truly individualized learning for all. Above all, successful inclusion is built on a vision that every student is worthy and capable of reaching their full potential as students and future members of society. In the ongoing pursuit of a more integrated school system, all components of our school system must be willing and able to serve as agents of change in prompting more inclusive public schools, especially as the number of students with diverse learning needs being included in general education classrooms continues to rise (Comfort, 1997; Dent & Goldberg, 1999; Snyder & Anderson, 1986). John Dewey (1916) stated, “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself” (p. 239). With this philosophy in mind, we must continuously advocate for the success and value of all students to create a system of inclusion that extends beyond the public school system to the betterment of the public itself.

REFERENCES Albers, A. E., & Greer, R. D. (1991). Is the three-term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction? Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(3), 337–354. doi:10.1007/ BF00947188 Armendariz, F., & Umbreit, J. (1999). Using active responding to reduce disruptive behavior in a general education classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(3), 152–158. doi:10.1177/109830079900100303

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N. H. (1968). The token economy: A motivational system for therapy and rehabilitation. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Ayllon, T., Layman, D., & Burke, S. (1972). Disruptive behavior and reinforcement of academic performance. The Psychological Record, 22(3), 315–323. doi:10.1007/ BF03394096 Baker, J., & Zigmond, N. (1990). Mainstreaming learning disabled students: The impact on regular education students and teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA. Bar-Eli, N., & Ravin, A. (1982). Underachievers as tutors. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 682–685. doi:10.1080/00220671.1982.10885370 61

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Barbetta, P. M., Miller, A. D., Peters, M. T., Heron, T. E., & Cochran, L. L. (1991). Tugmate: A cross-age tutoring program to teach sight vocabulary. Education & Treatment of Children, 14(1), 19–37. Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Cullinan, V. (2001). Relational frame theory and Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 23(1), 69–84. doi:10.1007/BF03392000 PMID:22478339 Becker, W. C., Madsen, C. H. Jr, Arnold, C. R., & Thomas, D. R. (1967). The contingent use of teacher attention and praise in reducing classroom behavior problems. The Journal of Special Education, 1(3), 287–307. doi:10.1177/002246696700100307 Berliner, C. C. (1990). The case for peer tutoring: Research. Instructor, 99, 16–17. Boniecki, K. A., & Moore, S. (2003). Breaking the silence: Using a token economy to reinforce classroom participation. Teaching of Psychology, 30(3), 224–227. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3003_05 Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), i–vi. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. The American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–520. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. Bruneau-Balderrama, O. (1997). Inclusion: Making it work for teachers, too. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70(6), 328–330. doi:10.1080/00098655.1997.10543536

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Bryan, L. C., & Gast, D. L. (2000). Teaching on-task and on-schedule behaviors to high-functioning children with autism via picture activity schedules. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30(6), 553–567. doi:10.1023/A:1005687310346 PMID:11261467 Burgstahler, S. (2005). Web-based distance learning and the second digital divide. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and information technology (pp. 3079–3084). Idea Group Inc. doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch548 Burgstahler, S. (2015). Opening doors or slamming them shut? Online learning practices and students with disabilities. Social Inclusion (Lisboa), 3(6), 69–79. doi:10.17645i.v3i6.420

62

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Busick, M., & Neitzel, J. (2009). Self-management: Steps for implementation. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina. Callahan, C. M., Plucker, J. A., & Gluck, S. (2020). Inclusion of academically advanced gifted students. In J. M. Kauffman (Ed.), On Educational Inclusion: Meanings, History, Issues and International Perspectives. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429344039-9 Canter, L. L. S., King, L. H., Williams, J. B., Metcalf, D., & Potts, K. R. M. (2017). Evaluating pedagogy and practice of universal design for learning in public schools. Exceptionality Education International, 27(1), 1–16. Carr, E. G., & Darcy, M. (1990). Setting generality of peer modeling in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 20(1), 45–59. doi:10.1007/ BF02206856 PMID:2324055 Catania, A. C. (2007). Learning (4th ed.). Sloan Publishing. Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2016). The relationship between school-wide implementation of Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports and student discipline outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 89–99. doi:10.1177/1098300715590398 Comfort, L. K. (1997). Models of change: A dialogue between theory and practice. The American Behavioral Scientist, 40(3), 259–263. doi:10.1177/0002764297040003003 Cook, B., Tenkersley, M., & Landrum, T. (2000). Teachers’ attitudes toward their included students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 115–135. doi:10.1177/001440290006700108 Cooke, N. L., Heron, T. E., Heward, W. L., & Test, D. W. (1982). Integrating a Down’s syndrome child in a classwide peer tutoring system: A case report. Mental Retardation, 20, 22–25. PMID:6211588

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson. doi:10.26741/abaespana/2020.cooper3e Da Fonte, M. A., & Barton-Arwood, S. M. (2017). Collaboration of general and special education teachers: Perspectives and strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53(2), 99–106. doi:10.1177/1053451217693370 Davis, W. E. (1989). The regular education initiative debate: Its promises and problems. Exceptional Children, 55(5), 440–446. doi:10.1177/001440298905500507

63

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Delgado, J. A. P., & Greer, R. D. (2009). The effects of peer monitoring training on the emergence of the capability to learn from observing instruction received by peers. The Psychological Record, 59(3), 407–434. doi:10.1007/BF03395672 Dent, E. B., & Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging “resistance to change”. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1), 25–41. doi:10.1177/0021886399351003 Dewey, J. (1939). Experience and education. Macmillan. Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. The Free Press. (Original work published 1916) Dineen, J. P., Clark, H. B., & Risley, T. R. (1977). Peer tutoring among elementary students: Educational Benefits to the tutor. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), 231–238. doi:10.1901/jaba.1977.10-231 PMID:16795552 Dodd, A. W. (2000). Are higher standards and students’ needs compatible? Principal Leadership, 1(1), 28–32. Douvanis, G., & Hulsey, D. (2002). The least restrictive environment mandate: How has it been defined by the courts? The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13(4), 619–627. doi:10.1901/ jaba.1980.13-619 PMID:7204282 Egel, A. L. (1981). Reinforcer variation: Implications for motivating developmentally disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14(3), 345–350. doi:10.1901/ jaba.1981.14-345 PMID:7298543 Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2001). Access to the core curriculum: Critical ingredients for student success. Remedial and Special Education, 22(3), 148–157. doi:10.1177/074193250102200303

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Thousand, J. (2003). What do special educators need to know and be prepared to do for inclusive schooling to work? Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(1), 42–50. doi:10.1177/088840640302600105 Fisher, M., & Meyer, L. H. (2002). Development and social competence after two years for students enrolled in inclusive and self-contained educational programs. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27(3), 165–174. doi:10.2511/rpsd.27.3.165

64

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Fitch, F. (2003). Inclusion, exclusion, and ideology: Special education students’ changing sense of self. The Urban Review, 35(3), 233–252. doi:10.1023/A:1025733719935 Franca, V. M., Kerr, M. M., Reitz, A. L., & Lambert, D. (1990). Peer tutoring among behaviorally disordered students: Academic and social benefits to tutor and tutee. Education & Treatment of Children, 13(2), 109–128. Frederickson, N., Dunsmuir, S., Lang, J., & Monsen, J. J. (2004). Mainstream‐special school inclusion partnerships: Pupil, parent and teacher perspectives. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(1), 37–57. doi:10.1080/1360311032000159456 Freeman, S. F., & Alkin, M. C. (2000). Academic and social attainments of children with mental retardation in general education and special education settings. Remedial and Special Education, 21(1), 3–26. doi:10.1177/074193250002100102 Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1994). Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60(4), 294–309. doi:10.1177/001440299406000402 Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2000). Inclusion versus full inclusion. Profiles & Perspectives. Retrieved June 14, 2020, from https://beloinandbrandl.com/wp-content/ uploads/Forum_M2_Supplemental.pdf Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. doi:10.1598/ RRQ.41.1.4 Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Bishop, N. (1992). Instructional adaptation for students at risk. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(2), 70–84. doi:10.1080/0022067 1.1992.9941143

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Gautreaux, G. G. (2005). The effects of monitoring training on the acquisition of an observational learning repertoire under peer tutoring conditions, generalization and collateral effects (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 2005). Abstract from UMI Proquest Digital Dissertations. Dissertation Abstracts Item: AAT3174795. Gee, K., Gonzalez, M., & Cooper, C. (2020). Outcomes of inclusive versus separate placements: A matched pairs comparison study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45(4), 223–240. doi:10.1177/1540796920943469

65

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Giangreco, M. F., Prelock, P. A., Reid, R. R., Dennis, R. E., & Edelman, S. W. (1999). Roles of related service personnel in inclusive schools. In R. A. Villa & J. S. Thousand (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education: Piecing the puzzle together (2nd ed., pp. 360–393). Paul H. Brookes. Greer, R. D. (1991). Teaching practices to save America’s schools: The legacy of BF Skinner. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(2), 159–164. doi:10.1007/BF00957002 Greer, R. D. (1997). The comprehensive application of behavior analysis to schooling (CABAS®). Behavior and Social Issues, 7(1), 59–63. doi:10.5210/bsi.v7i1.300 Greer, R. D. (2002). Designing teaching strategies: An applied behavior analysis systems approach. Academic Press. Greer, R. D., Corwin, A., & Buttigieg, S. (2011). The effects of the verbal developmental capability of Naming on how children can be taught. Acta de Investigación Psicológica, 1(1), 23–54. doi:10.22201/fpsi.20074719e.2011.1.214 Greer, R. D., Keohane, D., Meincke, K., Gautreaux, G., Pereira, J. A., ChavezBrown, M., & Yuan, L. (2004). Key instructional components of effective peer tutoring for tutors, tutees, and peer observers. In D. J. Moran & R. W. Malott (Eds.), Evidence-based educational methods (pp. 295–333). Academic Press. doi:10.1016/ B978-012506041-7/50018-8 Greer, R. D., Keohane, D. D., & Healy, O. (2002). Quality and comprehensive applications of behavior analysis to schooling. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3(2), 120–132. doi:10.1037/h0099977 Greer, R. D., Pohl, P., Du, L., & Moschella, J. L. (2017). The separate development of children’s listener and speaker behavior and the intercept as behavioral metamorphosis. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 7(13), 674–704. doi:10.4236/jbbs.2017.713045

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Greer, R. D., & Ross, D. E. (2008). Verbal behavior analysis: Inducing and expanding new verbal capabilities in children with language delays. Allyn & Bacon. Greer, R. D., Singer-Dudek, J., & Gautreaux, G. (2006). Observational lear ning. Inter national Jour nal of Psychology, 41(6), 486–499. doi:10.1080/00207590500492435 Greer, R. D., Stolfi, L., Chavez-Brown, M., & Rivera-Valdez, C. (2005). The emergence of the listener to speaker component of Naming in children as a function of multiple exemplar instruction. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 21(1), 123–134. doi:10.1007/ BF03393014 PMID:22477318 66

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Hammond, H., & Ingalls, L. (2003). Teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion: Survey results from elementary school teachers in three southwestern rural school district. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 22(2), 24–30. doi:10.1177/875687050302200204 Heyder, A., Südkamp, A., & Steinmayr, R. (2020). How are teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion related to the social-emotional school experiences of students with and without special educational needs? Learning and Individual Differences, 77, 77. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101776 Higgins, J. W., Williams, R. L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (2001). The effects of a token economy employing instructional consequences for a third-grade student with learning disabilities: A data-based case study. Education & Treatment of Children, 24(1), 99–106. Hong, S., Kwon, K., & Jeon, H.-J. (2014). Children’s attitudes towards peers with disabilities: Associations with personal and parental factors. Infant and Child Development, 23(2), 170–193. doi:10.1002/icd.1826 Horner, R. (2016, January 26). A brief history of PBIS with Rob Horner [Audio podcast]. www.tash.org Horrocks, J., White, G., & Roberts, L. (2008). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion of children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(8), 1462–1473. doi:10.100710803-007-0522-x PMID:18256916 Houchens, G. W., Zhang, J., Davis, K., Niu, C., Chon, K. H., & Miller, S. (2017). The impact of positive behavior interventions and supports on teachers’ perceptions of teaching conditions and student achievement. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(3), 168–179. doi:10.1177/1098300717696938

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Hranchuk, K., Greer, R. D., & Longano, J. (2019). Instructional demonstrations are more efficient than consequences alone for children with naming. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 35(1), 1–20. doi:10.100740616-018-0095-0 PMID:31976218 Hunt, P., Doering, K., Hirose-Hatae, A., Maier, J., & Goetz, L. (2001). Across-program collaboration to support students with and without disabilities in a general education classroom. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(4), 240–256. doi:10.2511/rpsd.26.4.240 Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., & Doering, K. (2003). Collaborative teaming to support students at risk and students with severe disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 315–332. doi:10.1177/001440290306900304

67

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(1), 20–35. doi:10.1080/aac.18.1.20.35 Jimerson, S., Burns, M., & VanDerHayden, A. (2007). Response to intervention. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-49053-3 Johnson, G. O. (1962). Special education for the mentally handicapped—A paradox. Exceptional Children, 29(2), 62–69. doi:10.1177/001440296202900202 Johnson, M., & Bailey, J. (1974). Cross-age tutoring: Fifth graders as arithmetic tutors for kindergarten children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7(2), 223–232. doi:10.1901/jaba.1974.7-223 PMID:4436170 Kamps, D., Locke, P., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Increasing academic skills of students with autism using fifth grade peers as tutors. Education & Treatment of Children, 12(1), 38–51. Kamps, D., Royer, J., Dugan, E., Kravits, T., Gonzalez-Lopez, A., Garcia, J., Carnazzo, K., Morrison, L., & Kane, L. G. (2002). Peer training to facilitate social interaction for elementary students with autism and their peers. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 173–187. doi:10.1177/001440290206800202 Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994b). Classwide peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(1), 49–61. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-49 PMID:8188563

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kamps, D. M., Dugan, E. P., & Leonard, B. R. (1994a). Enhanced small group instruction using choral responding and student. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 99(1), 60–73. PMID:7946254 Kamps, D. M., Leonard, B. R., Vernon, S., Dugan, E. P., Delquadri, J. C., Gershon, B., Wade, L., & Folk, L. (1992). Teaching social skills to students with autism to increase peer interactions in an integrated first‐grade classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 281–288. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-281 PMID:1634423 Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (2000). History, rhetoric, and reality. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 279–296. doi:10.1177/074193250002100505 Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye, teacher…. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 79–89. 68

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Students’ perceptions of instruction in inclusion classrooms: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 23–37. Knapczyk, D. R., & Livingston, G. (1973). Self‐recording and student teacher supervision: Variables within a token economy structure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6(3), 481–486. doi:10.1901/jaba.1973.6-481 PMID:16795431 Kochhar, C. A., & West, L. L. (1996). Handbook for Successful Inclusion. Aspen Publishers. Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Hurley, C., & Frea, W. D. (1992). Improving social skills and disruptive behavior in children with autism through self‐management. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 341–353. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25341 PMID:1634427 Koegel, L. K., Singh, A. K., & Koegel, R. L. (2010). Improving motivation for academics in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(9), 1057–1066. doi:10.100710803-010-0962-6 PMID:20221791 Koegel, R. L., & Egel, A. L. (1979). Motivating autistic children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88(4), 418–426. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.88.4.418 PMID:479464 Kunc, N. (1992). The need to belong: Rediscovering Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In R. A. Villa, J. S. Thousand, W. Stainback, & S. Stainback (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education: An administrative guide to creating heterogeneous schools (pp. 25-39). Paul H. Brookes. Kurth, J. A., Morningstar, M. E., & Kozleski, E. B. (2014). The persistence of highly restrictive special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(3), 227–239. doi:10.1177/1540796914555580

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Lamm, N., & Greer, R. D. (1991). A systematic replication and a comparative analysis of CABAS. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(4), 427–444. doi:10.1007/ BF00946776 Lanter, A., & Singer-Dudek, J. (2020). The effects of an observational conditioningby-denial intervention on the establishment of three observational learning cusps. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 21(2), 231–254. doi:10.1080/15021149. 2020.1724001

69

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Lee, S., Odom, S. L., & Loftin, R. (2007). Social engagement with peers and stereotypic behavior of children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 67–79. doi:10.1177/10983007070090020401 Leyser, Y., & Kirk, R. (2004). Evaluating inclusion: An examination of parent views and factors influencing their perspectives. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 51(3), 271–285. doi:10.1080/1034912042000259233 Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1994). Inclusive education and school restructuring. ERIC. Retrieved June 13, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED383128 Lipsky, O. K., & Gartner, A. (1991). Restructuring for quality. In J. W. Lloyd, A. C. Repp, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), The Regular Education Initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 43–56). Sycamore. Loreman, T. (2017). Pedagogy for Inclusive Education. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Love, H. R., & Horn, E. (2021). Definition, context, quality: Current issues in research examining high-quality inclusive education. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 40(4), 204–216. doi:10.1177/0271121419846342 Madsen, C. H. Jr, Becker, W. C., & Thomas, D. R. (1968). Rules, praise, and ignoring: Elements of elementary classroom control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(2), 139–150. doi:10.1901/jaba.1968.1-139 PMID:16795170 Maheady, L., Sacca, M. K., & Harper, G. F. (1988). Classwide peer tutoring with mildly handicapped high school students. Exceptional Children, 55(1), 52–59. doi:10.1177/001440298805500106 PMID:3169102 Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2000). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction. Merrill.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Matzen, K., Ryndak, D., & Nakao, T. (2010). Middle school teams increasing access to general education for students with significant disabilities: Issues encountered and activities observed across contexts. Remedial and Special Education, 31(4), 287–304. doi:10.1177/0741932508327457 McGhie-Richmond, D., & de Bruin, C. (2015). Tablets, tweets, and talking text: The role of technology in inclusive pedagogy. In J. Deppeler, T. Loreman, R. Smith, & L. Florian (Eds.), Inclusive pedagogy across the curriculum: International perspectives on inclusive education (Vol. 7, pp. 211–234). Emerald Group Publishing. doi:10.1108/ S1479-363620150000007017

70

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

McIntosh, R., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Haager, D., & Lee, O. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60(3), 249–261. doi:10.1177/001440299406000306 Miguel, C. (2016). Common and intraverbal bidirectional naming. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 32(2), 125–138. doi:10.100740616-016-0066-2 PMID:30800621 Miller, M., Garriott, P., & Mershon, D. (2005). Special education students’ placement preferences as shown in special education journals. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 1(9), Article 7. Milo, J. S., Mace, F. C., & Nevin, J. A. (2010). The effects of constant versus varied reinforcers on preference and resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 93(3), 385–394. doi:10.1901/jeab.2010.93-385 PMID:21119852 Monsen, J. J., Ewing, D. L., & Kwoka, M. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, perceived adequacy of support and classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 17(1), 113–126. doi:10.100710984-013-9144-8 Mu, K., Siegel, E. B., & Allinder, R. M. (2000). Peer interactions and sociometric status of high school students with moderate or severe disabilities in general education classrooms. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(3), 142–152. doi:10.2511/rpsd.25.3.142 Narayan, J. S., Heward, W. L., Gardner, R. III, Courson, F. H., & Omness, C. K. (1990). Using response cards to increase student participation in an elementary classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23(4), 483–490. doi:10.1901/ jaba.1990.23-483 PMID:16795735 Neitzel, J., & Busick, M. (2009). Overview of self-management. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Noltemeyer, A., Palmer, K., James, A. G., & Petrasek, M. (2019). Disciplinary and achievement outcomes associated with school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports implementation level. School Psychology Review, 48(1), 81–87. doi:10.17105/SPR-2017-0131.V48-1 Oliver, R. M., Wehby, J. H., & Nelson, J. R. (2015). Helping teachers maintain classroom management practices using a self-monitoring checklist. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 113–120. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.007

71

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Pas, E. T., Johnson, S. R., Debnam, K. J., Hulleman, C. S., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2019). Examining the relative utility of PBIS implementation fidelity scores in relation to student outcomes. Remedial and Special Education, 40(1), 6–15. doi:10.1177/0741932518805192 Paseka, A., & Schwab, S. (2020). Parents’ attitudes towards inclusive education and their perceptions of inclusive teaching practices and resources. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), 254–272. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1665232 Patterson, J., Marshall, C., & Bowling, D. (2000). Are principals prepared to manage special education dilemmas? NASSP Bulletin, 84(613), 9–20. doi:10.1177/019263650008461303 Patterson, J., & Protheroe, N. (2001). Essentials for principals: School leader’s guide to special education. National Association of Elementary School Principals. Peck, C. A., Staub, D., Gallucci, C., & Schwartz, I. (2004). Parent perception of the impacts of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29(2), 135–143. doi:10.2511/rpsd.29.2.135 Petrasek, M., James, A., Noltemeyer, A., Green, J., & Palmer, K. (2021). Enhancing motivation and engagement within a PBIS framework. Improving Schools, 1–15. Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 50–58. doi:10.1016/j. ijedudev.2010.06.009 Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R. C., Smith, T. E., & Buck, G. H. (1997). Mental retardation and learning disabilities: Conceptual and applied issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(3), 297–308. doi:10.1177/002221949703000305 PMID:9146096

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Reina, R., Hutzler, Y., Iniguez-Santiago, M. C., & Moreno-Murcia, J. A. (2019). Student attitudes toward inclusion in physical education: The impact of ability beliefs, gender, and previous experiences. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly; APAQ, 36(1), 132–149. doi:10.1123/apaq.2017-0146 PMID:30554524 Rhoad-Drogalis, A., & Justice, L. M. (2020). Is the proportion of children with disabilities in inclusive preschool programs associated with children’s achievement? Journal of Early Intervention, 42(1), 83–96. doi:10.1177/1053815119873100 Rock, M. L., & Thead, B. K. (2009). Promote student success during independent seatwork. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(3), 179–184. doi:10.1177/1053451208326055

72

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Rothstein, M. B., & Gautreaux, G. G. (2007). The effects of a peer-yoked contingency on observational learning and the collateral emergence of naming. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention: JEIBI, 4(2), 453–470. doi:10.1037/h0100384 Salend, S. J. (2001). Creating inclusive classrooms: Effective and reflective practices (4th ed.). Merrill. Saloviita, T. (2020). Teacher attitudes towards the inclusion of students with support needs. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 20(1), 64–73. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12466 Santoli, S. P., Sachs, J., Romey, E. A., & McClurg, S. (2008). A successful formula for middle school inclusion: Collaboration, time, and administrative support. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 32(2), 1–13. doi:10.1080/19404476 .2008.11462055 Shook, S. C., LaBrie, M., Vallies, J., McLaughlin, T. F., & Williams, R. L. (1990). The effects of a token economy on first grade students inappropriate social behavior. Reading Improvement, 27(2), 96–102. Shores, R. E. (1987). Overview of research on social interaction: A historical and personal perspective. Behavioral Disorders, 12(4), 233–241. doi:10.1177/019874298701200408 Singer-Dudek, J., Choi, J., & Lyons, L. (2013). The effects of an observational intervention on the emergence of two types of observational learning. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 14(2), 329–347. doi:10.1080/15021149.2013.11434465 Singer-Dudek, J., Speckman, J., & Nuzzolo, R. (2010). A comparative analysis of the CABAS® model of education at the Fred S. Keller School: A twenty-year review. The Behavior Analyst Today, 11(4), 253–265. doi:10.1037/h0100705 Skinner, B. F. (1974). About Behaviorism. Vintage.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Skrtic, T. M. (1987). An organizational analysis of special educational reform. Counterpoint, 8, 15-19. Snell, M. E., & Janney, R. E. (2000). Teachers’ problem-solving about children with moderate and severe disabilities in elementary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 472–490. doi:10.1177/001440290006600403 Snyder, K. J., & Anderson, R. H. (1986). Managing productive schools: Towards an ecology. Academic Press.

73

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Snyder, L., Garriott, P., & Aylor, M. W. (2001). Inclusion confusion: Putting the pieces together. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 198–207. doi:10.1177/088840640102400304 Soudien, C. (2020). Systemic shock: How Covid-19 exposes our learning challenges in education. Southern African Review of Education, 26(1), 6–19. Soudien, C. (2020). Complexities of difference and their significance for managing i inequality in learning: Lessons from the COVID-19 crisis. Prospects, 49(1), 59–67. doi:10.100711125-020-09486-x PMID:32836428 Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1992). Schools as inclusive communities. In Controversial issues confronting special education: Divergent perspectives (pp. 29–43). Allyn & Bacon. Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1991). Rationale for integration and restructuring: A synopsis. In J. W. Lloyd, A. C. Repp, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), The regular education initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 225–239). Sycamore. Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: Schoolwide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1-2), 23–50. doi:10.1300/J019v24n01_03 Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining School-Wide Positive Behavior Support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259. doi:10.1080/02796015.2006.12087989 Swain, J. C., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1998). The effects of bonus contingencies in a classwide token program on math accuracy with middle‐school students with behavioral disorders. Behavioral Interventions, 13(1), 11–19. doi:10.1002/ (SICI)1099-078X(199802)13:13.0.CO;2-1

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Tarbox, R. S., Ghezzi, P. M., & Wilson, G. (2006). The effects of token reinforcement on attending in a young child with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 21(3), 155–164. doi:10.1002/bin.213 Taylor, R. L., Richards, S. B., Goldstein, P. A., & Schilit, J. (1997). Teacher perceptions of inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(3), 50–54. doi:10.1177/004005999702900309 Thousand, J., & Villa, R. A. (2000). Inclusion: Welcoming, valuing, and supporting the diverse learning needs of all students in shared general education environments. Special Services in the Schools, 15(1-2), 73–108. doi:10.1300/J008v15n01_05 74

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Tichenor, M., & Tichenor, J. (2019). Collaboration in the elementary school: What do teachers think? Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 8(2), 54–61. doi:10.5430/ jct.v8n2p54 Trapani, C., & Gettinger, M. (1989). Effects of social skills training and crossage tutoring on academic achievement and social behaviors of boys with learning disabilities. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 22(4), 1–9. Twyman, J. S. (1998). The Fred S. Keller School. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 695–701. doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-695 U.S. Department of Education. (2020). Students with Disabilities. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved June 13, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgg.asp#f3 Varni, J. W., Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., & Everett, N. L. (1979). An analysis of observational learning in autistic and normal children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 7(1), 31–43. doi:10.1007/BF00924508 PMID:438430 Vaughn, S., Bos, C., & Schumm, J. S. (2018). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (7th ed.). Pearson Education. Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Kouzekanani, K. (1993). What do students with learning disabilities think when their general education teachers make adaptations? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(8), 545–555. doi:10.1177/002221949302600808 PMID:8245700 Vignes, C., Godeau, E., Sentenac, M., Coley, N., Navarro, F., Grandjean, H., & Arnaud, C. (2009). Determinants of students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 51(6), 473–479. doi:10.1111/j.14698749.2009.03283.x PMID:19416319

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Voltz, D. L., Brazil, N., & Ford, A. (2001). What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide for moving forward. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(1), 23–30. doi:10.1177/105345120103700105 Wallace, T., Anderson, A. R., Bartholomay, T., & Hupp, S. (2002). An ecobehavioral examination of high school classrooms that include students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68(3), 345–359. doi:10.1177/001440290206800304 Welch, F. C., Lindsay, S., & Halfacre, J. (2001). Quality principals: Questions to consider. Principal Leadership. High School Edition, 1(6), 56–59.

75

Effective and Efficient Practices for Successful Inclusion in Public School Settings

Werts, M. G., Caldwell, N. K., & Wolery, M. (1996). Peer modeling of response chains: Observational learning by students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(1), 53–66. doi:10.1901/jaba.1996.29-53 PMID:8881344 Williamson, P., McLeskey, J., Hoppey, D., & Rentz, T. (2006). Educating students with mental retardation in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 347–361. doi:10.1177/001440290607200306 Wood, M. (1998). Whose job is it anyway? Educational roles in inclusion. Exceptional Children, 64(2), 181–195. doi:10.1177/001440299806400203 Zagona, A. L., Kurth, J. A., & MacFarland, S. Z. (2017). Teachers’ views of their preparation for inclusive education and collaboration. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(3), 163–178. doi:10.1177/0888406417692969

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Accommodation: A change in the process through which the student reaches a goal; often involves some sort of tool or scaffold. Cybernetic: An interdependent relationship between various members of a community. Differentiated Instruction: An approach to teaching in which all students’ individual needs are simultaneously met within a cohesive classroom system. Inclusion: The ongoing act of arranging the environment so that all individuals have the opportunity and the right to reach their full potential. Modification: A change in a goal due to a limitation that prevents the student from being able to reach the goal as is. Naming: The ability to learn incidentally, such that one knows the name of a stimulus simply by having been exposed in natural settings on multiple occasions. Observational Learning: The capability to learn new behaviors by observing the consequences received by another regarding that same behavior. Self-Management: The application of strategies to regulate one’s own behaviors.

76

77

Chapter 4

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction Alpana Bhattacharya https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5152-7748 Queens College and Graduate Center, CUNY, USA

ABSTRACT This chapter illustrates pedagogical practices from an undergraduate educational psychology course focused on preparing preservice teacher candidates for inclusive education in grades 7-12 general classes. First, literature related to teacher preparation for multi-tiered inclusive education is reviewed. Next, an inclusive instructional project is showcased to pinpoint pedagogical approaches used for promoting preservice teacher candidates’ capabilities for diferentiated instruction and technology-enhanced instruction in general education. Finally, implications of pedagogical practices for promoting preservice teacher candidates’ aptitude for teaching diverse students via diferentiated instruction are discussed, and future research directions for examining efectiveness of teacher preparation in general education for inclusive education are suggested.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION In 2018-2019, 7.1 million (i.e., 14 percent) of all students in public schools, ages 3-21, received special education services under Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in the United States. In fall 2018, among all students ages 6–21 served under IDEA, 64 percent spent 80 percent or more of their time inside DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch004 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

general classes in regular schools, 18 percentage spent 40 to 79 percent of the school day inside general classes, and 13 percentage spent less than 40 percent of their time inside general classes. The percentage of students served under IDEA who spent most of the school day inside general classes was 88% of students with speech or language impairments, 72 percent specific learning disabilities, 68 percent visual impairments, 67 percent other health impairments, 66 percent developmental delays, 63 percent hearing impairments, 17 percent intellectual disabilities and 14 percent multiple disabilities (Hussar, et al., 2020).This suggests that future teachers have to be appropriately prepared to teach P-12 students with disabilities in general classes. With revision to the IDEA, general education teachers are now expected to integrate educational interventions, such as the widely adopted model, Response to Intervention (RtI), as a preventative measure for addressing inappropriate identification and disproportionate placement of academically struggling students in special education. Prior to initiation of RtI and Inclusion as pedagogical approaches for attending to the learning needs of students at risk of academic failure, special education teachers were charged with the responsibility of screening, assessing, and educating students with disabilities (Barrio & Combes, 2015). Currently, however, such responsibilities have shifted to now include general education teachers, thereby ushering in the practice of inclusive education and collaboration between general education and special education (Zagona et al., 2017). Preservice teachers who are prepared to teach in general education, however, express concern about their aptitude for operationalizing RtI in their classes as an approach for differentiating instruction and attending to the learning needs of all students, including those at risk for special education referral (Barrio & Combes, 2015). Findings from the Stites et al. (2018) study indicated that preservice teachers often lacked thorough understanding of inclusion and were of the position that additional preparation was needed in order for them to teach effectively in an inclusive setting. “Teacher preparation programs therefore need to provide a more coherent conceptual framework to guide the enhancement of both course and field work related to inclusion and effective inclusive practices” (p 21). This chapter exhibits pedagogical practice from an educational psychology course geared towards preservice teacher candidates’ preparation for inclusive education in 7-12 grade classes. First, literature related to preservice teacher candidates’ preparation for inclusive education is reviewed. Specifically, the Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) is reviewed to pinpoint a trajectory for advancing preservice teacher candidates’ aptitude for educating diverse students in inclusive classes. Next, the process of engaging preservice teacher candidates in the development and demonstration of technology-enhanced and differentiated instruction for implementing inclusive education in 7-12 grade general classes is showcased. Finally, implications of pedagogical approaches for promoting preservice teacher candidates’ propensity for teaching 7-12 grade diverse students via inclusive educational methods as well 78

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

as future research related to teacher preparation for inclusion of diverse students in general education are discussed.

BACKGROUND Theoretical Framework Guiding Teacher Preparation for Inclusive Education The Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) frameworks described in this chapter serves as theoretical foundation for preservice teacher candidates’ preparation in an educational psychology course for inclusive education. Elements of the MTSS framework are integrated within the course for building preservice teacher candidates’ readiness to teach diverse students in grades 7-12 inclusive classes.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) Framework for Inclusive Education “Multi-tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) is a framework that is increasingly being used to meet the needs of all students in inclusive schools” (Reese et al., 2018, p. 19). Since diversity in education requires high standards and expectations for all learners, MTSS is a systematic educational approach which addresses social, emotional, behavioral, and learning of all students through inclusive practices (Hoover & Patton, 2008). In the MTSS framework, Tier I provides universal supports to all students; Tier II provides targeted supports to students who may need additional intervention; and Tier III provides intensive support to students who need individualized intervention (Miller et al., 2019). The three tiers of the MTSS framework is based on some foundational principles. The guiding principles of the MTSS framework are: 1) schoolwide support for students, staff, and family; 2) data driven decision making and problem solving; 3) generate multitiered prevention system to promote students’ academic skills and improve their behaviors; 4) conduct screening and consistently monitor progress; and 5) integrate evidence-based practice on a continuum (Morningstar et al., 2018). Researchers contend that improved student outcomes are possible in schools that implement MTSS framework where academic and behavioral curriculum are aligned with student learning through evidence-based instruction. Furthermore, schools that implement MTSS framework are able to meet the needs of 80-85% of their students with high quality core curriculum and highly effective instructional practice (i.e., Tier I support) and the needs of 15-20% of their students with intensive interventions (i.e., Tiers II and III supports). Thus, “MTSS provides a system of highly effective teaching methods and curriculum to support 79

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

general education students, students with disabilities, English-language learners, and gifted students” (Mundschenk et al., 2017, p. 394). Response to Intervention (RtI) is a comprehensive school-wide support system that reflects elements of the MTSS framework. As is inherent in the MTSS framework, RtI encompasses a multitiered system which incorporated a core curriculum enriched with interventions available to all, plus highly individualized and intensive interventions for those who need them. More specifically, Tier I emphasizes teaching of the core curriculum to all students in the general education classroom, with integration of differentiated instruction for supporting academic performances of struggling learners (e.g., students with specific learning disabilities). Tier II combines general instruction, which addresses learning of all students, and differentiated instruction, which accommodates for learning of struggling learners in the general education class, with targeted supplemental supports (e.g., strategy-based paired instruction) outside of the general education class to strengthen academic learning of struggling learners. Tier III, the final tier, encompasses intensive intervention outside of the general education classroom (e.g., individualized after-school tutoring) to support academic outcomes of struggling learners (Mundschenk et al., 2017; Reese et al., 2018).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Integration of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) in Teacher Education Effects of inclusive practices anchored in schoolwide MTSS framework have been studied by researchers both in terms of preservice teacher preparation for inclusive education as well as in-service teachers’ instruction in inclusive classrooms. Mundschenk and her colleagues (2017) describe a professional development model focused on supporting teacher educators’ integration of MTSS principles in teacher preparation courses and clinical practice for building preservice teacher candidates’ aptitude for teaching diverse students in inclusive settings. Their MTSS professional development model for teacher educators targeted key elements such as universal core instruction, evidence-based practices, problem-solving process, formal and informal assessment, data-based decision making, positive behavior interventions and supports, parent involvement and collaboration, and integrity of implementation. The MTSS professional development initiative targeted elementary education program faculty from nine universities based on the following criteria: a) majority of the graduates from these universities were from elementary education programs; b) elementary education graduates were expected to have crucial influence in P-12 settings as future general education teachers, c) facilities required redesign of elementary education programs, and d) debunking of the myth that MTSS was mainly a special education matter. Outcomes of the MTSS professional development for teacher preparation 80

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

faculty suggested that with support elementary education faculty were able to revise their courses and supervised clinical practice by integrating elements of MTSS. Furthermore, this professional development initiative also helped debunk the myth that MTSS was primarily a special education issue as faculty acquired the knowledge and skills for aligning their coursework with their state professional teaching standards which explicitly indicated that general education teacher are expected to plan and deliver instruction, assess learning, and generate positive learning environment for diverse learners. Finally, teacher education faculty were able to bridge the space between their college coursework and P-12 field-based experience by integrating MTSS elements in preparing elementary education preservice teachers for P-12 inclusive education. Application of the MTSS framework for redesign of literacy education program, as aligned with the Common Core State Standards, has been described in Reese and her colleagues’ (2018) manuscript. Application of the MTSS framework was replicated in the literacy program redesign, wherein Tier 1 literacy course focused on reading, writing, and oral language and Tiers 2/3 literacy course focused on reading foundations intervention. These courses were designed to develop teacher candidates’ knowledge of reading and writing processes, and how such processes could differ for students with disabilities and English learners. These literacy courses also provided teacher candidates with opportunities to practice strategy-based literacy instruction with grade school students during their fieldwork, and thereafter reflect on and share their experiences with peers and faculty in their literacy courses. Another element of inclusive education integrated in the MTSS model in the literacy education courses was co-teaching by general education program faculty and special education program faculty, as is often practiced in P-12 schools. The co-taught literacy courses provided teacher candidates with additional opportunities to observe collaborative integration of literacy instruction and interventions as a part of their teacher preparation, which they then had the option of implementing during their own collaborative teaching with their mentor teacher during clinical practice. A final feature of the MTSS integrated literacy courses was strengthening of university-school partnership to prepare teacher candidates for P-12 grade inclusive education. University-school partnership was strengthened in three ways. One approach was to hold the literacy courses in the partnership school where the teacher candidates were to concurrently engage in clinical practice. This also provided the literacy course faculty to observe lessons, thereby having a shared experience with the teacher candidates. Another way of cementing university-school partnership was through faculty and cooperating teacher collaboration in identifying instructional objectives and interventions that teacher candidates were to implement in the cooperating teacher’s class during clinical practice. A final form of partnership between university and school was through university faculty and school administration collaboration in designing 81

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

and implementing the literacy education program and through faculty and teacher candidates’ participation in professional development with school administrators and teachers.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Implementation of Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) In Grade School Compared to Mundschenk et al. (2017) and Reese et al. (2018) descriptions of teacher preparation programs aligned with MTSS and state curricular standards, Morningstar et al. (2018) describe an extended framework of MTSS which embeds College and Career Readiness (CCR, Morningstar et al., 2017) for all students, including students with disabilities, in secondary schools. CCR is explained as incorporating core academic (e.g., content knowledge) and nonacademic skills (e.g., cognitive strategies, learning strategies, social skills, and transition knowledge and skills). “As such, educators face the daunting challenge of prioritizing academic and nonacademic elements of CCR while personalizing student learning to meet the individual needs of all students, including students at risk of school failure and those with disabilities” (p. 3). In their CCR framework, Morningstar et al. (2017) identify six domains that are key for preparing students with disabilities to transition from secondary school to postsecondary education and work. The six domains include: academic engagement, mindsets, learning processes, critical thinking, interpersonal engagement, and transition competencies. Academic engagement requires that students acquire behaviors and skills that could develop work habits which they could use in college and career settings. Mindsets requires that students learn goal setting, decision making, self-monitoring, and perseverance for ensuring personal growth and success in college and career settings. Learning processes requires that students master strategies and skills for accessing academic content (e.g., note-taking, test-taking, and time management) and engaging in learning (e.g., collaborative groupwork, nonverbal communication, and verbal communication). Critical thinking requires that students learn cognitive strategies for problem solving and apply such strategies in future college and career environments. Interpersonal engagement requires that students develop social awareness, empathy, and respect for diversity, which are foundational interpersonal skills in preparing students with disabilities for postsecondary education and the workforce. Transition competencies require planning for transition to postsecondary education and career. During transition planning students are prepared to meet the demands of college (e.g., faculty and peer expectations, dormitory living, and recreation) and career environments (e.g., professionalism, interviewing, and coworker/supervisor relationships), and develop skills for accessing community resources, health and wellness, transportation, and independent living. 82

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

In their integrated CCS/MTSS framework, Morningstar et al. (2018) embed the six domains of the CCS framework (Morningstar et al. 2017) in alignment with the three tiers of the MTSS framework. For instance, Morningstar and her colleagues illustrate embedment of the learning processes domain of the CSS framework within the MTSS framework with notetaking instruction for preparing students with disabilities to transition to postsecondary education and workforce. Tier 1 focuses on teaching notetaking to all students in the general class, with accommodations for students with disabilities (e.g., speech synthesized software and electronic template for notetaking). Tier 2 ensures that students at risk of school failure or students with disabilities, who have more intensive needs, are provided access to academic content through separate, small group study skills class where students learn targeted note-taking strategies. Tier 3 provides intensive supports to ensure that students can access and engage with academic content through peer mentoring programs implemented within general education classrooms. Peer mentoring fosters communication through collaborative groupwork, which enables all students to access and engage in learning processes contributing towards collage and career readiness. According to Morningstar et al. (2018), their proposed CCR and MTSS blended approach unifies academic and nonacademic factors leading to short-term outcomes (i.e., in-school learning engagement) as well as long-term outcomes (i.e., college and career success).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Preservice Teacher Candidates’ Preparation for Inclusive Education This chapter showcases preservice teacher candidates’ preparation within an undergraduate educational psychology course, Cognition, Technology, and Instruction for Diverse Learners, for educating 7-12 grade students from diverse backgrounds, including students with disabilities, for inclusion in general education. The educational psychology course is designed to ensures that preservice teacher candidates acquire and exhibit aptitude for educating all 7-12 grade students in an inclusive educational environment by aligning the course objectives with specific Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) core teaching standards. For example, preparation of preservice teachers for educating 7-12 grades diverse students through inclusive approaches is guided by InTASC Standard 2: Learning Differences - “The teacher uses understanding of individual differences and diverse cultures and communities to ensure inclusive learning environments that enable each learner to meet high standard” (p. 11), and Standard 3: Learning Environments – “The teacher works with others to create environments that support individual and collaborative learning, and that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation” (p.12, Council of Chief State School Officers, 2011, April). This is of significance because it implies that future 83

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

teachers should acquire knowledge, skills, and dispositions to not only understand and attend to the individual differences of students as related to their ethnicity, language, and income, but also those associated with disabilities. Discussion in this chapter therefore emphasizes preservice teacher candidates’ preparation for designing, implementing, and assessing inclusive educational practices for diverse students, including students with disabilities, in general education.

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER Preservice teachers often are not effectively prepared to work with students with disabilities in general education (Barrio & Combes, 2015). With increase in the number of students with disabilities in public schools from 6.4 million to 7.1 million between 2011–12 and 2018–19 (Hussar et al., 2020), teacher education programs are currently expected to prepare preservice teachers to effectively work with these students (Myers & Rivero, 2019; Zagona, et al., 2017). Teaching candidates can be prepared to work with diverse learners by engaging them in collaborative teacher training projects (Burstein & Cabello, 1989), wherein they have the opportunities to: (a) work collaboratively and cooperatively with other preservice peers prior to being in an actual school setting; (b) collaboratively design lessons and materials for diverse learners; and c) work with diverse learners in their field (Crosby, 2012). Teacher educators who teach educational psychology as a core course in teacher preparation programs therefore are expected to ensure that preservice teacher candidates acquire knowledge, skills, and dispositions for designing, implementing, and assessing inclusive instruction for supporting learning of diverse students in general education classes, including students with disabilities.

Teacher Preparation for Inclusive Instruction in General Education

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Connecting Inclusive Pedagogical Practices with RtI Supplemental Support Tiers This chapter illustrates and describe an inclusive education project which is designed to engage preservice teacher candidates in designing and implementing technologyenhanced and differentiated instruction for educating students with and without disabilities in inclusive general education classes. The MTSS framework, specifically Tier I, which provides universal supports to all students; Tier II wherein targeted supports is provided to students who may need additional intervention; and Tier III with intensive support for students who may need individualized intervention 84

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

(Miller et al., 2019), serves as the foundational structure for developing preservice teacher candidates’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions related to inclusive education in grades 7-12 classes. To foster preservice teacher candidates’ expertise related to inclusive education in their discipline of professional specialization (e.g., art, languages, math, science, and physical education), they are engaged in the task of designing, developing, and demonstrating an instructional unit wherein they integrate general-purpose and assistive technology as well as differentiated pedagogical practices for teaching and assessing learning of diverse secondary school students in inclusion classes. Furthermore, preservice teacher candidates are prepared to integrate pedagogical practices that align with the hierarchical supplemental support tiers of the RtI framework, that are synonymous to the tier-system of the MTSS framework. An overview of the inclusive education project is displayed in Figure 1. Furthermore, Figure 2 illustrates the correspondences between the pedagogical components of the inclusive education project shown in Figure 1 and the hierarchical tiers of the RtI framework. The connectedness of the pedagogical components of inclusive instruction and the supplemental support tiers of RtI framework are described, with illustrations, later on in this chapter. The trajectory of preservice teacher candidates’ engagement in the inclusive education project is illustrated in Figure 3. Each of the three learning processes displayed in Figure 3 are subsumed and interspersed within the inclusive education components and RtI tiers illustrated in Figure 2.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. Pedagogical components of the inclusive education project

85

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Figure 2. Alignment of inclusive instruction components with RtI support tiers

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 3. Learning process related to technology-enhanced and differentiated instruction

86

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Figure 4. Teacher preparation cycle for technology-enhanced and differentiated inclusive instruction

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Teacher Preparation Process for Integrated Inclusive Instruction and RtI Framework The Explain, Exhibit, and Expand cycles diagrammed in Figure 4 are applied to facilitate preservice teacher candidates’ preparation, production, and presentation (see Figure 3) of their core instructional unit for teaching grades 7-12 students in inclusion classes. More specifically, preservice teacher candidates are oriented to the pedagogical components of their inclusive education project (see Figure 1) through showcasing of sample technology-enhanced and differentiated curriculum units (Exhibit cycle in Figure 4) in the focal educational psychology class. Preservice teacher candidates are also provided with opportunities to work in subject specific

87

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

groups to develop and display technology-enhanced and differentiated curriculum units, with course instructor guidance (Explain and Expand cycles in Figure 4). To reiterate, for the inclusive education project described in this chapter, the RtI framework (see Figure 2) is integrated within the teacher preparation process to facilitate preservice teacher candidates’ engagement in developing and demonstrating technology-enhanced and differentiated instruction. Through the Explain, Exhibit, and Expand cycles (see Figure 4) of teacher preparation, preservice teacher candidates are oriented to two aspects of inclusive education: a) RtI for facilitating learning of all students in general education, with specific support for struggling students, and b) differentiation for all students in general education, with specific support for students with disabilities. The following section provides description of preservice teacher candidates’ preparation for the inclusive education project, as aligned with the multitiered RtI framework (see Figure 2) and related to the learning processes illustrated in Figure 3.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Pedagogical Component 1: Core Instructional Unit Orientation for the inclusive instruction project begins with the course instructor clarifying the meaning of a curriculum unit. Preservice teacher candidates are told, “A curriculum unit consists of several concepts that are taught over two or three weeks and includes several standards, skills, and outcomes for interconnected learning. For example, Unit 7: Geography, Climate, and Human Cities is a curriculum unit in Earth Science. Science teachers generally teach this unit over 20-25 days. In this unit, students learn about a) geography and climate; b) reading and drawing topographic maps; c) climate change; and d) weathering and erosion”. This is the Explain cycle in Figure 4. Next, an excerpt from an English language arts unit plan is displayed (see Figure 5) to facilitate preservice teacher candidates’ understanding of the core instructional unit. This is the Exhibit cycle in Figure 4. Thereafter, preservice teacher candidates are engaged in a class review and discussion of the sample instructional unit plan to facilitate their understanding of the key components of an instructional unit plan. For example, through questions, explanations, and sharing of ideas, preservice teacher candidates are expected to recognize the key elements of universal instruction (i.e., a key attribute of RtI Tier 1): a) curricular content and instructional objectives, b) instructional approaches and materials, c) technology applications, and d) assessment systems. Alignment of the core instructional unit with universal support, another a key attribute of RtI Tier 1, is also examined to facilitate preservice teacher candidates’ arriving at a conclusion that the sample instructional unit incorporates instructional support in the form of: a) teacher explanation of curricular concept (symbolism),

88

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 5. Sample illustration of elements required for core instructional unit

b) teacher demonstration of technology application (Inspiration software), and c) assessment for ascertaining learning (checklist). This is the Expand cycle in Figure 4. As a culminating step for the core instructional unit component of the inclusive education project (Prepare phase in Figure 3), preservice teacher candidates are directed to work collaboratively with peers in their teaching certification groups (i.e., art education, math education, science education, etc.) to research core curriculum, instructional approaches, teaching materials, technology applications, and assessment measures for their project. Groups then shared their preliminary finds with the class, with specific explanation of alignment between the core instructional unit (Pedagogical Component 1) and universal instruction/support of RtI (Tier 1) as related to their 89

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

project. Group sharing is followed up with questions and suggestions from peers and course instructor for advancement of their project preparation.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Pedagogical Component 2: Differentiated Instruction Differentiated instruction involves modification of curricula, teaching methods, instructional materials, learning activities, and assessment protocols based on students’ learning outcomes. These modifications are made with the goal of providing students with maximal learning opportunities (Tomlinson et al., 2003). Thus, differentiated instruction is a platform for creating an inclusive learning environment wherein teachers support each student in the classroom by proving them with multiple opportunities for learning via diversified approaches matched to their readiness, interest and learning needs (Tomlinson, 2017). Dee (2010) therefore is of the position that preservice teacher condidates should be provided explicit instruction and guidance in implementing differentiation for supporting students through instructional intervention in inclusion classes, and teacher preparation programs should require that candidates demonstrate their differentiation skills and strategies to ascertain their ability to transfer such knowledge to practice. Accordingly, Pedagogical Component 2: Differentiated Instruction focuses on preparing preservice teacher candidates for implementing differentiated instruction in inclusive classes with the goal of providing supplemental support to struggling students and students with disabilities. Figure 6 illustrates application of differentiated instruction targeting curricular content, teaching approaches, and instructional materials. Three forms of adaptation of instruction have been illustrated: a) format adaptation; b) content adaptation; and c) communication adaptation. The purpose of this illustration is to prepare preservice teacher candidates to consider differentiation of instruction for supporting learning of diverse students, including students with disabilities, in general education. In line with the Pedagogical Component 1: Core Instructional Unit and RtI Tier 1: Universal Instruction and Support, Pedagogical Component 2: Differentiated Instruction corresponding with RtI Tier 2: Supplemental Instruction (see Figure 2), the Explain, Exhibit, and Expand cycles (see Figure 4) are used to prepare preservice teacher candidates to understand and apply differentiated instruction for their inclusive education project. The Produce phase and Present phase (see Figure 3) correspond with Pedagogical Component 2: Differentiated Instruction (see Figure 1) of this teacher preparation process. Following course instructor explanation and demonstration of different forms of adaptation (i.e., Explain cycle and Exhibit cycle in Figure 4), preservice teacher candidates are guided to work collaboratively with peers to select teaching materials, apply strategies, tailor instruction, and modify assessments to provide supplemental support to struggling students and students with disabilities. The 90

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

research conducted by preservice teachers during Pedagogical Component 1: Core Instructional Unit, corresponding with RtI Tier 1: Universal Instruction and Support, are used to generate differentiated instruction. As per RtI framework, preservice teacher candidates are reminded of the requirement that assessment outcomes from Tier 1: Universal Instruction and Support, corresponding with Pedagogical Component 1: Core Instructional Unit, are to be used for decision-making and to provide supplemental support to grades 7-12 students who may have specific learning needs in general education. Preservice teacher candidates are also offered guided practice with development and demonstration of their supplemental support strategies as group instruction, individual instruction, and peer-mediated instruction, wherein pedagogical format, content, and communication are tailored to meet the learning needs of individual students within general classes. This is the Expand cycle in Figure 4. Preservice teacher candidates’ demonstration of differentiated instruction is back up with appreciative and evaluative comments from peers and the educational psychology course instructor.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 6. Sample illustration of adaptation for students with disabilities in general education

91

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Pedagogical Component 3: Technology Application In a study on technology literacy of preservice teachers, Dincer (2018) found that despite claims from preservice teachers that they had knowledge and skills for using technology for teaching activities, results indicated they had low or insufficient level of technology literacy. Either preservice had not taken any technology related courses in their teacher preparation programs or the courses they had taken had insufficient technology related content, thereby resulting in low level technology related knowledge and skills. Dincer therefore contends that, “technology literacy courses must be given in teacher training where technology has also to be integrated and preservice teachers must be taught on how these technologies can be used in teaching” (p. 2713). Although most teachers generally have had students with disabilities in their class, many teachers do not usually know how to meet their students’ technology needs. Given that assistive technology is a required element of Individualized Education Program, and all teachers, both general education as well as special education teachers, are responsible for implementation of and IEP for students with disabilities in their class, it is imperative that teachers also address the assistive technology needs of their students with disabilities. However, despite having used technology in their personal life on a daily basis, research results have shown that new teachers do not demonstrate competencies in integrating assistive technology for teaching students with disabilities in their classrooms. This often is because teacher education programs do not prepare general as well as special education teachers to implement assistive technology in their classrooms (Koch, 2017). Therefore, it is imperative that teacher education programs find ways to provide substantive training in assistive technology in order for new teachers to meet the technology needs of their students with disabilities. Table 1 illustrates assistive technology for students with specific learning disabilities. To ensure that preservice teacher candidates infuse both general-purpose as well as assistive technology within their curriculum unit, the course instructor describes and demonstrates select general-purpose and assistive technology applications (i.e., Explain cycle and Exhibit cycle in Figure 4). For example, the proofreading feature of Microsoft Word 365 (general-purpose technology) versus Ginger (assistive technology) are demonstrated to pinpoint functions such as grammar check, spell check, word prediction, and sentence rephrasing which could help students with learning disabilities with writing (i.e., Exhibit cycle and Expand cycle in Figure 4). Preservice teacher candidates are also provided with opportunities to collaboratively explore Mindomo and Screen Chomp as assistive technology within the context of their professional discipline and as preparation for researching and integrating comparable general-purpose as well as assistive technology in their 92

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

inclusive instruction project. Thus, Produce phase and Present phase in Figure 3 are addressed during teacher preparation for advancing preservice teacher candidates’ knowledge and skills related to implementation of technology-enhanced instruction in general classes. The goal of Pedagogical Component 3: Technology Instruction is to advance preservice teacher candidates’ acquisition and application of generalpurpose technology and assistive technology with the goal of providing intensive intervention for struggling students and students with disabilities both in class as differentiated instruction and outside class as remedial instruction. Preparing preservice teacher candidates to provide intensive intervention for addressing specific learning needs of struggling students and students with disabilities aligns with RtI 3: Intensive Intervention (see Figure 2). Preparing preservice teacher candidates in acquiring and implementing assistive technology is of significance because with increasing diversity of students in grade school, knowledge of assistive technology will enable novice teachers to teach in diverse classrooms rather than only students with disabilities (King & Allen, 2018). Table 1. Assistive Technology for student with specific learning disabilities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Technology Categories

Technology Examples

Technology Functions

Targeted Skills

Text-To-Speech Software

Kurzweil 3000

Scans and reads words in synthesized voices

Test taking, essay writing, and note taking

Text-To-Speech Software

Draft: Builder

Integrates outlining, note taking, and draft writing

Writing, spelling, research, and bibliography

Speech-To-Text Software

MathTalk

Solve math equations and problems by speaking

Math problems, equations, and worksheets

Speech-To-Text Software

Dragon Naturally Speaking

Create text and navigate online by speaking

Email, navigate internet, and access data

Web-based Mind Mapping Tool

Mindomo

Graphically store concepts, tasks, and ideas in a structured form

Collaborative learning, problem solving, thinking, learning across disciplines

Interactive Screencasting Application

Screen Chomp

Interactive whiteboard interface to record, sketch, and share ideas

Homework, projects, videos, and activities across disciplines

SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Although preservice teacher candidates who are prepared for P-12 grade general education learn about inclusive education in their teacher preparation courses, Byrd 93

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

and Alexander’s (2020) research findings indicated that assessments implemented in general education classes often did not adequately measure content knowledge and educational skills of students with disabilities. Furthermore, although general education teachers were knowledgeable about assessment practices in their specialty discipline, they were not skilled at adapting their assessment practices for accommodating students with disabilities in their P-12 grade classes. Teacher preparation programs therefore should explicitly prepare preservice teachers with the knowledge and skills for adapting their assessment measures and procedures for adequately evaluating academic outcomes of students with disabilities in their general education P-12 grade classes. Another area where preservice teacher candidates appear to be underprepared for inclusive education is their potential for co-teaching. Findings from the Chitiyo and Brinda (2018) study indicated that more than half of the preservice teachers surveyed in their study did not have any training regarding co-teaching in inclusive settings as a part of their teacher preparation. Since teaching students with disabilities in inclusive classes is highly valued in P-12 grade education, teacher education programs should emphasize co-teaching as an essential element for preparing preservice teachers to teach in P-12 grade classes. More specifically, preservice teachers should be provided with ample opportunities to coteach in inclusive classrooms during their fieldwork, practicum, and student teaching placements. Based on his literary investigation of reflective teaching and inclusive teaching, Minott (2019) concluded that “features of reflective teaching connect with and are fundamental to inclusive teaching”. Reflective teaching features such as “giving careful consideration or thought; questioning personal assumptions, values, and beliefs; taking initiatives; using intuition; taking part in development and change; and the use of journaling” (p. 226) were identified as features that helped make explicit the connections between reflective teaching and inclusive teaching. Socratic pedagogical approaches such as dialogue, questioning, critical thinking, and sharing of views (Balbay, 2019; Gorry, 2011) therefore could be integrated within teacher preparation courses to foster preservice teacher candidates’ reflective teaching practices, which they could implement during their fieldwork, practicum, and student teaching in inclusion classes.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Given the increased expectation that teacher preparation programs are to prepare preservice teacher candidates for collaborative as well as independent education of P-12 grade students with and without disabilities in general education, teacher education researchers could investigate impact of teacher preparation in several ways. 94

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

One option is for teacher education researchers to examine preservice teachers’ knowledge, skills, and dispositions for integrating inclusive practices in practicum and student teaching placements. Such research should also look at the role of mentor teachers and university supervisors in facilitating preservice teachers’ efforts at evaluating their successes and challenges in advancing inclusive practices at their field placement sites (Zagona et al., 2017). This also calls for research focused on explicitly studying preservice teachers’ preparation and experience teaching students with and without disabilities during their practice teaching placement in inclusive settings (Stites et al., 2018). Another idea is to research the influence of teacher preparation on preservice teachers’ personality traits and resultant motivation to integrate inclusive pedagogical strategies for teaching students with and without disabilities in general education classes. Findings from Bussing and his colleagues’ (2019) study showed that “affective and deeper personality traits like universalistic values are connected to higher order beliefs and enjoyment in the context of teaching in inclusive settings” (p. 20). Teacher education research therefore could identify the relationship between preservice teacher candidates’ beliefs and values that influence their inclusive practice and the emotional experiences that were provided within teacher preparation programs for strengthening their inclusive practices. Finally, future research could determine the impact of coteaching practice on students in inclusive classrooms. In order for researchers to claim effectiveness of coteaching on student learning, student performance would have to be examined across grades (e.g., elementary, middle, and high school), subjects (e.g., English, math, science, and social studies), and disabilities (e.g., specific learning disability, emotional disturbance, intellectual disability, and orthopedic impairment). More specifically, student outcomes such as “academic achievement on high-stakes tests as well as curriculum-based measures, discipline referrals and other behavioral indicators, suspensions, retention and dropout information, attendance information, and other outcome data” (Friend et al., 2010, p. 22) could be analyzed to determine impact of coteaching.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION The number of students with disabilities receiving instruction in general education classes has been steadily increasing in the recent decade. Teacher education programs therefore have worked on explicitly integrating differentiated pedagogical approaches for preparing preservice teacher candidates to teach students from diverse backgrounds, including students with disabilities, in general education. This chapter describes teacher preparation in an undergraduate educational psychology course 95

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

wherein preservice teacher candidates are engaged in the teaching-learning process with the goal of advancing their knowledge, skills, and dispositions for teaching students with and without disabilities in their 7-12 grades discipline specific classes in general education. Through instructor guidance and collaborative peer interactions, preservice teacher candidates engage in preparing, producing, and presenting technology-enhanced and differentiated instruction, with a focus on differentiating pedagogical materials, methods, and activities for addressing learning needs of students with and without disabilities in general education. Two key elements of teacher preparation emphasized in the educational psychology course are: a) differentiated instruction and b) technology-enhanced instruction. The goal of emphasizing the two pedagogical practice in the target course is to facilitate preservice teacher candidates’ preparation for tailoring instruction to meet the needs of diverse students, including students with disabilities, to ensure that all students have equal access to their discipline specific instruction and in an inclusive classroom environment. Preparation, production, and presentation of inclusive instructional unit is geared toward developing preservice teacher candidates’ potential for teaching diverse 7-12 grade students in alignment with the Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (MTSS) framework and Response to Intervention (RtI) model. When preservice teacher candidates prepare, produce, and present their technology-enhanced and differentiated curriculum unit, the three tiers of MTSS-RtI framework are integrated: Tier I - teaching core curriculum with differentiated instruction in general education classroom; Tier II – substantiating core curriculum and differentiated instruction with targeted supplemental supports in general education classroom; and Tier III – arranging intensive intervention for students with learning difficulties outside of their general education classroom (Mundschenk et al., 2017, 2018; Reese et al., 2018).

REFERENCES

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Balbay, S. (2019). Enhancing critical awareness through Socratic pedagogy. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 515–536. doi:10.32601/ejal.651348 Barrio, B. L., & Combes, B. H. (2015). General education pre-service teachers’ levels of concern on Response to Intervention (RTI) implementation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 38(2), 121–137. doi:10.1177/0888406414546874 Burstein, N. D., & Cabello, B. (1989). Preparing teachers to work with culturally diverse students: A teacher education model. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 9–16. doi:10.1177/002248718904000502

96

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Bussing, A. G., Menzel, S., Schnieders, M., Beckmann, V., & Basten, M. (2019). Values and beliefs as predictors of pre-service teachers’ enjoyment of teaching in inclusive settings. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19(1), 8–23. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12474 Byrd, D. R., & Alexander, M. (2020). Investigating special education teachers’ knowledge and skills: Preparing general teacher preparation for professional development. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(2), 72–82. doi:10.33902/ JPR.2020059790 Chitiyo, J., & Brinda, W. (2018). Teacher preparedness in the use of co‐teaching in inclusive classrooms. Support for Learning, 33(1), 38–51. doi:10.1111/14679604.12190 Council of Chief State School Officers (2011, April). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue. Council of Chief State School Officers. Crosby, C. (2012). Reimagining teacher education in the 21st century: Shifting and widening the lens of teacher training for mainstream classroom and TESOL teaching candidates of linguistically and culturally diverse learners. International Journal of Innovation in English Language Teaching, 1(2), 125–138. http://queens.ezproxy. cuny.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/scholarlyjournals/reimaging-teacher-education-21-sup-st-century/docview/1711193117/ se-2?accountid=13379 Dee, A. (2010). Preservice teacher application of differentiated instruction. Teacher Educator, 46(1), 53–70. doi:10.1080/08878730.2010.529987

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Dincer, S. (2018). Are preservice teachers really literate enough to integrate technology in their classroom practice? Determining the technology literacy level of preservice teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2699–2718. doi:10.100710639-018-9737-z Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley-Chamberlain, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An illustration of the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 9–27. doi:10.1080/10474410903535380 Gorry, J. (2011). Cultures of learning and learning culture: Socratic and Confucian approaches to teaching and learning. Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 4–18. doi:10.3167/ latiss.2011.040302

97

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F., Barmer, A., & Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020-144). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020144 King, L., & Allen, A. (2018). Beyond preservice special educators: Embedding assistive technology content throughout a teacher education program of study. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 228–234. doi:10.1177/8756870518773474 Koch, K. (2017). Stay in the box! embedded assistive technology improves access for students with disabilities. Education Sciences, 7(4), 82. doi:http://dx.doi.org. queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/10.3390/educsci7040082 Miller, B., Taylor, K., & Ryder, R. (2019). Introduction to special topic: Serving children with disabilities within multitiered systems of support. AERA Open, 5(2), 1–6. doi:10.1177/2332858419853796 PMID:31431902 Minott, M. (2019). Reflective teaching, inclusive teaching and the teacher’s tasks in the inclusive classroom: A literary investigation. British Journal of Special Education, 46(2), 226–238. doi:10.1111/1467-8578.12260 Morningstar, M., Lombardi, A., & Test, D. (2018). Including college and career readiness within a multitiered systems of support framework. AERA Open, 4(1), 1–11. doi:10.1177/2332858418761880 Morningstar, M. E., Lombardi, A., Fowler, C. H., & Test, D. W. (2017). A preliminary college and career readiness model for secondary students with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 40, 79–91. doi:10.1177/2165143415589926 Mundschenk, N., Fuchs, W., & Simonson, S. (2017). Statewide change in teacher preparation: An inside job. New Educator, 13(4), 392–407. doi:10.1080/154768 8X.2016.1237694

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Myers, J. P., & Rivero, K. (2019). Preparing globally competent preservice teachers: The development of content knowledge, disciplinary skills, and instructional design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 214–225. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.008 Reese, L., Richards-Tutor, C., Hansuvadha, N., Pavri, S., & Xu, S. (2018). Teachers for inclusive, diverse urban settings. Issues in Teacher Education, 27(1), 17–27. http://queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.queens. ezproxy.cuny.edu/scholarly-journals/teachers-inclusive-diverse-urban-settings/ docview/2049663215/se-2?accountid=13379

98

Advancing Teacher Candidates’ Capabilities for Differentiated Instruction

Stites, M. L., Rakes, C. R., Noggle, A. K., & Shah, S. (2018). Preservice teacher perceptions of preparedness to teach in inclusive settings as an indicator of teacher preparation program effectiveness. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 9(2), 21–39. doi:10.2478/dcse-2018-0012 Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms. ASCD. Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145. doi:10.1177/016235320302700203 Zagona, A. L., Kurth, J. A., & MacFarland, S. Z. C. (2017). Teachers’ views of their preparation for inclusive education and collaboration. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(3), 163–178. doi:10.1177/0888406417692969

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Assistive Technology: Computer software or mobile application to facilitate academic learning of students with disabilities. Differentiated Instruction: Designing and conducting lessons by tailoring teaching methods, materials, activities, and assessments to meet the learning needs of P-12 grade diverse students. Diverse Learners: Students who are representative of different culture, disability, ethnicity, gender, language, and socioeconomic groups. Inclusive Education: Students with disabilities receiving instruction with peers without disabilities in P-12 grade general education classes. Preservice Teacher Candidates: Undergraduate college students who are receiving training for teaching children in P-12 grade schools. Supplemental Support: Instructional strategies and systems for supporting academic learning of students struggling with core curriculum areas. Teacher Preparation: Education courses that focus on developing undergraduate students’ knowledge, skills, and attitudes about teaching children in P-12 grade classes.

99

100

Chapter 5

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships Jamie Mahoney https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4354-2339 Murray State University, USA Carol A. Hall https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9557-6787 University of Phoenix, USA

ABSTRACT

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

This chapter examines the roles and responsibilities of general education and special education teachers in the inclusion model of teaching. Providing students with disabilities services within the inclusion model of services requires both teachers to use specialized strategies and methods such as the co-teaching models ensuring all students are successful within the classroom. These models include the one teach one observe, one teach one assist, station teaching, parallel teaching, alternative teaching, and teaming. Kagan provides collaborative teaching strategies to assist in helping students to learn to work together in during projects and other classroom activities. Students must learn to work in a cooperative manner to be prepared for future essential life skills and jobs. Employers are seeking students who can get along with others and work in group settings to accomplish tasks in a competitive feld.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch005 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

STRATEGIES FOR INTEGRATED COLLABORATIVE INCLUSION RELATIONSHIPS Collaboration can be defined as shared responsibilities; however, education collaboration is often referred to as co-labor. In schools, general and special education teachers work together to meet ALL students’ needs within the inclusive classroom setting. Students identified as requiring special education services in the least restrictive environment spend most of their time in the general education classroom with support services. Inclusionary services offer disabled students the support needed to achieve equal access to the general education curriculum to promote academic success (Obiakor, Harris, Mutua, Rotatori, & Algozzine, 2012). The co-teaching and collaborative model used in the inclusion classroom provides general education and special education teachers the opportunity to ensure all struggling students achieve academic success (Pugach & Winn, 2011). “Co-teaching is not one teacher leading while the other grades essays. It is also not both teachers doing the same thing at all times, either” (Beninghof, 2016, p. 12). “Collaboration relies on parity, or a clear sense of value for each member’s contribution, a mutual goal, shared responsibility for key decisions, joint accountability for outcomes, and polled resources” (Friend & Barron, 2019, p. 3). Murawski and Bernhardt (2016) noted, “Special education students can no longer be simply physically included in general education classes. These students need authentic opportunities to access and participate in the curriculum” (p. 31). Villa and Thousand (2016) discussed the purposes and practices of inclusive education for providing differentiated instruction for students using the collaborative planning, sense of community building, and the use of self-determination, choicemaking and goal-setting. General education and special education teachers following the inclusionary philosophy surmise competence for all students within the classroom and holding high expectations rather than lowering expectations for students with disabilities (Villa & Thousand, 2016). Tremblay (2013) noted “these findings appear to show inclusion with co-teaching provided students with LD (learning disabilities) with the necessary support for academic achievement on standardized tests” (p. 256). Students in the inclusive model using co-teaching strategies made progress as compared to those not in an inclusive model not receiving co-teaching strategies (Trambley, 2013). Price-Dennis, Holmes and Smith (2015) explained students working collaboratively in an inclusive classroom “using 21st century literacy skills promoted additional skills such as building a community of learners, using digital tools making learning accessible, and linking academic goals with real-world platforms”(p. 197). Students in these settings no longer see themselves just as students but they see themselves as teachers and as learners developing life-long skills for future careers. Students 101

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

with disabilities no longer see themselves as outsiders but now see themselves as accepted members of the group. Acceptance of diversity is just one aspect of the inclusion delivery model for teachers to achieve to meet diverse learners’ needs and prepare them for the future (Sousa, 2001). “Since the 1980s, many parents of students with special needs together with special education professionals have been pressing for more integrated services for students with disabilities” (Snyder, 1999, p. 173). The inconsistency in which the inclusion delivery model is implemented raises concerns and problems for unprepared teachers to provide appropriate, academically successful activities for special needs students. Concerns are based upon insufficient knowledge and research in inclusion, and therefore, special education continuum programs, including the inclusion model, are provided to serve students with mild disabilities (Snyder, 1999). In addition, professional development workshops offer all teachers the necessary training in inclusionary and collaboration practices to accommodate these concerns and practices.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

COLLABORATION Collaboration is a group-work process team may employ to reach a goal. Critical factors of collaboration needed to achieve a common goal are communication, interconnectedness, and open-mindedness. In collaboration, communication occurs when a group of people shares their knowledge and expertise to benefit all stakeholders. According to Hutchins (2011), “Collaboration encourages the transcending of traditional boundaries used to atomize and separate teams” (para. 4). Interconnectedness demonstrates team members’ ability to work together and respect others’ perspectives to work more effectively to reach a team goal. “Being open-minded means you have a willingness to listen to other ideas and opinions and consider the possibility that you are wrong or may change your perspective” (Kokemuller, n.d., para. 1). If one does not possess collaborative skills, they can be learned. “Co-teaching requires more than just learning to play nicely together” (Murawski & Bernhardt, 2016, p. 31; Murawski & Dieker, 2008). “Co-teaching also requires a paradigm shift from teaching in silos to teaching in tandem, from owning the front of the room to sharing space, from sending students with special needs out of the classroom to thoughtfully differentiating for diverse learners” (Murawski & Bernhardt, 2016, p. 31). Cook (2004) explained collaboration is how teachers plan for students to interact throughout the learning process using problem-solving strategies to complete a task or project. Sharing roles and responsibilities occurs while students engage in critical thinking and processing skills within curriculum intervention activities. Co102

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

teaching approaches are best implemented when “student characteristics, teacher characteristics, curriculum, instructional strategies, and pragmatic considerations” (Cook, 2004, p. 14) are taken into consideration. Afflerbach (2012) discussed the importance of the assessment process during students’ collaborative group tasks and activities. Working in a group on a project is challenging for many students with disabilities. Teachers can alleviate behavioral problems by assigning roles and responsibilities, by providing clearly written directions and expectations, and by explicitly defining measures describing how students will be graded on their collaborative work (Afflerbach, 2012). Simply having each student work collaboratively is not the only task goal. Teachers must also measure what is to be learned and how working with different team members affects others’ learning in the team. This division of roles and responsibilities is a task analysis providing details for the assessment rubric noting criteria for collaborative learning situations, positive interactions, and comprehension of activity standards (Afflerbach, 2012).

STRATEGIES TO BUILD COLLABORATIVE SKILLS Acquiring and using collaborative skills is a core school philosophy of classroom teachers across the globe. Students learn how to solve problems and find solutions using real-world tools and strategies to prepare them for the ever-changing workplace. New technologies and the Internet have shortened the distances between continents, thereby allowing multicultural work-team members from different cultures to work together daily in global businesses. Useful strategies teachers use to build collaborative skills in students are as follows: • • • •

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• • • • •

Select group members rather than allowing members to choose a group. Confgure group size to ensure diversity and every member can contribute. Require active listening of group members. Teach students how to disagree collegially, to lead others, and to follow others. Specify group goals. Assign and rotate the roles of group members: leader, recorder, encourager, and checker. Use real problems. Divide tasks among assigned groups. Begin training by having groups practice solving an assigned problem, which the teacher and members then critique.

103

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

The teacher selects the group members. Teacher selection of group members strategically ensures groups are successful in reaching their goals. Once groups master the process approach of selecting members, students may find themselves select and self-organize group members based on assessing students’ strengths, challenges, and diverse characteristics. Learning to listen actively is a necessary part of the collaborative process. Six active listening skills, which can be taught to students, are • • • • • •

Paying attention, Withholding judgment, Refecting, Clarifying, Summarizing, and Sharing. (Center for Creative Leadership, 2020, para. 3)

Students must also be taught how to disagree respectfully by learning about logical fallacies and ways to avoid them, by learning about reliable sources and methods to cite and evaluate them, by demonstrating the proper way to handle disagreement and conflict, by providing students with the appropriate words to use when disagreeing, and by teaching students about empathy (Treleaven, 2017). Providing students with the proper tools to navigate life is essential. Teachers should not assume students know these life skills. Solving complex tasks is the goal of collaboration. Teachers must work with groups to establish specific collaboration goals. As an example, goals may be established to identify, prioritize, assess, or evaluate critical data, skills, or needs to solve a real problem. Group tasks to solve the chosen problem are divided among the assigned groups. By going through the process, using a collaborative example appropriate for the groups formed, group members, will bring clarity to collaboration.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

PROFESSIONAL PARTNERSHIPS Co-teaching can be compared to a marriage in which two individuals work together in partnership to compromise and negotiate regularly (Murawski & Dieker, 2008). Co-teachers must communicate and discuss roles and responsibilities daily. Checklists may be used when beginning the collaborative process and deciding role divisions between each teacher. Sharing each teacher’s contributions and making a chart visible for both teachers show teacher commitment to working together within the co-teaching classroom. Parity is essential in the co-teaching model (Murawski &

104

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Dieker, 2008). Teachers should feel both are equal partners who share comparable duties. Tomlinson (2016) reflected upon the co-teaching partnership shared with her first teaching experience. Paired with a 7th-grade language arts teacher, between both of them, 60 students in a 2-hour block received instruction using a variety of co-teaching models including station teaching, team teaching, one teach one assist, and one teach one observes. Reflecting upon the experience, Tomlinson (2016) referred to “tandem teaching” or “like singing a duet” (p. 91). The best takeaway from the experience was understanding “both as the soloist and the sustainer in paired teaching” (p. 91). Each teacher needs to feel valued and supported in the collaborative experience. All teachers have unique talents that need to be supported, demonstrated, and recognized by the other professional and vice versa. Professional partnerships with universities and school districts provide learning opportunities and experiences for pre-service student teachers’ practices in the coteaching model. Using this classroom model prepares the pre-service student teacher the supported opportunity to be in a classroom with a certified, veteran teacher who models and mentors explicit curriculum and management decisions (Heck & Bacharach, 2016). Modeling and coaching sessions provided by the collaborating veteran teacher reinforces content learned and real-world teaching experiences. The cooperating teacher participates with the pre-service teacher in planning each lesson before the delivery of the instruction. Lesson planning requires the pre-service teacher to diligently peruse all content materials, enabling the veteran teacher to release all responsibilities of teaching to the novice teacher (Heck & Bacharach, 2016). New student-teaching programs using the co-teaching model require both university partners and public school stakeholders to agree to all terms and conditions about the process (Heck & Bacharach, 2016). Implementing such diverse and inclusive student-teaching programs begins with purposefully planned preparation and thoroughly developed training. The professional development training partnership works together to decide shared planning, delivery models, and instructional procedures (Heck & Bacharach, 2016). Heck and Bacharach (2016) stated, “Ensure time for co-planning, [for] if you don’t co-plan, you won’t co-teach” (p. 29). Heck and Bacharach added the co-planning time is the “structure to guide the experience” (p. 29). Murawski and Dieker (2008) explained co-planning is the most important part even if teachers spend only 10 minutes per week to work out their signals and the game plan for how to handle specific situations. Cook (2004) outlined topics all co-teachers should be prepared to discuss to have an effective working relationship. The instructional content, how it will be divided, will teach which parts when, which model to use, and the students’ expectations are the needs to be decided prior to the beginning of class. Parity and how each teacher will share roles and responsibilities so all students view both teachers as 105

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

equal partners in the classroom instructional duties must be determined. Routines and processes for teachers and students should be well-defined for smooth transition and execution of all activities. When these decisions are established and effectively implemented, co-teaching will become a favorite teaching model for teachers, students, and parents.

Shared Planning Time One problem faced among co-teacher teams is the lack of shared planning time. The basis of the problem is that the special education teacher teaches students in multiple grade levels. The grade levels also have differing planning times; therefore, the special education teacher cannot always attend the grade level team planning meetings. Ways to accommodate this problem include allowing the special education teachers to have different planning times scattered throughout the week (Lent, 2012). However, this might not be an available option. Another option is to provide electronic lesson planning tools, so lesson plans can be shared electronically, and documents can be worked on collaboratively. Another option can include using electronic face-to-face planning such as with Zoom or Google Meets (Miller, Rigdway, & Ridgway, 2019).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

COLLABORATION WITH PARAPROFESSIONALS Teachers are not alone in providing services for students in the inclusive classroom model. Paraprofessionals are an important service provider in the cycle of supports for students with disabilities. A paraprofessional assists with “academic supports, clerical assistance, student supervision, tutoring, managing classroom materials and providing accommodations for students with disabilities in a variety of classroom models” (Kampwirth & Powers, 2016, p. 34). Effective collaboration requires teachers and paraprofessionals to understand the roles each provide for the student. Roles and responsibilities established from the beginning ensure an effective and efficient working experience for all, including the student. Establishing clear roles and responsibilities involves several strategies such as “acknowledging contributions made by the paraprofessional, asking for the input of ideas related to student performance and behavior, providing lesson plans for their activities with students, and providing ongoing professional development training” (Kampwirth & Powers, 2016, p. 34). Strategies such as these support the paraprofessional in completing duties with students and assist in the professional aspect of job expectations. People will work harder when they feel appreciated and valued. Treating paraprofessionals as professionals help advocate for them as entrusted individuals and as members of the educational team. 106

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

CO-TEACHING BASICS Co-teaching and collaboration are essential for students of various abilities and needs in 21st-century classrooms. Every student has unique talents, skills, similarities, and differences. One teacher cannot always fulfill the needs and provide the instructional strategies for all students during curriculum implementation; therefore, co-teaching and collaboration are excellent service delivery options for schools and serve as a mechanism to render specialized instruction for students designated to receive special education services. General and special education teachers work in tandem with the general education classroom to contribute their expertise to lesson planning and delivery methods. For co-teaching to be successful, general and special education teachers must master the strategies needed by all students in integrated collaborative inclusionary classrooms. Successful co-teaching occurs when the general education teacher and special education teacher have equivalent certifications or licenses but possess different expertise areas. This similarity and difference allow both teachers to be competent educators but complement each other in supplementary curriculum areas. While one teacher provides instruction with one methodology, the other teacher can demonstrate a different technique. Some students will grasp one approach, and others will need to use different supplemental methods. This reciprocal relationship provides a shared workload and shared responsibilities to help ensure all students within the classroom are learning. Planning, teaching, and sharing various duties enable each teacher to establish learning activities that forge new ways of thinking about the teaching and learning processes.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

PURPOSE OF CO-TEACHING General education and special education teachers have been developing coteaching practices to meet the diverse populations’ needs of students for nearly 30 years (Bauwens, Hourcade, & Friend, 1989). Since the inception of Response to Intervention (RTI), more than 80% of students with mild disabilities are in general education classrooms; therefore, the co-teaching service delivery model has become the norm for expecting the same curriculum and rigorous standards for students with disabilities. Another factor influencing the co-teaching service delivery model is supported by research. Schools across the country facing the implementation of Common Core State Standards, among other district mandates, realize teachers collectively effectively and logistically meet the requirements. Collaboration and co-teaching of state mandates are the best way to meet the unique needs of a diverse population of students (Lent, 107

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

2012). Teachers work collaboratively to share instincts, philosophies, and strategies to incorporate effective lessons to meet diverse students’ needs to master the standards (Lent, 2012). Co-teaching allows teachers to brainstorm ideas and think creatively to address scheduling problems instead of continuing with the status quo and not finding solutions; therefore, this “out of the box thinking” provides the alternatives to the issues (Lent, 2012, p. 186). The co-teaching model was envisioned as a classroom placement to serve students with disabilities parallel to peers (Friend, 2016). Both teachers worked professionally, sharing responsibilities, using the general education curriculums, and expecting student mastery to be indicated through performances on high stakes assessments (Friend, 2016). “The most effective co-teachers provide the same kind of explicitly designed and carefully documented instruction that has always characterized special education” (Friend, 2016, p. 18). During the co-teaching model’s learning process, the use of specially designed instruction involves using evidence-based strategies to address the individualized educational plans (IEP) goals. Teachers confuse specially designed instruction with differentiation; however, these two terms do not have identical meanings.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CO-TEACHING IN THE INCLUSION CLASSROOM The special education models continue to change and vary from a geographical location across the nation. Inclusion, the model where special education students are taught general education curriculum standards alongside their non-disabled peers within the same classroom supported by the special education teacher on a minute per week or minutes per day basis, is the typical norm today. General education teachers collaborate and co-teach with these inclusion special education teachers to plan lessons and differentiate to meet special education students’ needs. As explained above in the different co-teaching models, the special education teacher is often relegated to the position of a teacher’s aide in the one teach one assist or one teach one to observe model. This does not help to utilize all the skills and knowledge of the highly skilled special education teacher (Kampwirth & Powers, 2016). Co-teaching is the most used format between general and special education teachers; however, co-teaching is becoming a format used by other specialty professionals. The most positive classroom influences occur when special education teachers work in their element and provide explicit, direct instruction in a specialized manner (Beninghof, 2016). Co-teaching and collaboration require explicit and clear communication regarding roles and shared responsibilities; failure to do so causes difficulties within the students’ academic achievement.

108

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Friend and Barron (2019) explained collaboration communication skills as universal elements for effectively instructing all students in the inclusive classroom. These communication skills include active listening by both teachers within the classroom. Each teacher must mentally hear, comprehend, maintain attention to classroom activities, respond appropriately, and actively engage in surrounding activities appropriately. This active listening skill requires constant focus by both teachers as if each were reading the other’s mind to be able to carry on teaching and completing sentences flawlessly. Collaboration such as this requires explicit planning and mutual respect of each other’s skills while noticing and using subtle nonverbal communication cues. Getting started using collaborative learning strategies or structures can be a daunting task for a first-time user of these types of activities. Never fear, start out with one. Remember these factors before starting and make plans to encounter them prior to beginning collaborative activities: Not all students like to work in groups, not all students are ready to work in groups, groups do not use group time appropriately, group activities mean noisy activities, some groups work faster than others, and find an ending signal to alert all groups (Morton & Kagan, 1998). To address these issues effectively, “start with appropriate structure, establish routines, encourage norms, teach cooperation skills, and teach the strategy” (Morton & Kagan, 1998, p. 13).

CO-TEACHING MODELS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Six co-teaching models provide general education and special education teachers with tactics to employ to learn to work together collaboratively. Each model offers specific purposes, variations, and instructional strategies to meet student needs. The six models are as follows: (a) one teach, one observe; (b) station teaching; (c) parallel teaching; (d) alternative teaching; (e) teaming; and (f) one teach, one assist. Each of the different co-teaching models has strengths and weaknesses for the student and teacher relationship. Research completed by Heck and Bacharach (2016) suggested the “co-teaching model of student teaching is best practice” (p. 27). Any of these models lends to the inclusive model and collaborative efforts for all students to work as a community of learners accepting each other’s ideas and abilities.

One Teach, One Observe The one teaches, and one observes the model provides one teacher with the ability to lead a lesson. In contrast, the other teacher concentrates on gathering data through observations of student behaviors or performances. Teaching and collecting data at the same time is a complicated process, a process that cannot be completed effectively 109

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

by one person. Therefore, using the co-teaching model of one teacher instructing students while the other teacher is free to count, tally, and time how long a specific behavior or task lasts is imperative. Cook (2004) noted that one teach one observes is the model providing the most detailed teaching method and observing students engaged in the learning process. Before the teaching-learning process, the co-teachers should decide the exact data to gather and monitor the data. Both teachers should complete the analysis. The purpose is to compare target behavior observations to whole class peer observations. “Collect some data, Jada” as mentioned by Murawski & Dieker (2008) is perfect for the One teach, One Observe model. Two teachers teaching in a room allows for one to teach while the other is collecting data and vice versa of swapping roles. Data is so very important in the RTI process of today’s accountability of what students are doing during instruction. “Make sure to work together to collect information to make decisions on the basis of data rather than on the basis of opinion or emotion” (p. 47). That is the number one reason to have two teachers collecting data and the best reason for the one teach, one observe model.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Station Teaching Station teaching allows two teachers to work with small groups in stations while other students move from one learning station to another. This co-teaching model ensures each student receives small group instruction with both teachers during the rotations, thereby gaining more opportunities to participate and understand the skill or concept taught. Students in tier two of the RTI process require this co-teaching model to satisfy the additional instructional and intervention supports. Teachers divide the responsibility of planning and instruction (Friend, 2014; Lent, 2012). Students rotate on a predetermined schedule through stations. Teachers repeat the instruction to each group that comes through the station; delivery may vary according to student needs. The station teaching approach is appropriate, even if teachers have very different pedagogical approaches. Each teacher instructs every student. Cook (2004) reported station teaching should be used when “content is complex but not hierarchical, when instruction should be reviewed, and when several topics comprise instruction” (p. 19). While students rotate from one teacher to the next enabling instruction has been received multiple times. Using this model provides teachers and students opportunities to implement constructivist learning pedagogies. For example, Price-Dennis, Holmes, and Smith (2015) reported the Hive multilingual innovative pedagogies using Garage Band, FlipBoard and Corkulous enabling students to create organized, digital storyboards and podcasts in graphic formats. The struggling readers working in communities 110

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

of learners were accepted and embedded in the literacy practices receiving peer support using the same grade level curriculum instruction.

Alternative Teaching Another co-teaching model to assist in providing students with special educational needs support is the alternative teaching model. Special education teachers using this model generally instruct a smaller group of students, while the general education teacher instructs a larger group of students. The special education teacher uses an alternative instruction method; the general education teacher uses the traditional instruction method. Teachers divide responsibilities for planning and instruction (Friend, 2014; Lent, 2012). Most students remain in a large group setting, but some students work in a small group for pre-teaching, enrichment, re-teaching, or other individualized instruction (Friend, 2014). The approach allows for individualized instruction to be offered to all students. However, teachers must be careful that the same students are not always the same students pulled aside (Friend, 2014). As discussed by Cook (2004), alternative teaching provides students either a different lesson or the same lesson taught in a smaller group differently. Using the alternative teaching method allows one teacher to work on practice activities while the other teacher uses direct instruction to a smaller group, reinforcing deficit skills. Another option includes checking homework while the smaller group is frontloading the vocabulary for the upcoming lesson. Each teacher has specific instructional plans related to the same content but presents instruction using alternative methods. The alternative approach of co-teaching provides the special education teacher to use the “change your approach Coach” as suggested by Murawski & Dieker (2008). Using a different method of teaching or way of explaining the topic can help demonstrate to students there are other ways to teach a topic. Repeating it over and over or saying it louder does not help students to understand it. Drawing pictures, showing videos, singing songs, making models and using manipulatives of the topic are just a couple of ways to change the approach to teaching the same topic and using the alternative teaching method.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Parallel Teaching When employing the parallel teaching method, a class is divided into two equal parts, and both teachers teach the same lesson the same way. The use of this method helps to reduce the student to teacher ratio. Teachers share responsibility for planning and instruction. Classes of students are divided into heterogeneous groups, and each teacher instructs half the students on the same lesson. The content covered is the

111

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

same, but methods of delivery may differ (Friend, 2014). Both teachers need to be proficient in the range of curricula used for instruction. Teaching in large classrooms can reduce the opportunities to respond for students; however, using parallel teaching reduces the student to teacher ratio allowing for more opportunities to respond (Cook, 2004). Other reasons parallel teaching improves student engagement relates to instructional efficiency activities rather than drill and practice, test review and re-teaching. Students actually participate in purposeful and meaningful discussions using the parallel teaching model with turn and talk or think-pair-share strategies. Murawski and Dieker (2008) examined the need to address different learning styles; therefore, parallel teaching is the perfect co-teaching model to use for the inclusive model. Dividing the class into heterogeneous halves ensures both teachers will have the same types of students to address learning needs specifically in smaller groups.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Teaming Teaming is a co-delivery method in which both teachers complement each other almost as if a married couple in that they can finish each other’s sentences. This co-teaching model provides two teachers working in tandem instructing together and sharing complete responsibilities. Both teachers know each of the students and all the curricular content. This method requires mutual trust and respect between teachers and requires they mesh their teaching styles. Teachers work as a team to introduce new content, develop skills, clarify information, and facilitate learning and classroom management (Friend, 2014). Teachers share responsibilities for planning and instruction. During team teaching, “instruction becomes a conversation, not turn-taking” (Cook, 2004, p. 21). Two teachers may demonstrate how to interact with each other while using conversational skills such as active listening using the team-teaching model. Teachers may consider displaying a debate for a social studies class or, perhaps, model the “Think Aloud” strategy by completing a long division math problem in front of students. “They are our kids” (Murawski & Dierker, 2008, p.43). This is the philosophy of the teaming approach of co-teaching. Co-teaching using the teaming model do not differentiate between students on the special education teacher’s roster and those on the general education teacher’s classroom roster- all of the students belong to both teachers. The special education teacher works to assist all students in the room regardless of having an IEP or not. This is the beauty of the inclusive classroom model using the teaming approach.

112

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

One Teach, One Assist Finally, the last co-teaching model is the one teach, one assist method in which one teacher provides instruction, while the other moves around the classroom helping students who seem to be confused, off-task, or having behavioral issues. This assisting teacher offers much-needed help to all those students, which allows the other teacher to continue providing instruction. One teacher plans and instructs, and one teacher monitors the classroom and provides adaptations and other support as needed. This collaborative teaching method requires very little joint planning and should be used sparingly. The collaborative teaching method can result in one teacher, most often the general education teacher, taking the lead role most of the time. This method may also be distracting to students, especially those who may become dependent on the drifting teacher (Friend, 2014). Many times, lessons are better being taught by only one teacher, but having another teacher in the room to move around and provide help immediately when students struggle is very helpful to continue the pace and flow of teaching (Cook, 2004). Some teachers possess more content expertise than the other teacher with whom they are working and need to be the sole instructor, while the other teacher needs to provide supportive assistance and vice versa. Using this model helps to keep distracting students from continually interrupting the flow of the instruction.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

HIGH LEVERAGE PRACTICES “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004) requires the use of research-based practices and the instruction of students with disabilities in the general education classroom to the maximum extent possible” (20 U.S. C. 1412[5] [B]; Hovland, 2020, p. 405). Special education teachers worried about student performance levels within the inclusion classrooms based upon the increased expectations and accountability practices mandated by the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015 and the No Child Left Behind Act 2001 developed 22 High Leverage Practices (HLPs) for K-12 special education teachers (CEC, 2017). HLPs address the most demanding instructional methods all special education teachers need to be using within lessons. Areas addressed in the HLPs include collaboration, assessment, social/emotional/ behavioral practices, and instruction. Collaboration high leverage practices include High Leverage Practice 1: collaborating with professionals to increase student success. Pre-service teachers require additional opportunities to practice and observe teachers, paraprofessionals, administrators, and support personnel working together to provide coordinated services to support academics; counseling; and behavioral, social, and physical 113

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

skills lessons. Co-teaching using high leverage practices includes sharing ideas, active planning for all students within the classroom, and problem-solving, including negotiation of roles and responsibilities of each professional (CEC, 2017). Hovland (2020) reported using the reciprocal teaching strategy in the inclusive classroom as and effective technique for students with disabilities. Reciprocal teaching is a comprehension strategy used for narrative and informational texts. Co-teachers “using explicit and scaffolded instructions in the four reciprocal teaching strategies with collaborative discussions in peer groups improved reading comprehension” (p. 405). The four areas included in reciprocal teaching include predicting, clarifying, questioning, and summarizing. Each skill needs to be explicitly and systematically taught to students with disabilities. Students with disabilities have difficulties in the area of writing as well as reading. Connecting reading to writing through the use of graphic organizers is one of the best practices used in special education classrooms. Ewoldt and Morgan (2017) discussed the innovative way of color-coding graphic organizers supporting students with learning disabilities in the writing process. Layers of support using different colors for different elements and requirements of the assignment bring visual attention to the graphic organizer allowing the student to focus on the learning rather than getting lost (Ewoldt & Morgan, 2017). Co-teaching with the general education teacher and collaborating with peers while using this instructional strategy builds a sense of ownership for students with learning disabilities. Another collaboration high leverage practice discusses the need for pre-service teachers to learn how to organize and facilitate effective meetings with professionals and families, High Leverage Practice 2 (CEC, 2017). Meetings with parents and other professionals can be a daunting task for first time teachers. Writing an individualized educational plan (IEP) requires collaboration with support personnel such as speech-language therapists, occupational therapists, and general education teachers. Building positive relationships and creating an agenda demonstrates a way to collaborate with parents during the IEP meeting. Working with parents of students with special needs is imperative and should be a collaborative experience for all teachers (Simpson & Mundschenk, 2010). Using a collaborative problem-solving approach provides a “win-win situation” for all stakeholders involved in the IEP meeting (Simpson & Mundschenk, 2010, p. 252). The factors associated with the collaborative problem-solving approach include negotiation in which all parties discuss facts about the problem, shared use of power, school wide supports, active listening skills, and constructive open-mindedness (Simpson & Mundschenk, 2010). Shared power conjures up different meanings for all stakeholders involved in the IEP process. However, in this collaborative process, equal power requires each person involved in the meeting be willing to work towards the same goal for the 114

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

student’s good. Working towards the goal requires two main actions: change and risk (Simpson & Mundschenk, 2010). The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results; therefore, change is required to expect different results. To implement change, a risk must be taken. Simpson and Mundschenk (2010) noted, “Risk-taking requires conceptualizing problems creatively and selecting novel solutions and strategies” (p. 253). The final collaborative high leverage practice is to work together with families to support student learning and secure needed services as discussed by high leverage practice three (CEC, 2017). Teachers are ethically required to assist families by communicating all necessary parental rights about students’ special education processes. Parents need to understand the processes so they can advocate for the services and resources their children need to reach their potential.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

KAGAN TEAMBUILDING COOPERATIVE LEARNING STRUCTURES Inclusion classrooms cater to the teambuilding cooperative learning opportunities discussed by Kagan et al. (2012). Grouping students of various backgrounds and understandings reinforces their ability to contribute and protect each other during school-related activities. Teambuilding helps students learn to work together as human beings on a personal basis. Each student learns to accept diversity in Kagan et al. (2012) teambuilding and class building activities. Activities and exercises to promote teambuilding include various strategies: 4S brainstorming, blind sequencing, fan-n-pick, pairs compare, roundtable, and team interviews. Each teambuilding drill contributes to the instructional practices of collaboration in the inclusive classroom. Teambuilding and class building activities provide students with disabilities in the inclusive classroom opportunities to move around, use other intelligences not otherwise used during standard teaching practices, and allows for energized socialized interactions in positive and meaningful ways (Kagan et al., 2012). Inclusive classrooms using collaborative teambuilding and class building strategies will notice improvements such as these: “1) building positive student relations, 2) enhancing classroom climate, 3) reduction in discipline problems, 4) increased motivation and learning, 5) promoting diversity skills, 6) developing synergy and 7) boosting self-esteem” (Kagan et al.,2012, “Classbuilding card”).

4S Brainstorming Team 4S brainstorming use includes four members with the specific roles of “speed captain, sergeant support, sultan of silly, and synergy guru” (Kagan et al., 2012, p. 2). 115

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Higher-order and critical thinking skills are generated from brainstorming exercises. Each role in the 4S brainstorming team has a purpose such as keeping time moving briskly, encouraging all ideas are accepted, supporting everyone within the group, and creating a union of ideas (Kagan et al., 2012).

Blind Sequencing Blind sequencing requires students to comprehend; think through events from the beginning, middle, and end of readings; and retell events. The blind sequencing team activity requires students to keep their cards facedown and describe their individual cards’ information. All team members agree in the sequential placement of the cards (Kagan et al., 2012). According to Michels, Manzi, and Mele (2003), sequencing can be used with any content area activity as a collaboration tool. Consider content areas such as Biology for the “steps in digestion process” (p. 231). Differentiation for students with disabilities can be provided by having students draw and label the digestion process, label and explain the process provided on a graphic organizer, or use technology such as EdPuzzle to watch a video and at specific stopping points explain the process. Chemistry has many steps that can be used as collaborative activities; however, instead of the teacher providing the steps, have the students complete and explain the steps as an assessment tool after the class lecture.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Fan-n-Pick Card games are essential for team cooperation and collaborative learning opportunities. Fan-n-pick is an efficient card game of question or problem cards. Teachers use this strategic activity to help students practice, review, or prepare for content assessments (Kagan et al., 2012). Each team member must actively interact and engage in the questioning and answering of the cards. The best activity to help students synchronize their learning for the day is to play a game. Fan-n-Pick is the perfect game for students to play and practice to prepare for the content area assessment and demonstrate their understanding of the topics. Have students make the cards for the Fan-n-Pick review games to encourage higher-order thinking skills about the topics. Engaging and encouraging students to collaborate and participate in creating questions and answers for the assessment demonstrates a shared role in the classroom community.

116

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Pairs Compare Pairs compare gives students the convenience to work in groups of two as in peer buddies. The pairs work together to create lists, ideas, and solutions. Each team works together to create as many ideas and solutions as possible. Variations for the problem solving and idea creations include using Venn diagrams, a two-by-two matrix, and plus/minus interesting frames (Kagan et al., 2012, p. 72). Social skills learned using Pairs Compare include “taking turns, listening, checking for agreement, and checking for understanding” (Morton & Kagan, 1998, p. 137). Using the strategy of pairs compare allows students to consider questions with multiple answers. Prior knowledge, points of view, building background, and considering all options about the topic help to elicit and encourage discussions.

Pairs Check In the pairs check strategy, students form A and B pairs. Partner A answers the first problem while partner B coaches and praises. Partner B then completes problem 2, and partner A coaches. Students then check the problems; if students disagree, they check with their teammates to determine correct answers. After agreeing, students circle, check, and give a hearty handshake to pairs. Students continue to complete the other problems in the same manner (Kagan et al., 2012). “Taking turns, asking for justification, helping and praising are the social skills used during pairs check” (Morton & Kagan, 1998, p. 129). The common activity used is a worksheet; however, in using this strategy, if students are only telling the correct answers and not explaining how learning is not taking place outside of each partner’s own work, then the strategy is basically checking a worksheet (Morton & Kagan, 1998). Pairs check can be used with any content area learning activity.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Roundtable Roundtable team members have fun learning to take turns while contributing to a group project. Team members equally produce a project while passing a card, paper, or list around the table to add positive reasons for mutual support in developing synergistic teamwork (Kagan et al., 2012, p. 116). Principles include “positive interdependence, individual accountability, equal participation, and simultaneous interaction” (Kagan et al., p. 117). Morton and Kagan (1998) reported social skills include taking turns and listening. RoundTable and RoundRobin Strategies are often used interchangeably. The only differences are “RoundTable answers are written or constructed, and RoundRobin answers are spoken” (Morton & Kagan, 1998, p. 153). To clarify the RoundRobin 117

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

strategy is not the old RoundRobin reading strategy. This is a collaborative turn taking and sharing strategy. Variations to these strategies include using them sequentially (only one paper); using the strategies simultaneously (everyone has a paper to use); brainstorming (similar to the 4S); reaction wheels (one paper and everyone reacts); rallies (completed in pairs); and boggle (just like the game boggle in that each member contributes a word). Vocabulary is an important skill for students with disabilities to develop and improve. Dazzeo (2020) reported using a Digital Frayer Model in a collaborative setting to increase and engage students’ abilities in the area of vocabulary. The Kagan RoundTable and RoundRobin strategies would be perfect models for such collaborative practices with the Digital Frayer Model for vocabulary development. Dazzeo (2020) discussed an example of the teacher using a team teaching approach with a group process of either RoundTable or RoundRobin where students collaborated in the completion of the graphic organizer.

Team Interviews The team interview activity is an activity in which groups of students take turns in serving as interviewer and interviewee. Topic ideas are suggested when teammates interview one student. This process is repeated as each group member experiences both roles (Kagan et al., 2012). Morton and Kagan (1998) reported the importance of learning how to participate in the interview process. Learning to interview well is a life skill that takes practice. Students, especially some students with disabilities, have difficulty listening to questions well and responding appropriately to the explicit question asked in a clear manner. “Active listening is integral to the team interview strategy,” stated Morton and Kagan (p. 199). Morton and Kagan added that the process helps students practice in a “non-threatening” atmosphere (p. 199).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Find Someone Who The find someone who strategy has students walk around the room with their hands up in the air until they are able to pair with a partner. Upon finding a partner, each student asks the other student a question from the activity worksheet to review correct and incorrect answers. Students will initial each other’s sheets and move to find new partners. This strategy can be used for multiple content areas such as the sciences, social studies, and math (Kagan et al., 2012). Michels, Manzi, and Mele (2003) explained the importance of using Find Someone Who to encourage active participation as well as the use of movement for those lecture-heavy content areas such as science, social studies, and math. The strategy 118

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

provides students opportunities to circulate among classmates, discuss answers, and share correct and incorrect answers without the anxiety of having everyone in the class watching. Many benefits of the Find Someone Who strategy includes students using each other as a resource, holding each other accountable for the content, and interacting with a variety of peers. Ideas for the use of this strategy includes but is not limited to knowing the authors of books and poems, listing the parts of a letter, listing the steps in making a bill become a law, naming the first 10 Amendments, describing the steps in the scientific process, and naming the steps of long division. All content areas can be used with the Find Someone Who strategy.

Mix and Match The teacher will give a signal, and students will stand up with their card in hand to find a partner. Using their card they will quiz their partner and their partner will quiz them. Then trade and move to find another partner. Repeat the process. This strategy has also been called Quiz Quiz Trade. When the teacher calls Freeze- stop and find your partner with the matching card (Kagan et al. 2012). Another interactive and engaging, collaborative activity allows students to get up and move is the Mix-n-Match strategy. This strategy also allows students to respond to questions and answers without anxiety and worry about everyone in the class knowing about correct or incorrect responses on cards. Anonymity is essential for students with disabilities, and this strategy is established to allow students to learn from mistakes during the activity (Michels, Manzi, & Mele, 2003). Benefits of the Mix and Match strategy include practicing matching the content as a review prior to a test and the competitive aspect of beating their class record or their classmates for making the most matches. Ideas for creating matches include but are not limited to books and authors, vocabulary words and definitions, states and capitals, events and dates, and finally fractions and decimals. The use of this strategy is limited only by your imagination.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

DIGITAL AND DISTANCE EDUCATION TEAM TEACHING Many teachers now teach in a 24/7 atmosphere because of technological advances. The Internet is always open, e-mails can be sent all hours of the day and night, and smartphones can be used to send and receive electronic messages at a moment’s notice making connecting quickly with other educators possible (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019; Tucker, 2016). Google drive provides teachers with the ability to collaborate in real-time with shared documents, slides, sheets, drawings, and other e-tools to plan, present, and teach while not being in the same room, building, or 119

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

geographical location (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019; Tucker, 2016). Team teaching using technology is not a restrictive classroom activity. Students in one classroom can collaborate with students in another classroom, and grade levels can communicate and connect through technology with other grade levels and schools (i.e., middle school with high school) for a cross-grade level or cross-curricular, collaborative project (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019; Tucker, 2016). Developing students’ skills using team-teaching activities may assist in answering the following questions posited by the 2020 National Association of Colleges and Employers Job Outlook Survey (Gray & Koncz, 2020) related to working in collaborative teams: A push by employers to teach students skills needed in the workforce is prevalent. Students are required in jobs to problem solve, work in teams, have a strong work ethic, think analytically and quantitatively, and have strong written communication skills upon graduating and entering the workforce. Collaboration requires students to graduate from high school and enter the workforce knowing how to use effective problem-solving skills. A question asked is how one foster individual problem-solving skill through collaboration can. Working together in a group builds strength individually as well as holistically. Students who learn to work together acquire acceptance of differences of opinions and of ways to handle tasks. Working for others requires the ability to work in a team. Employers expect employees to have a strong work ethic. Having a strong work ethic means a worker will put in a day’s work for a day’s pay. Teachers can help students learn how to develop a strong work ethic using teams. Additionally, collaborating with others provides opportunities to learn analytic and qualitative thinking and problem-solving skills when sharing in group activities. Effective verbal and written communication skills are necessary in all professions. Learning to communicate with various personalities in collaborative activities provides opportunities to acquire these communication skills. Such activities include discussing the projects in person or through e-mails, brainstorming problems and solutions, negotiating roles and responsibilities for each team member, and finalizing the plans for all members to participate to complete the project.

DIGITAL LEARNING STRATEGIES IN THE INCLUSIVE CLASSROOM Within general education inclusion classrooms, both general and special education teachers struggle to meet the needs of students with disabilities effectively. Teachers have an innate desire to correct problems or find solutions to educational barriers rather than “alter the teaching and learning process” (Baglieri, Valle, Connor, & Gallagher, 2011, p. 272) to differentiate instruction for students with disabilities. 120

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Miller, Ridgway, and Ridgway (2019) discussed techniques of using technology to differentiate such as “providing anticipation learning, grabbing attention, accessing content, personalization, culture and product” (p. xv). Many online collaboration tools exist to accommodate learners with various disabilities. The Google Suite provides multiple ADA accommodations and file sharing opportunities for teachers and students to work from any location provided by an internet access links the documents, slides, sheets, or other boards together. “Using technology such as ScreenCast-O-Matic, Padlet, and Kahoot can merge general education and special education collaborative efforts” (Mahoney & Hall, 2017, p. 292). Clark and Avrith (2017) explained how Screencastify allows students to “capture and share their thought processes behind and reflections on their work and creations” (p. 65). Miller, Ridgway, and Ridgway (2019) focused on these technology tools of collaboration providing students opportunities for alternatives to the traditional paper pencil projects. Projects focused on either 1:1 classroom computer workstations or the options of B.A.D. (bring a device) by allowing students choices of using their own devices or donations from the community as families upgrade to new devices (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). Collaborative tools discussed include Plickers, Wheeldecide, Youtube, Gradecam, Google Forms, Quizziz, Kahoot, Backchannel chat, Answer Garden, Photomath, and Flipgrid just to name a few options for students to a few.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ScreenCast-O-Matic and/ or Screencastify ScreenCast-O-Matic and Screencastify are a website tools providing teachers and students the opportunity to make presentations and publish information in audio, video, or both formats. Screencast-O-Matic and Screencastify are a handy tools for recording screenshots and sharing them with friends or colleagues for a number of different purposes. With just a few clicks, the screen can be recorded, and once satisfied with the video, the video can be uploaded. Providing students with recorded videos assists students in viewing materials and resources multiple times and in offering the option to stop and start recordings when needed for note taking purposes. Another alternative for student products is to allow students to make a video demonstrating their understanding of the topic, after which teachers may assess students’ ability to demonstrate comprehension of the topic, to employ creativity in expressing topic ideas, to work collaboratively with others, and to apply other variables of the assignment deemed necessary. Parents can use the resources provided by teachers to assist students with homework and to promote understanding through practice. Teachers and parents can work together to assist students in making academic progress by using the ScreenCast-O-Matic or Screencastify programs at home and at school (Mahoney & Hall, 2017).

121

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Padlet “Padlet is both a website and a Chrome extension that lets you create a bland digital wall where you can gather student work, answers, or any type of information that will help inform your teaching and serve as a baseline for upcoming instruction” (Clark & Avrith, 2017, p. 119). Students can edit with videos on the collaborative screen together with images and documents and create something beautiful. Using Padlet allows teachers to provide an alternative for students to communicate, collaborate, and produce academic work in various content areas (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). Students with disabilities respond using technology in a positive manner with more options available. Teachers can assess students’ ability to work collaboratively with others, their understanding of the topic by the answers provided to the prompt, their creativity used when responding to the questions, and their ability to present their ideas using the program (Mahoney & Hall, 2017). The Padlet platform provides students an alternative and visually appealing medium to display and demonstrate their knowledge about the lesson topic (Clark & Avrith, 2017).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kahoot and Quizziz Kahoot and Quizziz are free website tools available for teachers to use as review tools or assessment tools with students in preparing for a test. Students see the tools as a game rather than as an assessment tool. Teachers can create quizzes, discussions, or surveys, flashcards, or lessons to help prepare them for upcoming exams. “Quizziz and Kahoot are alternative that adds student-paced questions, funny memes, and lots of extra features that make it an interactive and fun tool” (Miller, Ridgway & Ridgway, 2019, p. 30). Kahoot questions are limited to 95 characters, and the answers are limited to 60 characters. Students respond using iphones, android phones, or computers. Kahoot is a competitive, fast-paced game in which the faster the student responds to the questions, the more points the student earns. Kahoot can be shared or made public on the website to enable students to visit and review the questions and answers as often as needed when studying prior to testing. “After answering the questions students are still mentally engaged with the question. Their minds are receptive to feedback and additional examples” (Miller, Ridgway & Ridgway, 2019, p. 30). Teachers use this tool as a way to engage students in assessing areas learned versus areas needing more instruction as based upon correct and incorrect responses (Mahoney & Hall, 2017).

122

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Plickers According to Miller, Ridgway, and Ridgway (2019) Plickers can be used “as a quick warm up” (p. 25). Plickers uses a paper-based, web-based, and app-based software program providing teachers to simply scan the room using her smartphone as students hold up a “QR code looking piece of paper showing either A, B, C, D response” (Miller,et al., 2019, p. 25). Using Plickers allows the teacher to differentiation the levels of questions, perform formative assessments using Webbs Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and gather individual data to drive instruction without drawing specific attention to the student with disabilities when the student does not know the answers to the questions (Mahoney & Hall, 2017). During the question and answer responding sessions, the teacher can show the correct response and the group data without displaying individual responses. This process provides immediate feedback to students to correct their thinking, as the assessment process is continued throughout the instructional delivery portion of the planned daily activities (Mahoney & Hall, 2017).

Wheel Decide Teachers and students needing to make those choices of what to do next and who to call on next can finally have an online random item selector making their lives much easier with Wheeldecide.com. This takes the voting out of your hands and into the hands of the computer. According to Miller, et al., (2019) “this provides intentional differentiation and endless possibilities” (p. 27). The wheel can be personalized with names, strategies, numbers, topics, stations, questions to be reviewed, colors, and any other idea you think about putting on the wheel.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

GradeCam Imagine all the differentiated tests given to each individual and personalized student or student group within your class. How long will that take you to grade? What if you could still differentiate your tests for all of your students and get those graded in a matter of minutes? Would you do it? Of course you would! GradeCam provides the “same type of options similar to Plickers using your smartphone using a Scantron looking form for students to complete” (Miller, et al., 2019). Teachers would transfer the varied grades to electronic gradebooks such as Google sheets or excel, analyze the data and plan for individualized lesson plans from the data. Viola! Even better, collaborative and co-teaching groups can share the results for RTI and MTSS meetings. Need behavior data?

123

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

ClassDojo, Flipgrid, VoiceThread Many schools using the ClassDojo app behavior management tool have abilities to share the data with parents, teachers and administrators for RTI and MTSS meetings (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). However, inappropriate behavior can be diminished by using engaging and interactive collaborative activities with technological tools. Allowing students to use their voice through Flipgrid, VoiceThread or Google Voice provides an alternative to the traditional paper and pencil option of answering and demonstrating knowledge (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019; Clark & Avrith, 2017). Mobile or other computer devices provide alternatives for the web-based platforms for individuals or groups of students to post videos, auditory or text based comments related to the lesson or topics of the assignment. Another feature provides students the opportunity to add specialized features such as backgrounds, blurred faces, etc to allow for privacy. Additional infographic websites allowing for differential assignment alternatives include Piktochart, MindMup, YouTube, PowToons, Blabberize, and Digitaltextbooks. These options assist students in creating documents, videos, advertisements, images, and texts to demonstrate and summarize the information learned in a student-friendly and motivating manner (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). According to Dazzeo (2020) utilizing the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) guidelines where “the curriculum should adapt to the varied ways in which students learn” (p. 36). The use of varied technologies utilizes the UDL model of teaching.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Other Instructional Learning Applications Meaningful differentiation technologies can be provided from a myriad of websites and useful webtools available. Technology is improving at a vast rate too difficult to keep up with on a daily basis; however some tools and websites continue to make improvements regularly to meet the needs of all learners. Such sites as the Smithsonian provides a website specifically for tween readers called the tweentribune. com providing reading materials at varied reading levels (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). Newsela.com also provides reading materials at different lexile levels based upon recent news topics. One of the main features of Newsela is every student’s reading article looks exactly the same; therefore no reader realizes his or her article is written at a different reading level (Mahoney & Hall, 2017; Miller, Ridgway, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019).

124

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Peardeck and Nearpod Interactive and engaging presentations can be used within the Peardeck and Nearpod websites. Features such as open-ended questions, polls, quizzes, and collaborative bulletin boards are all elements adding interactivity to the teacher’s lessons and giving students’ engaging demonstrations of their knowledge (Miller, Ridgway, & Ridgway, 2019). Teachers can upload their own content then integrate the engaging features. Bell (2018) explained giving students’ choices assists in motivating students to be engaged and involved in the learning process. Digital choice boards can be included in the options provided in Nearpod, Peardeck, Hyperdocs, Google Forms and other technological tools. “Empower students with voice and choice is the vital choice to establishing student ownership of learning” (Bell, 2018, p. 72). Therefore, students are always learning as should teachers should always be learning (Bell, 2018).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

TRAINING All teachers require training in learning to use technology, not just for the sake of learning but to learn to differentiate for implementing response to intervention strategies at all levels. Bell (2018) explained “Give a teacher an app, and she’s got a day’s lesson. Teach her how to find the right apps, and she’ll have lessons for a lifetime” (p. 41). Training should not be a one and done type of event. Google for Education offers trainings and resources to help keep educators learning and improving their technology skills (Bell, 2018). General education teachers facing the inclusion environment require “skill training in addressing special needs, skill training in collaboration and communication, and team-building opportunities” to create a successful inclusive classroom (Guzman, 1997, p. 439). Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie (2007) reported the need for more training related to the implementation of co-teaching as a means to address inclusive classroom situations. Varied versions of co-teaching are used, and each version requires training of the general education and special education teachers for successful inclusion to occur (Scruggs et al., 2007). Teachers lacking in confidence in inclusive services and needing specialized training will impede the learning of all students, especially students with disabilities (Jung, 2007). Training in positive behavioral support interventions and research-based systematic differentiated instruction must be provided for teachers to ensure success for students with disabilities (Howey, n.d.). Collaboration provides opportunities for improving learning, which is an important aspect of a teacher leadership coalition. The leadership team meets and develops methods that will enable the entire staff to implement new strategies that uphold and meet new vision and mission statements’ focal points. 125

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

The teacher leadership team then shares the ideas and questions raised with the respective grade-level team members to implement or find solutions. Collaboration strategies include the following: grouping teachers by free periods, starting school later enabling teachers’ opportunities to plan before students arrive, using teacher assistants (paraprofessionals) so teachers can plan during additional planning periods, use of substitutes so teachers can plan, and providing early release days. (Dearman & Alber, 2005, p. 637).

CONCLUSION Teachers can no longer work alone in isolation in their own classrooms. Diverse students require a collaborative method using multiple teachers in the school working in tandem to meet students’ various needs. The self-contained classroom model fails to meet the needs of all students. Inclusion and the response to intervention model (RTI) are the processes used to provide mildly disabled students opportunities to learn alongside their non-disabled peers. Age-appropriate social, emotional, behavioral, and academic skills are taught to students by both general and special educators. Students no longer feel isolated from their neighborhood friends. Regular and special education teachers share roles and responsibilities. Collaboration and co-teaching models are required for the successful implementation of the inclusion classroom service delivery to meet the needs of all students. Effective strategies are those in which all teachers and students can work together sharing ideas, plans, and spaces for the greater good of learning. The Council of Exceptional Children supports and provides high leverage practices to ensure that pre-service teachers are prepared to implement universal design for instruction models of teaching immediately upon graduation and enter the workforce.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

REFERENCES Afflerbach, P. (2012). Understanding and using reading assessment K-12 (2nd ed.). International Reading Association (IRA). Bauwens, J., Hourcade, J. J., & Friend, M. (1989). Cooperative teaching: A model for general and special education integration. Remedial and Special Education, 10(2), 17–22. doi:10.1177/074193258901000205

126

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Bell, K. (2018). Shake up learning: Practical ideas to move learning from static to dynamic. Dave Burgess Consulting. Beninghof, A. (2016). To clone or not to clone? Educational Leadership, 73(4), 10–15. Center for Creative Leadership. (2020). Use active listening to coach others. https:// www.ccl.org/articles/leading-effectively-articles/coaching-others-use-activelistening-skills/ Clark, H., & Avrith, T. (2017). The google infused classroom: A guidebook to making thinking visible and amplifying student voice. Elevate Books. Cook, L. (2004). Co-teaching: Principles, practices and pragmatics. Quarterly Special Education Meeting, New Mexico Public Education Department. Council for Exceptional Children. (2017). High leverage practices in special education. CEC. CEEDAR Center. Dazzeo, R., & Rao, K. (2020). Digital Frayer model: Supporting vocabulary acquisition with technology and UDL. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(1), 34–42. doi:10.1177/0040059920911951 Dearman, C. C., & Alber, S. R. (2005, April). The changing face of education: Teachers cope with challenges through collaboration and reflective study. The Reading Teacher, 58(7), 634–640. doi:10.1598/RT.58.7.4 Ewoldt, K. B., & Morgan, J. J. (2017). Color-coded graphic organizers for teaching writing to students with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(3), 175–184. doi:10.1177/0040059916681769 Friend, M. (2014). Co-teaching strategies to improve student outcomes. National Professional Resources. www.NPRinc.com

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Friend, M. (2016). Welcome to co-teaching 2.0. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 16–22. Friend, M., & Barron, T. (2019). Collaborating with colleagues to increase students success. In J. McLeskey, L. Maheady, B. Billingsley, M. T. Brownell, & T. J. Lewis (Eds.), High leverage practices for inclusive classrooms (pp. 3–14). Routledge., doi:10.4324/9781315176093-2 Gray, K., & Koncz, A. (2020, January 16). The top attributes employers want to see on resumes. National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE). https:// www.naceweb.org/about-us/press/2020/the-top-attributes-employers-want-to-seeon-resumes/

127

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Guzman, N. (1997). Leadership for successful inclusive schools: A study of principal behaviours. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(5), 439–444. doi:10.1108/09578239710184583 Heck, T. W., & Bacharach, N. (2016). A better model for student teaching. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 24–29. Hovland, J. B. (2020). Inclusive comprehension strategy instruction: Reciprocal teaching and adolescents with intellectual disability. Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(6), 404–413. doi:10.1177/0040059920914334 Howey, P. (n.d.). What you need to know about IDEA 2004: IEPs for children with behavior problems. Retrieved from https://www.wrightslaw.com/howey/iep.special. factors.htm Hutchins, G. (2011). Future-proofing needs collaboration, innovation, education, and inspiration. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/biomimicrybusiness-transformation-collaboration Jung, W. S. (2007, Fall). Preservice teacher training for successful inclusion. Education, 128(1), 106–113. Kagan, L., Kagan, M., & Kagan, S. (2012). Teambuilding: Cooperative learning structures. Kagan Publishing. Kampwirth, T. J., & Powers, K. M. (2016). Collaborative consultation in the schools: Effective practices for learning and behavioral problems. Pearson. Kokemuller, N. (n.d.). Is it important to be open-minded in the workplace? https:// work.chron.com/important-open-minded-workplace-6124.html Lent, R. C. (2012). Overcoming textbook fatigue: 21st-century tools to revitalize teaching and learning. ASCD.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Mahoney, J., & Hall, C. (2017). Using technology to differentiate and accommodate students with disabilities. E-Learning and Digital Media, 14(50), 291–303. doi:10.1177/2042753017751517 Michels, M., Manzi, A., & Mele, J. (2003). Cooperative learning & science: High school activities Grades 8-12. Kagan Publishing.

128

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Miller, M., Ridgway, N., & Ridgway, A. (2019). Don’t ditch that tech: Differentiated instruction in a digital world. Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc. Morton, T., & Kagan, S. (1998). Cooperative learning & Social studies towards excellence & equity Grades 6-12. Kagan Publishing. Murawski, W. W., & Bernhardt, P. (2016). An administrator’s guide to co-teaching. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 30–34. Murawski, W. W., & Dieker, L. (2008). 50 ways to keep your co-teacher: Strategies for before, during, and after co-teaching. Council for Exceptional Children, 40(4), 40–48. doi:10.1177/004005990804000405 Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making inclusion work in general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children, 35(3), 477–490. doi:10.1353/etc.2012.0020 Price-Dennis, D., Holmes, K. A., & Smith, E. (2015). Exploring digital literacy practices in an inclusive classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(2), 195–205. doi:10.1002/trtr.1398 Pugach, M. C., & Winn, J. A. (2011). Research on co-teaching and teaming: An untapped resource for induction. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1), 36–46. Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007, Summer). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392–416. doi:10.1177/001440290707300401 Simpson, R. L., & Mundschenk, N. A. (2010). Working with parents and families of exceptional children and youth (4th ed.). ProEd. Snyder, R. F. (1999, Fall). Inclusion: A qualitative study of inservice general education teachers’ attitudes and concerns. Education, 120(1), 173–180.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Sousa, D. A. (2001). How the special needs brain learns. Corwin Press. Tomlinson, C. A. (2016). Teaching in tandem: A reflection. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 90–91. Treleaven, K. (2017). Five ways to teach students respectful disagreement. We Are Teachers. https://www.weareteachers.com/teach-students-respectful-disagreement/

129

Strategies for Integrated Collaborative Inclusion Relationships

Tremblay, P. (2013). Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabilities: Inclusion with co-teaching and solo-taught special education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13(4), 251–258. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2012.01270.x Tucker, C. (2016). Team teaching from a distance. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 86–87.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Villa, R. A., & Thousand, J. S. (2016). The inclusive education checklist: A selfassessment of best practices. Dude Publishing.

130

Section 2

Implementation and Facilitation of Inclusive Communities Through Collaborative Constructs

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

In this section, readers will gain understanding of the established constructs for collaborative relationships. A case study will be reviewed to analyze interventions and consider accommodations in inclusive settings.

132

Chapter 6

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings Dena AuCoin https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0676-5245 Purdue University Global, USA Brian Berger Purdue University Global, USA

ABSTRACT Inclusion is built on the idea that all students are valuable and signifcant members of their community and should be accepted in general education settings. Inclusion is a term that can defne classroom practices, but it is also a valued system where all students have a sense of belonging. Collaboration between teachers can efectively support students with special needs (SSN) in inclusion, ofering insight into student needs and providing valuable information for supporting students. Research has identifed the efective collaborative constructs of (1) shared planning, (2) frequent communication, (3) shared vision, (4) mutual respect, and (5) joint trust. This chapter will investigate the real-life issue of collaboration needs and defne the established collaborative constructs for practice.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION A growing body of research on collaborative teaching practices shows collaboration as an approach that effectively supports students with special needs (SSN) in the inclusion environment (Kolbe, 2019; O’Connor et al., 2016). For the purposes of this chapter, the authors use the following to define collaboration. Collaboration DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch006 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

is a method of teaching in partnership where all members work toward a common goal, allowing for the knowledge of each partner to bridge the gaps of the other. Collaboration is grounded in the idea that each partner has unique expertise to bring to the situation. Collaboration among teachers can offer understanding about student issues and needs, providing teachers important information on how to set and meet purposeful objectives in the general education setting (Adams et al., 2016; Fisher et al., 2020). The positive collaborative relationship also has a profound effect on teachers through an increase in professional knowledge and an increase in job satisfaction (Sheppard, 2019). This chapter will review the collaboration constructs, provide questions to guide educators in building collaborative practices, and offer strategies for using the constructs in practice. Educators have stated that teaching styles, personality, and policies all contribute to how collaborative partnerships are formed (Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Educators have found they gain improved instructional skills, increased knowledge, and generally became better teachers for students in inclusion as a result of collaboration (Solone et al., 2020). Continued exploration is needed concerning the theory and practice of collaboration for students in inclusion and its impact on outcomes for students with special needs (Adams et al., 2016; Cook & Friend, 2010; Fisher et al., 2020). There has been a rise in the use of collaborative teaching methods and the documented positive results, and interventions via collaboration through the outlined collaborative constructs can offer students in inclusion more opportunities to experience success in school (Bruno et al., 2018; Cook & Friend, 2010; Morgan, 2016; Solone et al., 2020; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). This chapter intends for readers to develop a clear understanding of established collaborative constructs of (a) shared planning, (b) frequent communication, (c) shared vision, (d) mutual respect, and (e) joint trust (Cook & Friend, 2010; Solone et al., 2020; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Readers will also benefit from asking questions about how the constructs are used to build strong collaborative relationships and inclusive environments, and explore strategies to put collaboration constructs into practices we want to see in the inclusive classroom.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

COLLABORATION CONSTRUCTS The term inclusion has been used since the early 1990s, although it is not actually stated in IDEIA, and is often misunderstood by educators (Alesech & Nayar, 2020; Francisco et al., 2020; Portelli & Koneeny, 2018). Inclusive education is designed to offer all students the chance to learn in the same setting without discrimination (Gregory, 2018; Francisco et al., 2020). For example, simply placing a student with disabilities in the general education environment alone does not meet the purpose of 133

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

inclusion, educators must move beyond advocacy to practice. Instead, participation, building peer connections, and reasonable learning goals are overall inclusion objectives (Gregory, 2018; Portelli & Koneeny, 2018). Students with special needs are now spending the bulk of their time, approximately 60%, in the general education setting at least 80% of their day (U.S. Department of Education, 2019). In general, teachers typically approve of inclusion and agree that the best environment for students with special needs is in the general education classroom, yet conversely, teachers continue to express concerns about inclusion given the drive for academic rigor and excellence in United States schools today (Kauffman & Hornby, 2020; Silveira-Zaldivar & Curtis, 2019). The push for inclusion programs calls for general classroom teachers to provide specific instruction for SSN, however, many educators feel unprepared due to a lack of skills and a feeling of incompetence, agonizing how to include students with special needs in the general classroom environment (Gregory, 2018; Portelli & Koneeny, 2018). Therefore, teachers must build positive collaborative relationships to reap the positive educational benefits. Teacher collaboration should be a developed process with shared planning, frequent communication, and shared visions for student goals. Teachers often struggle to include SSN in the general education setting, feeling unprepared to handle the demands (Silveira-Zaldivar & Curtis, 2019). A way to deal with those challenges is through collaboration between teachers and/or service providers. Collaboration as a process also involves all parties acting as willing contributors that are equally devoted to sharing mutual respect and joint trust (Cook & Friend, 2010; Solone et al., 2020; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Current research supports the benefits of inclusion for all students involved through positive attitudes, growth of professional knowledge, and strong relationships between teachers (Gregory, 2018; Francisco et al., 2020; Lewis et al., 2019; Sheppard, 2019). Overall, positive collaboration among educators brings better cross-discipline understanding, professional development in teaching skills, benefits for target students, and an extension of benefits to typical students (Lewis et al., 2019; Morgan, 2016; Sheppard, 2019). The realization that an increasing number of students require significant modifications to be successful is not often met with enthusiasm, but purposeful collaboration can develop teachers’ differentiation and shift teachers’ attitudes regarding inclusion toward a more positive perspective (Sheppard, 2019). Collaboration is an association of partners who work together towards a particular goal and share the consequences both good and bad (Stoloff et al., 2020). Teachers need to be proficient collaborators to successfully perform their job. While traditionally general education and special education teachers have been isolated and detached, collaboration must be the standard in today’s inclusive educational settings (Cook & Friend, 2010; Solone et al., 2020). Teachers must work together for the benefit of all students, including those with 134

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

special learning needs and disabilities. Not collaborating is no longer an option because different educational innovations, such as inclusion, push towards teacher collaboration (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020). SSN benefit from collaborative efforts among teachers working together to support progress. Benefits from collaboration include increased student focus, lessening of negative behaviors, enhanced social skills, increased academic success, and better self-esteem (Solone et al., 2020). Positive relations can positively impact teachers’ well-being by motivating engagement in projects and the sharing of ideas and content (Stoloff et al., 2020). This collaboration has the added value of helping teachers overcome possible isolation when handling the various needs of students. However, to have deep collaboration, the five identified constructs of collaboration must be understood. In the next sections, the collaboration constructs will be defined.

Shared Planning Shared planning time is one way to develop a collaborative relationship among teachers and is a successful part of an inclusive program. Opportunities for specific collaboration times between general and special education teachers can improve teacher relationships and be the most valuable preparation piece in the classroom (Turner & Theilking, 2019). Shared planning among teachers provides an opportunity to improve practices and help identify professional strengths and weaknesses. Further, shared planning can bring colleagues together to analyze resources and evaluate their use (Brendle et al., 2017; Carreno & Ortiz, 2017). Shared planning opens the door for teachers to access activities and resources they may not have been able to think of on their own. The result is making the teacher more accessible, more interesting, and more motivating for all students. Additionally, learning different perspectives creates community among colleagues and helps teachers to feel more empowered, comfortable, and at ease with inclusion. Thanks to shared planning as a collaboration construct, a broader view of student needs is considered (Carreno & Ortiz, 2017). The next collaboration construct is communication.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Frequent Communication Communication has been identified as a key element of a successful collaborative relationship and to promote collaboration, teachers must communicate as colleagues (Green, 2019). The frequency and quality of the communication between educators contribute to the collaborative sharing of knowledge on teaching strategies to meet the needs of all students, including SSN. There is a need for more effective communication between educators (Mihajlovic, 2020). Frequent communication as a collaborative construct involves an open and honest discussion of personal philosophy 135

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

and differences to support the acceptance of strengths and weaknesses for each member (Sirkko et al., 2018). Frequent communication, which leads to enhanced collaboration, can lead to more support in the workplace. This collaborative support then serves as a resource for teachers and has a positive influence on performance (Wolgast & Fischer, 2017). In order to support planning and communication, educators’ collaborative relationships must share a vision for students.

Shared Vision Among the factors of positive collaboration is for partners to have a shared vision. This involves sharing mutual goals and a collective philosophy towards the education of SSN (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020; Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). The shared vision construct is a documented source of tension between teachers that can impede collaborative efforts, however, this construct is an essential component of successful collaboration. Partnerships with a shared vision include regular reflection on experiences to discover each person’s strengths and needs, which will ultimately expand their teaching. These partnerships involve an understanding of how learning happens paired with an understanding of individual student needs. All included in a collaborative team should have a shared understanding of the standards and curriculum used with students (Murawski & Hughes, 2021). Further, each member should have an awareness of the other’s specialty and view them as an esteemed team member with expert knowledge in their field (Sheppard, 2019). Shared vision should lead to shared respect, the next collaboration construct.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Mutual Respect Collaboration between general and special education teachers is an important element of an enhanced learning environment for SSN. There must be respect in this relationship to ensure that all students have equality in the classroom (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). Mutual understanding among teachers is a key element of a solid collaborative relationship. The attitude of teachers toward their collaborative partners can determine how well the relationship will work (Sheppard, 2019; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Mutual respect involves appreciating what each teacher brings to the collaborative relationship and their commitment to the same student outcomes. Teachers with mutual respect connect on an emotional level and with equity, exercising empathetic skills to understand each discipline (Eccleston, 2010). Finally, the last construct is trust.

136

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Joint Trust Joint trust as a collaboration construct provides a medium for sharing information and knowledge to build one another’s skills (Eccleston 2010; Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). Collaboration depends on shared responsibility and decision-making, which involves each person participating fully in all tasks and trusting each other’s capabilities (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). When a collaborative team has built joint trust, each person’s role is valued equally and resources are shared to contribute toward reaching student goals (Kelly et al., 2018; Rinio, 2018). Successful collaboration involves an understanding of confidentiality with trust and respect between all participants (Vostal et al., 2019).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

COLLABORATION EQUALS SUCCESS Collaboration between teachers is an important component of success in inclusion and is reliant on the varying attitudes and subsequent actions of teachers. The inclusion of SSN can introduce significant challenges to teachers since they can be uneasy and also concerned they will not be able to manage SSN (Jones & PetersonAhmad, 2017; O’Connor et al., 2016). Despite the reported apprehension, SSN in inclusive and collaborative settings are likely to have more positive social and emotional functioning, be more accepted by peers, and show more progress (Bruno et al., 2018; Cook & Friend, 2010; Morgan, 2016). Without collaboration, the result can be that SSN do not achieve the same academic outcomes as their peers on a consistent basis (Sheppard, 2019). The critical outcomes of successful inclusion for students involve participation in events, building peer relationships, engagement with the curriculum, and social acceptance (Bruno et al., 2018). In the face of the debates regarding the rationality of inclusion, the process seems to have positive effects including the encouragement of respect, care, empathy, and the removal of marginalization and exclusion (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020). In inclusive classrooms, students feel connected to their peers and can experience rigorous education. Students in inclusion can improve their selfesteem when in the general education classroom and can benefit from modeling typical peers (Alesech & Jayar, 2020). Furthermore, research suggests that typical students also make gains when inclusion is successful including: actively engaging with students with disabilities, fostering friendships, and developing a positive attitude towards people with disabilities (Cikili & Karaca, 2019; Francisco et al., 2020). Interventions as an outcome of teacher collaboration in the outlined collaborative constructs of a) shared planning, b) frequent communication, c) shared vision, d) mutual respect, and e) joint trust can offer students in inclusion more opportunities 137

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

to experience success in school (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Eccleston, 2010). Now that you have a deeper understanding of the collaboration constructs, understanding how the constructs work together, and how you can direct your practice to form successful collaborations, is critical. The next section will examine how collaboration is applied, how to build deep collaboration, and how to address barriers to strong collaborative relationships.

APPLICATION: INTEGRATION, BARRIERS, AND ATTITUDES Integrated Collaboration To implement true inclusive communities, teachers must collaborate with colleagues and members of the school community (Green, 2019). Although teacher collaboration can be useful for improving inclusive education, collaboration does not always work as such. Rather, several determinants are relevant for its success, a significant one is represented by the attitudes towards collaboration, that is, how well teachers integrate their work, and what they do to make it possible (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020). Teams should have isolated discussions on the strengths and challenges of collaboration and the overall goals for the relationship to better support SSN. All five collaborative constructs should be addressed in the discussion, with a clear plan for monitoring progress (Cook & Friend, 2010; Solone et al., 2020; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Integrated or deep collaboration can exist with greater levels of engagement and goal alignment, including (a) a shared vision, (b) enhanced participation and commitment, (c) higher levels of accountability, (d) increased determination, and (e) reciprocity (Alsubai, 2016; Bruns, 2013; Charner-Laird et al., 2016; Horton, 2013; Lewis et al., 2019). Integrated collaboration is more than simple routine interactions, when collaboration is integrated, the relationship can function as an additional layer to expertise and create a multifaceted conceptualization of practice (Bruns, 2013; Horton, 2013). To further develop integration, barriers to collaboration must be addressed.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Barriers Inadequate collaboration and attitudes toward collaboration can create barriers to inclusive environments. Further, conflicting teaching philosophies and personality factor into how strong collaborative relationships are built (Bruno et al., 2018; Murawski & Hughes, 2021). Enabling or hindering factors to collaboration also includes structural characteristics, such as time issues (e.g., individual and common planning time); staff continuity; and leadership support. Attitudes and perceptions of 138

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

the team members are considered as vital, referring to equality, personal harmony, and shared responsibilities. Another identified barrier is school governance and administration, the overall culture of the school that either supports or ignores the atmosphere of collaborative collegiality (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020). Many educators participate in what they believe is collaboration, through informal and impromptu means. Examples include meeting at lunch, before or after school, and on weekends. Truly shared planning in collaboration is comprised of teachers offering expertise and content that meets the learning needs of SSN. Both partners should be present in the relationship and maintain joint responsibility for instructional preparation (Carreno & Ortiz, 2017; Lewis et al., 2019). There is a critical need for more collaboration time between teachers to jointly plan out and address lesson components such as standards, accommodations, and instructional strategies. Teachers express that their informal practices lack depth and feel frustrated by the lack of time to work together to meet student needs, time continues to be a main barrier to building relationships. Despite the barriers, the failure to collaborate nullifies individualized instruction and accommodations and leads to student difficulties in accessing the general curriculum (Sheppard, 2020; Solone et al., 2020). The barriers of inclusion that are connected to misconceptions will continue to affect the efficiency of inclusive programs if not fully explored. The next section identifies how teacher attitudes toward inclusion and collaboration can be either a barrier or an advantage.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Teacher Attitudes Teachers’ roles have become more collaborative than in the past and the collaboration of educators is one of the most important factors related to the effectiveness of the education of SSN (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020). Further, educators must collaborate to meet accountability standards for students, design professional development plans, and address issues associated with teaching students from diverse cultural backgrounds. Collaborative teachers’ practices are influenced by their attitudes and consequently, a large part of the success of collaborative practices depends on teachers’ attitudes. Understanding teachers’ attitudes is critical to the development and success of collaborative teaching practices (Ghedin & Aquario, 2020; MoraRuano, Gebhardt & Wittmann, 2018). Educators have stated that teaching styles, personality, and policies all contribute to how collaborative partnerships are formed. Even with the use of collaborative teaching methods and documented positive results, teacher attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about collaborative practice remain a barrier to collaborative relationships. Continued exploration is needed concerning the theory and practice of collaboration for students in inclusion and its impact on outcomes for students with special needs (Cook & Friend, 2010; Sheppard, 2019). 139

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Potential sources of stress in collaboration can be the conflict of personality characteristics and working styles, as well as differing philosophies (Gregory, 2018). Additionally, teachers have uncertainty concerning their roles and the lack of professional development (Cikili & Karaca, 2019). Teachers are highly stimulated to collaborate with their colleagues to meet the needs of their students and to receive useful advice. However, this also determines the most frequently used impromptu collaboration, which ensures the sharing of knowledge and information but does not build the deep collaborative relationships needed for the provision of inclusive education (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012; Sileira-Zaldicar & Curtis, 2019). Educators have found they gain improved instructional skills, increased knowledge, and generally became better teachers for students in inclusion as a result of collaboration (Murawski & Hughes, 2020). Despite noted stress involved with collaboration, teacher attitude does play an important part in the success of collaboration and requires a deep dive into the constructs to apply them.

Deconstructing the Collaboration Constructs Despite the established importance of collaborative work for inclusive environments, collaboration remains a remarkably multifaceted process that needs time, trust, respect, social skills, and conflict management (Mora-Ruano et al., 2018; Murawski & Hughes, 2020). To address these challenges, support for building integrated collaboration through established constructs is needed. The figures below outline the collaboration constructs in further detail, and also provide strategies to build collaboration through the established constructs.

STRATEGIES FOR COLLABORATION

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Finding Ways to Share Planning The present research has identified several aspects of effective collaboration, including shared responsibility, accountability, and resources (Johnson et al., 2020; Kelly et al., 2019; Sefanidis et al., 2019). Shared planning time is one way to develop a collaborative relationship among teachers and is a successful element of an inclusive program (Murawski & Hughes, 2021). Allowing for specific collaboration times between educators will improve the relationship (Stefanidis et al., 2019). Teachers involved in collaboration can offer each other content that meets the needs of students in inclusion with shared responsibility for planning, with both partners present in the relationship maintaining joint responsibility (Murawski, 2009). Shared planning

140

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

involves a willingness to share authority in decision-making and encompasses dedication to the process.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. Collaboration Constructs

141

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 2. Strategies for Collaboration

Planning is a demanding task that educators embark on every day (Carreno & Hernandez-Ortiz, 2017). However, the lack of adequate planning time is a barrier to the success of the collaboration, and more time for shared planning is needed for a collaborative relationship to survive. Planning time is an often isolated practice that adversely affects collaboration (Kelly et al., 2019). Shared planning time is not typically provided for teachers, and this can increase feelings of isolation and elevate stress for teachers. For successful collaboration to occur both partners must take that time to share resources and plan together to determine how to meet educational goals (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012; Stefanidis et al., 2019). Teachers should cooperatively plan out and address lesson components such as standards, accommodations, and instructional strategies. Teachers that share planning can proactively and collaboratively create lessons that provide a wide range of choice to students. Further, they can encourage student input and voice in learning with less adaptation for SSN. As a result, both teachers feel more successful (Katz & Sokol, 2016). In positive collaborative programs, the school culture is a community of 142

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

sharing where collaboration is a support to teaching and where common planning time is a vital part of the program (Carreno & Hernandez-Ortiz, 2017). Most important is that despite what is identified as a major barrier to shared planning, time, this should not be something that prohibits collaboration (Karten & Murawski, 2020). There are ways to both build time and to advocate for adequate shared planning time with collaborative partners. To make the most of planning time, collaborators should schedule regular meetings that are organized and goal-oriented with the sole purpose of shared planning that is focused on student goals (Johnson et al., 2020; Karten & Murawski, 2020). Regular meetings should have a solid agenda, begin with large item needs first, and then move toward individual needs. Additionally, time for planning should be used wisely, with adequate time set aside to build trust and respect into the relationship through connections (Murawski, 2009).

QUESTIONS TO DIRECT SHARED PLANNING • • • • •

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

•

Is collective planning time provided, with consistency? Do meetings focus on the collaborative efort? Can the administration provide a foating substitute for teacher coverage to provide for shared plan time? Can the administration provide coverage to provide for shared plan time? Have collaborative teams discussed planning options and what works best for them? How has technology been leveraged to support shared planning?

The more teachers collaborate in planning, they offer opportunities to share strategies and expertise in their respective fields, and the more likely students in inclusion will benefit (Murawski & Hughes, 2021). In making time to plan, teachers will have adequate time to assess, reflect, and design educational opportunities that meet the needs of students. Time spent planning together ensures that each teacher is familiar with all material being taught, and shared planning time gives partners extensive time for the coordination of instruction, which can in turn increase inclusion time (Stefanidis et al., 2019). Educators who are afforded a shared plan time with their partners found positive ways to support students in inclusion by making mutual decisions, prioritizing needs, and regularly reviewing student goals. Successful collaborative partners find time to plan, even when time is not provided by the administration, to create a positive force for students in inclusion (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Shared plan time can help educators proactively address any issues the student or teaching team might have. There is a need for the willingness of more organization and efforts

143

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

and deep integration of the established collaborative construct of shared planning, with time to do the actual work. Next, let’s review how to build communication.

Opportunities for Frequent Communication

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Frequent communication involves equally beneficial exchanges between teachers to foster teamwork and support the processes required for effective collaboration (Eccleston, 2010). Frequent communication in collaboration means having regular contact with the collaborative partner so each is aware of progress on student goals and can anticipate any adjustments that may be needed. Research indicates that communication is an important feature of collaborative success, with teams engaging in constant and open exchanges (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012; Murawski, 2009). In a successful collaboration, efficient communication skills are essential and all involved must understand student needs. Open communication with collaborative partners is important to ensure student success in inclusion. This guarantees that the responsibilities of both educators are shared evenly and that all involved feel comfortable handling situations in the classroom (Friend & Cook, 2016). Frequent communication in collaboration secures each teacher’s investment in the process and allows a forum for discussing challenges and for efficient problem solving (Eccleston, 2010). If communication is not clear between team members, the overall goal could be misguided. If teachers in collaboration build communication skills, they will be able to share ideas and knowledge. This will allow partners to benefit from differing expertise and perspectives (Mora-Ruano et al., 2018). Despite the understanding of how open communication can support collaborative relationships, effective communication is one of the biggest hurdles in collaborative partnerships (Eccleston, 2010; Cikili & Karaca, 2019). Further, methods of communication for teachers in inclusion programs are not readily identified and teachers report a lack of plan time, feelings of isolation, and elevated stress levels when communication is lacking (Silveira-Zaldivar & Curtis, 2019). These established barriers represent a need to focus efforts on building communication skills among teachers.

QUESTIONS TO DIRECT FREQUENT COMMUNICATION • •

144

Have collaborative partners utilized a communication notebook, passed back and forth? Are meetings regularly scheduled and consistently held?

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

• •

Are opportunities for both formal and informal communication on an everyday basis? How is technology being used to promote consistent communication?

To maintain frequent communication, regularly scheduled meetings are necessary to strengthen practices for supporting students in inclusion (Eccleston, 2010). Formal and informal communication on an everyday basis will build collaborative partnerships and promote the exchange of information, resources, and knowledge (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Friend & Cook, 2016). Additionally, teachers can communicate often with emails, apps, and phone calls, ensuring that each teacher comes to the classroom understanding what will be happening with equal responsibility. Collaboration itself can enhance communication and improve student outcomes and result in a range of benefits for teachers (Friend & Cook, 2016). Open and authentic communication between collaborative teachers can assist in the effectiveness, cohesion, and conflict resolution in the relationship. Teacher personalities and focus will always differ, however, when there is strong communication, learning can be enhanced for students (Murawski, 2009). When partners have time to plan and communicate, they can work to develop a shared vision for students.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Developing a Shared Vision Collaborative partners should share the understanding that all students have a place and belong. A shared vision requires a willingness to try new approaches and creative ideas from partners sharing goals that are specific to the growth of students (Brendle et al., 2017; Eccleston, 2010). The sharing of common goals for students can help the decision-making and the problem-solving process easier to facilitate (Kelly et al., 2019). The shared responsibility of classroom functioning is enhanced when partners are comfortable in each other’s space and share the responsibility of student growth, and sharing of all things from space in filing cabinets to lesson plans (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Karten & Murawski, 2020). A collective vision brings different perspectives, shared ideas, problem-solving skills, and support decision making for students in inclusion. A shared vision is required for genuine collaboration when working toward a goal, with teachers viewing teamwork as a valued endeavor with a plan that goes beyond each individual on the team. When educators grasp the role they bring in collaboration, there can be more opportunity for trust, respect, and shared vision with teams working together as equal partners (Karten & Murawski, 2020; Tzivinikou, 2015).

145

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

QUESTIONS TO DIRECT SHARED VISION • • • •

What methods to support building a shared vision, such as grant writing, have been explored together? Are teachers provided creative and teaching freedom? Is a shared space for collaboration provided and encouraged? How do teachers share their ‘vision’ for inclusion and students?

When collaborative teams have a shared vision, more engaged involvement in all aspects of planning, teaching, evaluation, and classroom management will result. Communication about the shared vision can support more effective teaching strategies and will synthesize the collaboration constructs (Tzivinikou, 2015). Collaborators must embrace the need for joint accountability toward inclusive classrooms, including the significant sharing of responsibility. Teachers’ willingness to share the classroom and instructional duties are key to a constructive relationship and not only enhances student success but also can support job satisfaction (Brendle et al., 2017; Walker et al., 2021). This sharing of responsibility and vision will ultimately lead to mutual respect.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Developing Mutual Respect Mutual respect involves the continuous building of relationships where teachers share practice and co-create knowledge (Brendle et al., 2017; Neill et al., 2017). The recognition of equality and mutual respect enhances a collaborative team and helps identify roles and objectives. Without this respect, the collaborative process cannot endure (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). Mutual respect in collaboration allows for the diversity of teachers to have multiple positive effects for students in inclusion. Ideas can be shared and better teaching strategies developed (Neill et al., 2017). Strong relationships between teachers who take time to plan together and take time to understand differing philosophies will lead to mutual respect and trust in collaboration, binding teachers together in a community (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). The exchange of experiences and respect develops constructive relationships in collaborative teams. Drawing on each other’s expertise offers a wealth of knowledge for students in inclusion, and this sharing requires active participation and respect (Karten & Murawski, 2020; Murawski, 2009). As collaborative partners build stronger relationships, deeper understandings of the needs of students can be identified and addressed (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Collaborative partners show continual appreciation of each other and persistently aim to understand the personalities of the

146

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

team, respecting all viewpoints, perspectives, and philosophies (Eccleston, 2010; Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012; Neill et al., 2017).

QUESTIONS TO DIRECT MUTUAL RESPECT • • • •

Do collaborative teams have opportunities to connect personally as well as professionally? What types of fun activities or pleasurable events are planned, such as cofee meetings, or other options? Is there teacher buy-in to inclusion? Why or why not? How can that be changed? Do collaborative teams actively assess their self-efcacy with respect for others and confdence in inclusion?

Teachers who share mutual respect in collaboration improve inclusion environments by examining teaching practices and supporting each other’s growth. The conclusion is that the likelihood of success with collaboration may be deeply influenced by each participant’s shared concern and respect for the task at hand. A primary variable for collaborative success involves all partners respecting one another and is an environment where all feel valued (Milteniene & Venclovaite, 2012). Mutual respect in collaboration can lead to greater communication and ensures all involved in the relationship are focused on student success and establishes a foundation of trust between partners (Neill et al., 2017; Walker et al., 2021).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Building Joint Trust Joint trust in a collaborative relationship includes sharing accountability for outcomes and compromise, which are both crucial to collaboration success (Eccleston, 2010; Stefanidis et al., 2019). Collaborative partners should spend time to get to know one another, work out issues, and be honest, culminating in trust. Partners who have joint trust work to connect at the emotional level to help support each other. Inclusion can be a challenge for teachers and having strong working relationships can enable them to share issues, confide in each other, and get assistance (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Sharing in this process helps collaborators build trust and relate to one another in their experiences. Trust in collaboration is vital and can lessen the apprehension of judgment and provide a safe and collegial space to share methods and supports (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Tzivinikou, 2015).

147

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

QUESTIONS TO DIRECT JOINT TRUST • • • •

Do collaborative partners have adequate time to get to know one another, to build honest relationships? Have roles been established for each partner, allowing for clarity? Are collaborators provided a safe environment for addressing challenges, disagreements, or confict? Is adequate time provided for building trusting relationships? What does that look like?

The goal of these positive interactions among collaborators is to build professional trust in one another. When educators have a better sense of each person’s role and what they can do in the inclusive classroom, they are more apt to respect, trust, and share (Friend & Cook, 2016; Karten & Murawski, 2020; Stefanidis et al., 2019). Joint trust builds a shared desire for the students to succeed in inclusion, a key element in effective collaboration (Stefanidis et al., 2019). Now that you have key questions to ask in order to built collaborative relationships within the established constructs, support needs to be garnered from administration to meet the needs of and continue development towards collaboration.

SUPPORTING THE COLLABORATIVE CONSTRUCTS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Administration Teachers’ attitudes toward and the ability to collaborate can be enhanced through a supporting administration. A strong administration team can help to increase opportunities for collaboration, provide the time needed for strong relationships, and contribute to student success (Sheppard, 2019; Tzivinikou, 2015). The expectations set by school administrators will have a significant impact on teachers’ willingness to collaborate and adjust attitudes toward inclusion. The administration must take steps to move beyond vision statements into action. Collaboration and inclusion should be a part of the school characteristics and visible in all aspects of work with students (Sheppard, 2019). School administrators should consider structural changes so that collaboration between teachers can be better supported and implemented. Administrators should pay attention to the development of an inclusive environment and establish a degree of consensus around the inclusive values in the school (Mihajlovic, 2020).

148

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

One way to make a structural change is through an administrator collaboration model involving a variety of collaborative opportunities (Brendle et al., 2017; Sheppard, 2019; Vostal et al., 2019). Administrators need to follow this model to ask intentional questions about how they support collaboration and how to ensure the collaborative opportunities for teams are accessible by all members of the teaching staff (Sheppard, 2019). There is a need for leadership support of daily, focused collaboration in place of special occasion collaborative work that happens on the fly. It is important that collaboration is promoted positively and that collective responsibility for outcomes is supported (Vostal et al., 2019). School leadership does affect teacher attitude toward change and initiatives, therefore, there is a responsibility to encourage specific collaboration strategies. Professional development funds can be allocated toward collaboration skill building or for substitutes to provide coverage for collaborative teams. Teachers would then have the opportunity to collaborate for an extended period at school, developing strategies to support students in their inclusive classrooms. (Sheppard, 2019). Creating inclusive classrooms through collaboration will continue to be a challenge for educators. Teacher attitude toward collaboration and inclusion can be guided and reinforced by the administration that seeks out the most efficient and effective opportunities for teacher growth. School leaders must creatively ensure the success of students and for collaboration by finding time and training for teachers (Sheppard, 2019). Administrators can directly help collaborative teams build relationship trust within the school culture to significantly improve student outcomes, influencing both environment and teaching practices (Brendle et al., 2017; Vostal et al., 2019). In addition to using the outlined collaboration model, administrators should seek ways to support collaboration skill building for teachers through professional development.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Development Teachers will only open themselves up to participation in collaborative activities and learning, such as discussion about shared vision, inclusion, and curriculum innovation when they are confident and know it will be safe for them to do so. Additionally, the attitudes and anxieties of teachers towards inclusion affect both the collaborative relationship and the outcomes of SSN (Cilkili & Karaca, 2019). To build confidence and implement collaborative techniques, there is a need for focused in-depth and ongoing training in collaborative constructs and strategies (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Brendle et al., 2017). Training programs should include how to plan together for accommodations and modifications for SSN, and how to

149

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 3. Administrator Collaboration Model

150

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

provide appropriate assessments to monitor progress (Brendle et al., 2017). While administrator support is essential for successful collaboration, ongoing training to support longevity in relationships is also a necessity (Silveira-Zaldivar & Curtis, 2019). In addition to teacher professional development, teacher preparation programs have an opportunity to prepare teacher candidates for collaboration. Teacher preparation programs can help bridge the gap between theory and application for real situations through training on collaborative best practices. Every teacher needs to study teaching techniques, subject area(s), individualization, and collaboration skills in the classroom (Brendle et al., 2017; Ghedin & Aquario, 2019; Tzivinikou, 2015). The intent is that both teacher candidates and practicing teachers should be part of inclusive schools where students and teachers can enhance their potential to the greatest extent possible. Schools can consistently be a place where teachers and students are supported, and that allows for both to grow and develop towards common well-being. To utilize the strengths of all members of the collaborative team, teachers require expert knowledge of collaboration best practices including shared planning, shared vision, and effective communication. Teachers that are prepared and knowledgeable have less stress, which can in turn enhance. When collegial support is evident, teacher stress levels remain low, and the quality of teaching high (Wolgast & Fischer, 2017). Collegial and administrative support in building strong collaborative teams and providing continuing education is part of the puzzle. Providing a structured means for collaboration and professional development could come from administration in the form of inclusion professional learning communities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INCLUSION PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES The inclusion of SSN into general education classrooms can introduce significant challenges to teachers. Teachers are often uneasy, worried they will not be able to manage inclusion classrooms (Jones & Peterson-Ahmad, 2017; O’Connor et al., 2016). Despite the reported lack of understanding and apprehension, students in inclusive settings are likely to have more positive social and emotional functioning, be more accepted by peers, and show more progress (Bruno et al., 2018; Cook & Friend, 2010; Morgan, 2016). To support inclusive environments, teaching colleagues must have isolated discussions on the strengths and challenges of collaboration and the overall goals for the relationship to better support SSN. All five collaborative constructs should be addressed in the discussion, with a clear plan for monitoring progress (Cook & Friend, 2010; Solone et al., 2020; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Professional learning communities (PLCs) can offer this foundation, with proven 151

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

structures for enhanced results and frequent meetings to identify student needs, develop common plans, review practice, and set goals (Blitz & Schulman, 2016; Brown et al., 2018; Henderson, 2018). If shared planning time cannot be provided for all teachers in a given school day, it is recommended that an inclusion professional learning community (IPLC) made up of teachers working with students in inclusion be formed to provide an intentional and scaffolded approach to overcoming teacher isolation and developing deep collaborative work. The IPLC would help determine what students will be learning and how to respond when they do not learn, as a team. Three important aspects should be focused on within the IPLC: 1) the goals for each student, 2) team response when there are challenges, and 3) expectations and visions for teacher growth through a collaboration map (Blitz & Schulman, 2016; Brown et al., 2018; Henderson, 2018). A collaboration map, similar to a curriculum map that gathers data about what is taught, should be included in the IPLC to improve communication on instruction and build an integrated relationship. In a structured community, teachers can work to confirm trust and build good relationships in practice. Teachers can become more willing to assist others, support one another, confide and build trust, and encourage one another. A community of practice can work to lessen the fear of judgment in relationship building and enhance collective learning while offering teachers a means of support for inclusive settings (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Even with administration understanding, support, and provision of opportunities to build collaborative relationships, like any teaching strategy, there are continued needs to reflect upon and address and are outlined in the next section.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Future Needs for Collaboration The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act ([IDEIA], 2004) states explicitly that SSN should be given the right to interact with general education curriculum to the highest degree appropriate and should be educated with nondisabled students in the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) (IDEIA, 2004). The federal mandates requiring LRE placement has increased the number of students in inclusion settings. An important factor of IDEIA is that educators must be skilled in collaboration to meet standards for SSN (Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). These changes elicit questions on what is needed for teachers and teaching practice. In theory, teachers report that ideally, collaborative teaching had many positive aspects, such as open and sincere communication between teachers, recognition of each other as partners of equal importance for the students, and the feeling of being able to support all students in the classroom (Brendle et al., 2017). In practice, however, this belief can alter and the level of agreement in real-life situations often doesn’t connect (Ghedin & Aquario, 2019). Overall, there is a collaboration enigma, a 152

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

dilemma that exists between what a teacher believes is important at an ideal level, and what becomes important on a plane of reality. This enigma offers an opportunity to study further the attitudes and cultures of teachers to bridge the theory to practice gap in the daily practice of collaboration. Teachers are increasingly aware of the significance of collaboration, yet, the implementation of the established collaborative constructs remain largely theoretical, and this means that collaboration sits at a more superficial state with barriers of time and limited professional development (Ghedin & Aquario, 2019; Teachers support the concept of collaboration, nevertheless, they lack a clear understanding of the collaborative process. Teachers feel that their collaboration lacks depth, that there are differences in philosophy, and are discouraged by lack of time. Teachers need more quality time to meet student needs while establishing trust in a relationship in collaboration. An improved understanding of each collaborative construct would positively impact the quality of inclusion. Inclusion of SSN can be challenging, however, it is not a solitary practice and collaboration can be used to find success (Jones et al., 2017; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Three important elements should be continually visited and assessed, school culture, time, and integrated collaboration.

School Culture

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

School culture has been established as a significant predictor of how collaborative practices improve student outcomes (Vostal et al., 2019). As indicated, strong support of administration can guide collaborative teams to develop collegial trust. True collaboration requires a united culture and structure that encourages all strengths, weaknesses, and opinions. A united culture gives educators the purpose and freedom to move toward improvement for students. Further, it provides a safe place for difficult conversations about what needs to be done for students. Educators can take ownership of the collaborative process and become accountable to students. In a united school culture, collaboration becomes purposeful with positive outcomes (Henderson, 2018). A united culture can also lead to more recognition of the importance of collaboration, and therefore the time to do so.

Time for Collaboration Time as an obligatory piece of successful collaboration is a main barrier to building relationships. Appropriate time must be considered for practicing the collaborative constructs. Schools must find ways to build a collaborative culture and be creative in finding time to collaborate (Henderson, 2018; Murawski & Hughes, 2021). With strong leadership, time can be provided for experimentation, observation, and discussions 153

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

to increase teacher knowledge and confidence in collaboration. Time designated for collaboration must be included in the contract day, in addition to preparation and teaching time. Further, the constructs should provide the foundation as ground rules for expectations with a focus on what the goals are for the development of the relationship to meet student needs (Cook & Friend, 2010; Henderson, 2018). Teachers must be provided time to meet frequently to identify essential student needs, develop common plans and assessments, analyze practices, and set goals (Solone et al., 2020). This leads to integrated, or deep, collaboration.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Integration Integrated or deep collaboration can exist with greater levels of engagement and goal alignment, including (a) a shared vision, (b) enhanced participation and commitment, (c) higher levels of accountability, (d) increased determination, and (e) reciprocity (Alsubai, 2016; Bruns, 2013; Charner-Laird, Szczesiul, Kirkpatrick, Watson, & Gordon, 2016; Horton, 2013; Lewis et al., 2019). Integrated collaboration is more than simple routine interactions, when collaboration is integrated the relationship can function as an additional layer to expertise and create a multifaceted conceptualization of practice (Bruns, 2013; Horton, 2013). Teachers in general understand the importance of a collaborative relationship and have a general understanding of each construct of collaboration. Teachers feel that shared planning could be helpful for students in inclusion, but recognize the lack of time provided in the school day to support it (Akinyemi et al., 2020; Solone et al., 2020). Teachers identify that building and having respect and trust for their collaborative partner is important, yet often only a surface practice of collaboration exists in reality. Collaboration communication happens both formally and informally, yet consistently teachers indicate that frequent, informal communication was the foundation of effective collaboration (Portelli & Koneeny, 2018). Shared communication is not sufficient for student success in collaboration, which is more superficial. For integrated collaboration, trust must be assumed where teachers can be honest and transparent to review practices and implement strategies (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Integrated collaboration takes time and therefore requires regular meetings and administrative support, along with the reflection on school culture and teacher attitude (Horton, 2013).

154

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION In the end, teachers want success for all students. Schools that engage in collaborative practices can help to bring about cultural changes within the educational environment. A supportive school culture for collaboration enhances student success, classroom climate, and form positive communities. In this culture, teachers appreciate shared planning and responsibilities (Ghedin & Aquario, 2019). It is evident that trust and positive relationships amongst teachers in collaboration is a joint effort, thus, teachers need to engage in collaborative learning with mutual respect. Teachers must work as teams and build their trust and working relationships over time, and this requires clear support from leadership. The inclusion setting should develop into a safe place, without stress, and enable teachers to freely share expertise and relate with collaborative partners (Akinyemi et al., 2020). Collaboration is vital for a school’s success. No single teacher has all of the resources necessary to practice in isolation. Available time and strained resources require teachers and administrators to consider new strategies for collaboration. Using the established collaboration constructs of (a) shared planning, (b) frequent communication, (c) shared vision, (d) mutual respect, and €) joint trust, educators can work together toward student opportunity for success (Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Leaders and educators must build a positive school culture, find a shared purpose, be willing to face challenges, find planning and personal time, and provide relevant professional development for collaboration to work (Henderson, 2018). There is a dangerous notion that once teachers are provided the opportunity to work together, effective collaboration will be the ultimate result (Sheppard, 2019). Inclusive strategies must be supported alongside collaboration strategies, working together to improve student outcomes. An improved understanding of each teaching philosophy would positively impact the quality of inclusion and the existing mutual respect between teachers needs more support for each to gain in their practice (Bruns, 2013). Inclusion of SSN can be challenging; however, it is not a solitary practice and collaboration can be used to find success (Jones & Peterson-Ahmad, 2017; Tichenor & Tichenor, 2019). Collaboration, through the established constructs, can do just that. This chapter highlighted not only how the five collaboration constructs are defined, but also encouraged you to ask questions to direct and apply the constructs in practice. Further, important elements such as administrative support, teacher attitude, and professional development were presented as foundational needs for an overall positive school culture that embraces effective collaboration.

155

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

REFERENCES Adams, D., Harris, A., & Jones, M. S. (2016). Teacher-parent collaboration for an inclusive classroom: Success for every child. Malaysian Online Journal of Education Sciences, 4(3), 58-72. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1106456.pdf Akinyemi, A.F., Rembe, S., & Nkonki, V. (2020). Trust and positive working relationships among teachers in communities of practice as an avenue for professional development. Education Sciences, 10, 1-15. doi:10.3390/educsci10050136 Alesech, J., & Nayar, S. (2020). Acceptance and belonging in New Zealand: Understanding inclusion for children with special education needs. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 16(1), 84–116. Alsubai, M. A. (2016). Curriculum Development: Teacher Involvement in Curriculum Development. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 106–107. https://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1095725.pdf Blitz, C. L., & Schulman, R. (2016). Measurement instruments for assessing the performance of professional learning communities (REL 2016–144). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Centre for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs Brendle, J., Lock, R., & Piazza, K. (2017). A study of co-teaching identifying effective implementation strategies. International Journal of Special Education, 32(3), 538–550. Brown, B. D., Horn, R. S., & King, G. (2018). The effective implementation of professional learning communities. Alabama Journal of Educational Leadership, 5, 53-59. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1194725.pdf

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Bruno, L. P., Scott, L. A., & Willis, C. (2018). A survey of alternative and traditional special education teachers’ perception of preparedness. International Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 295-312. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1185629.pdf Bruns, H. C. (2013). Working alone together: Coordination in collaboration across domains of expertise. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 62–83. doi:10.5465/ amj.2010.0756 Carreno, L., & Hernandez-Ortiz, L. S. (2017). Lesson co-planning: Joint efforts, shared success. GIST Education and Learning Research Journal, 15, 173–198.

156

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Charner-Laird, M., Szczesiul, S., Kirkpatrick, C. L., Watson, D., & Gordon, P. (2016). From collegial support to critical dialogue: Including new teachers’ voices in collaborative work. Professional Educator, 40(2), 1-17. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1120331.pdf Cikili, Y., & Karaca, M. A. (2019). Examination of teacher candidates’ attitudes, emotions, and anxieties regarding inclusive education by different variables. Online Submission, 4(1), 115–130. Cook, L., & Friend, M. (2010). The state of collaboration on behalf of students with disabilities. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 1–8. doi:10.1080/10474410903535398 Eccleston, S. T. (2010). Successful collaboration: Four essential traits of effective special education specialists. Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 11(1), 40–47. Fisher, K. M., Willis, C. B., & Ransom, B. E. (2020). Parent knowledge of the definition of FAPE in light of the Endrew vs. Douglas County School Board decision. Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 9(1), 1-15. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1241863.pdf Francisco, M. P., Hartman, M., & Wang, Y. (2020). Inclusion and special education. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–17. doi:10.3390/educsci10090238 Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2016). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (8th ed.). Pearson. Ghedin, E., & Aquario, D. (2020). Collaborative teaching in mainstream schools: Research with general education and support teachers. International Journal of Whole Schools, 16(2), 1–34.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Green, J. (2019). Cross-cultural confusions amongst diverse colleagues: What teachers’ narratives reveal about intergroup communication. Discourse (Abingdon), 40(3), 386–398. doi:10.1080/01596306.2017.1349737 Gregory, J. (2018). Not my responsibility: The impact of separate special education systems on educators’ attitudes toward inclusion. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 13(1), 127–148. doi:10.29329/epasr.2018.137.8 Henderson, D. (2018). Staff collaboration for student success: Implementation challenges of professional learning communities and response to intervention. Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 10(2), 39–44.

157

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Horton, V. (2013). Going “All-in” for deep collaboration. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(2), 64-69. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship/vol5/iss2/1 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). Public Law, (108), 447. Johnson, T. M., King-Sears, M. E., & Miller, A. D. (2020). High school coteaching partners’ self-efficacy, personal compatibility, and active involvement in instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0731948720919811 Jones, B. A., & Peterson-Ahmad, M. B. (2017). Preparing new special education teachers to facilitate collaboration in the individualized education program process through mini conferencing. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 697707. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1184062.pdf Jones, B. A., & Peterson-Ahmad, M. B. (2017). Preparing new special education teachers to facilitate collaboration in the individualized education program process through mini conferencing. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4). https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1184062.pdf Karten, T. J., & Murawski, W. W. (2020). Co-teaching do’s, don’ts, and do betters. ASCD. Kauffman, J. M., & Hornby, G. (2020). Inclusive vision versus special education reality. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–13. doi:10.3390/educsci10090258 Kelly, K., Merry, J., & Gonzalez, M. (2018). Trust, collaboration and well-being: Lessons learned from Finland. SRATE Journal, 27(2), 34–29.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kelly, N., Wright, N., Dawes, L., Kerr, J., & Robertson, A. (2019). Co-design for curriculum planning: A model for professional development for high school teachers. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(7), 84–107. doi:10.14221/ ajte.2019v44n7.6 Lewis, G. D., Liace, K. F., & Braun, P. A. (2019). All hands on deck in curriculum and instructional processes. World Journal of Education, 9(5), 83–99. doi:10.5430/ wje.v9n5p83 Mihajlovic, C. (2020). Special educators’ perceptions of their role in inclusive education: A case study in Finland. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(2), 83–97. doi:10.33902/JPR.2020060179 Milteniene, L., & Venclovaite, I. (2012). Teacher collaboration in the context of inclusive education. Special Education, 2, 111–123. 158

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Mora-Ruano, J.G., Gebhardt, M., & Wittmann, E. (2018). Teacher collaboration in German schools: Do gender and school type influence the frequency of collaboration among teachers? Frontiers in Education, 3. doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00055 Morgan, J. L. (2016). Reshaping the role of a special educator into a collaborative learning specialist. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 12(1), 40-60. https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1095368.pdf Murawski, W. W. (2009). Collaborative teaching in secondary schools: Making the co teaching marriage work! Corwin Press. https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781452219370 Murawski, W. W., & Hughes, C. E. (2021). Special educators in inclusive settings: Take steps for self-advocacy! Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(3), 184–193. doi:10.1177/0040059920982263 Neill, C., Corder, D., Wikitera, K. A., & Cox, S. (2017). Embracing the muddle: Learning from the experiences from interdisciplinary teaching and learning collaboration. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 14(2), 136–154. O’Connor, E. A., Yasik, A. E., & Horner, S. L. (2016). Teachers’ knowledge of special education laws: What do they know? Insight into Learning Disabilities, 13(1), 7-18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1103671.pdf Portelli, J. P., & Koneeny, P. (2018). Inclusive education: Beyond popular discourses. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 10(1), 133–144. Rinio, D. (2018). Focus on collaboration: How understanding the nature of trust can help address the standards. Knowledge Quest, 46(3), 44–48. Sheppard, J. (2019). Collaboration as a means to support inclusion. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 11(2), 16–20.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Silveira-Zaldivar, T., & Curtis, H. (2019). “I’m not trained for this!” and other barriers to evidence-based social skills interventions for elementary students with high functioning autism in inclusion. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(1), 53-66. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1232739 Sirkko, R., Takala, M., & Wickman, K. (2018). Co-teaching in northern rural Finnish schools. Education in the North, 25(1-2), 217–237. Solone, C. J., Thornton, B. E., Chiappe, J. C., Jenny, C., Perez, C., Rearick, M. K., & Falvey, M. A. (2020). Creating collaborative schools in the United States: A review of best practices. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(3), 283–292. doi:10.26822/iejee.2020358222

159

Collaboration Constructs for Inclusive Settings

Stefanidis, A., King-Sears, M. E., & Brawand, A. (2019). Benefits for coteachers of students with disabilities: Do contextual factors matter? Psychology in the Schools, 56(4), 539–553. doi:10.1002/pits.22207 Stoloff, S., Boulanger, M., Lavallee, E., & Glaude-Roy, J. (2020). Teachers’ indicators used to describe professional well-being. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(1), 16–29. doi:10.5539/jel.v9n1p16 Turner, K., & Theilking, M. (2019). Teacher wellbeing: Its effects on teaching practice and student learning. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 938–960. http://www.iier. org.au/iier29/turner2.pdf Tzivinikou, S. (2015). Collaboration between general and special education teachers: Developing co-teaching skills in heterogeneous classes. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 64, 108-119. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). The Digest of Education Statistics, 2018 (NCES 2020-009). Table, 204, 60. Author. Vostal, M., LaVenio, K. N., & Horner, C. G. (2019). Making the shift to a co-teaching model of instruction: Considering relational trust as a precursor to collaboration. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 22(1), 83–94. doi:10.1177/1555458918796876 Walker, J. D., Johnson, K. M., & Randolph, K. M. (2021). Teacher self-advocacy for the shared responsibility of classroom and behavior management. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(3), 216–225. doi:10.1177/0040059920980481

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Wolgast, A., & Fischer, N. (2017). You are not alone: Colleague support and goal oriented cooperation as resources to reduce teachers’ stress. Social Psychology of Education, 20(1), 97–114. doi:10.100711218-017-9366-1

160

161

Chapter 7

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program: An Analysis of a Case Study

Georgios A. Kougioumtzis https://orcid.org/0000-0002-23622094 National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece

Isidora Kaliotsou Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus

Maria Sofologi University of Ioannina, Greece

Eleni Bonti https://orcid.org/0000-0002-43471828 Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

Argyro Fella University of Nicosia, Cyprus

Christiana Koundourou Neapolis University Pafos, Cyprus

Georgia Papantoniou University of Ioannina, Greece

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT Over the past three decades, the interest of teachers and parents has focused on a variety of learning difculties that students face in school settings. A signifcant number of students systematically fail in school, as they lack early detection of learning difculties or efective intervention. This case study examines an elementary school student within a more general context, taking into account essential parameters such

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch007 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

as family, school, and social environment. Furthermore, the authors thoroughly describe his difculties in practical terms, as well as ways to address them through the implementation of an individual intervention program that responds to the needs of the student. Finally, reference is made to signifcant evidence that cooperation with parents as well as with a number of institutions strengthens and enhances intervention.

1. INTRODUCTION 1.1 A short Introduction to the concept of Specific Learning Difficulties This chapter attempts to clarify the significant field of Specific Learning Difficulties. Learning Difficulties mirror the difficulties that occur in significant areas of one’s development, such as their listening, speaking, reading, writing, thinking, and mathematical ability (Hammill, 1990). Students with Learning Difficulties are not a homogeneous group of common manifestations and characteristics but are characterized by a heterogenity (Pandeliadu, 2011). This heterogeneity is manifested through significant “disturbances in auditory perception, thinking, speech, reading, writing, spelling or arithmetic” (Cole & Cole, 2001, p. 411). In order to support a child with learning difficulties, after having identified their difficulties and capabilities, we must be able to develop an appropriate interventional education framework which will ensure that the child is not differentiated from other students. The impairments in basic abilities (reading, writing, arithmetic) automatically affect the child as well as the environment in which he or she lives. In other words, a timely and proper diagnosis of a learning difficulty requires a proper education and approach (Aram, Morris & Hall, 1992).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1.2 Inclusion Inclusion refers to the operation of a school for all students without possible exclusions and discrimination. A school providing opportunities for equal and active participation of students - without exception - in all school activities, inside and outside the classroom. It has to do with modifying the teaching material, the teaching strategies and means, the school curriculum and activities (Aggelidis, 2011; Stasinos, 2020). Therefore, diversity is a source of learning and a challenge for the teacher himself.

162

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

It is crucial to educate students with learning difficulties in a supporting inclusive education environment. Many official texts [The Salamanca Statement (UNESCO, 1994), The Dakar Framework for Action (UNESCO, 2000) and The Incheon Declaration (UNESCO, 2015)] declare the significance of the inclusive education as an international policy and worldwide pursuit. As Magnússon, Göransson & Lindqvist claim (2019, p. 71) In these documents, inclusive education is linked to The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (United Nations, 1948), where the purpose of education is stated to be: ‘the full development of the human personality’ and to ‘promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups’ (article 26) In this context, it is of vital importance for students with Specific Learning Difficulties that the school cultivate diversity, equity, in-school pedagogical climate, respect and shared responsibility.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

2. SPECIFIC LEARNING DIFFICULTIES AND READING Reading is a complex term and a multidimensional concept (Hatzilouka-Mavri, Hatzigianni-Yiagou, & Papadopoulos, 2003). It includes three basic, independent and interrelated cognitive functions: decoding (letter matching with natural sounds; Ziegler & Goswami, 2005), fluency (ability to read a text comfortably with accuracy, expression, and prosody -without trying to decode it, Pandeliadou, 2011) and comprehension (deriving meaning from written speech, Perfetti & Hart, 2001). Children with specific learning difficulties face difficulties in decoding, fluency and comprehension of written texts (Archer, Gleaso, & Vachon, 2003). In particular, children with specific learning difficulties have significant difficulty in handling the constituent sounds that comprise words (phonological awareness deficit; McBrideChang & Manis, 1996; Ramus, Pidgeon, & Frith, 2003), which usually leads to difficulties in acquiring the alphabetic principle and in the automation of decoding. In addition, due to difficulties in accurate and easy decoding, these students are forced to dedicate important cognitive sources and overload their already limited memory, resulting in frequent problems in understanding the written text (e.g., Padeliadu, 2011). In order to help students with specific learning difficulties, the teacher should design and implement interventions that meet the specific individual needs of children with special educational needs. What these students usually need is not a different program, but adaptations and modifications of the existing program with emphasis

163

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

on more opportunities for practice and more intensive teaching support based on the needs and abilities of children with difficulties in the classroom (Tzivinikou, 2019).

2.1 Decoding In their effort to improve the decoding skills of children with specific learning difficulties, teachers could incorporate phonological awareness development and enhancement activities in the classroom. Research indicates that performance in phonological awareness tasks can help distinguish poor from competent readers (e.g., Manis & Bailey, 2008; Melby-Lervåg et al., 2012) and interventions aimed at enhancing phonological skills lead to a significant improvement in the reading performance of children with reading difficulties (e.g., Ball & Blachman, 1991; Lovett, Steinbach, & Frijters, 2000). Phonology games are about controlling the degree of awareness and sound processing from the level of word suffixes or their syllabic structure to the level of phonemes (Melby-Lervåg, Lyster, & Hulme, 2012; Papadopoulos et al., 2009, 2012). They focus on the recognition, analysis and composition of phonemes and syllables. Such games are the alliteration/assonance of a syllable or phoneme (Which of the three words starts with a different syllable (e.g., dad / day / dash) or a different sound (e.g., lamp / late / bread) from the other two) and syllable or phoneme deletion (e.g., what word is formed if the sound / b / is removed from the word / brave /). Phonological awareness games are distinguished for their brevity, maintain the students’ undiminished interest and attention and do not burden the curriculum and teaching material (Padeliadu, 2011).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

2.2 Reading Fluency Literature identifies a number of strategies for cultivating reading fluency (e.g., modeling reading, choral reading, reading in pairs). These strategies seem to incorporate into the processes three common elements: (a) repetition of reading in different ways and versions, (b) adoption of aloud versus silent reading, and (c) corrective feedback by explaining and repeating difficult words to students (Paige, 2011; Rasinsky, 2014; Tzivinikou, 2019). Repetitive reading is the most well-known strategy for improving reading ability. To implement the strategy the student reads a text many times. Usually, repetitive reading takes place in three stages: (a) the teacher reads the text while the students have the opportunity to look at the text or not, (b) the teacher reads the text as the students follow the text and (c) the text is read by the students under the guidance of the teacher, until expressive and prosodic reading is observed (Rasinski et al., 2016). This strategy can be applied in the general classroom, that is in a classroom with heterogeneous levels of students’ reading ability and can be implemented by 164

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

dividing students into small groups that are at the same level of reading ability (Tzivinikou, 2019).

2.3 Reading Comprehension Regarding the strengthening of the mechanism of comprehension, it is very important to teach strategies before, during and after reading the text (Tzivinikou, 2019). For example, teaching the students the strategy of predicting (the student is based on information from the title, images or a quick overview of the text, Bouchard, 2005) and the strategy of previewing (the student looks at the title, subtitles, diagrams, pictures, underlined words or reads the first sentence of each paragraph) prior to reading the actual text, is considered to contribute to the activation of pre-existing knowledge and motivation of the student to read (Tzivinikou, 2019). When reading texts, the strategy of questioning (e.g., questions asked by the teacher to promote understanding, Berkeley et al., 2010), as well as organizing information in cognitive maps (lists, diagrams, conceptual maps) are considered to promote reading comprehension. Respectively, interaction with the text is considered very important (underlining of keywords, question mark next to unknown words, Panteliadou, 2011), as well as the strategy of thinking out loud (e.g., the student mentions what comes to mind as he reads and tries to understand a text, McNamara, 2012). Finally, after having read the texts, the student needs to be trained in the development of summarization strategies which require students to identify key concepts of the text and combine them effectively. In any case, the teaching of each strategy should be clear and immediate (e.g., the teacher acts and describes the strategy he is following at the same time), and provide systematic positive feedback (e.g., Bravo Maria! You have identified the main idea of ​​the paragraph) and multiple opportunities for short retraining and independent practice for students (Tzivinikou, 2019).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

3. SPECIFIC LEARNING DIFFICULTIES AND WRITTEN EXPRESSION Composing a communicative text is a complicated and complex process, which requires the combination of many kinds of knowledge and skills (linguistic, metalinguistic, cognitive, metacognitive, communicative, emotional, Spantidakis, 2010). Students with Specific Learning Difficulties often have problems with written expression, despite their adequate mental capacity (Bonti, 2013). According to Spantidakis (2004), these problems can be spotted in complex skills, such as spelling, syntax and the organization of written speech. Children with specific learning disabilities usually begin writing the topic they are asked to write about without planning. They do not 165

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

have sufficient knowledge about textual types and their structural features and fall short of planning strategies (e.g., Graham & Harris, 2003). Their texts are small in scope, have incomplete content, contain sentences with simple sentence syntax and many spelling mistakes (e.g., Troia, 2006). They just carry through with writing so as to simply record the information they want (Tzivinikou, 2019). Finally, students with specific learning difficulties spend little or no time revising the text and have little knowledge of the features of proper revision (Graham & Harris, 2003).

4. SPECIFIC LEARNING DIFFICULTIES AND MATHEMATICS - DISCALCULIA As Kakia & Kougioumtzis (2016, pp. 93-96) refer “Dyscalculia is the term that is used to describe the learning difficulties students face in mathematics in a simple but concise way. […] The definition given by Geary (2004, p. 8) for dyscalculia, which is characterized as a special learning difficulty in Mathematics, is that it is «a mathematic learning disability which can be expressed as a lack of those abilities to handle concepts or processes which determine the field of Mathematics and which, theoretically, are caused either due to underlying lacks in the central executional function or in the linguistic systems of information representation and management or in the optical field».

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Moreover, we will list certain indicative characteristics that children with dyscalculia have, as they are observed in relation with students’ age and educational level (Bafalouka, 2011, p. 23): Preschool age: ◦◦ Difculty in learning how to count. ◦◦ Difculty in recognizing standardized numbers. ◦◦ Difculty in matching numbers with what they represent (e.g. number 4 with four fngers or four glasses). ◦◦ Weak memory in remembering numbers. ◦◦ Difculty in organizing tasks in logical order. Primary School: ◦◦ Difculty in learning basic arithmetic (mainly subtraction, multiplication and division). ◦◦ Inability to solve mathematical problems. ◦◦ Difculty in their long-term memory regarding mathematical terms and functions. ◦◦ Inability to familiarize themselves with mathematical language. 166

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

◦◦ ◦◦

Avoiding strategy games. Difculty in precisely placing numbers on the number line (Papanis & Antena, 2011, p. 37). ◦◦ Difculty in recalling by memory simple numerical facts, like those of the multiplication table. Even when they have accomplished to learn them after a lot of hard work, they tend to forget them in a very short time. ◦◦ Difculty in calculating mentally and automatically; they insist on counting using their fngers. ◦◦ Difculty in remembering mathematical terminology (e.g. sum, length, numerator, denominator, hypotenuse) (Benianaki, 2011, p. 74). ◦◦ Difculty in memorising the given and requested data of a problem. Secondary Education and adulthood: ◦◦ Inability to estimate and handle bills (e.g. bill for clothes or food purchases, banking accounts, settlement of a loan etc.). ◦◦ Difculty in handling time and planning. ◦◦ Difculty in learning mathematical terms apart from very simple ones. ◦◦ Difculty in developing strategies for the resolution of mathematical problems (Agaliotis, 2011)

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

5. STRATEGIES It is necessary that teachers who try to improve children’s written expression with or without difficulties should teach strategies related to the three stages of composing a written text (pre-writing, writing, post-writing stage; Hayes & Flower, 1980) in a clear, direct and systematic way. In particular, teachers can teach writing strategies directly by first describing them to students and pointing out their purpose and benefits and then modeling their application process through thinking out loud and giving them time for guided practical application until they can apply them independently (Graham & Harris, 2016). For example, memory aids, which are in the form of acronyms and help students remember the steps they need to follow to organize and produce a text (e.g., LISTList Ideas and Sequence Them, STOP- Stop and Think the Purposes; Graham & Harris, 2005), are an important tool for students during the pre-writing stage. When recording the student’s thoughts, the teacher focuses on the production of gradually more complex sentences (use of links, adjectives) and more structured paragraphs (e.g., studying well-written paragraphs and locating the constituent parts of the paragraph or in paragraphs where the thematic statements are absent the student is asked to write the appropriate thematic statement after studying the supporting 167

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

sentences and the conclusion). In addition, the teaching of specific words related to the topic and the teaching of transitional words can significantly enhance the range of vocabulary that the students use when recording their views (Tzivinikou, 2019). The writing stage is completed with activities that seek to revise and correct the text (self-assessment and self-checklists, collaborative text correction, TAPS strategy when the text is reviewed by classmates: Tell the person what you liked about the paper, Ask questions about parts may be confusing, Provide suggestions for making the paper better, Share the revised paper, Mather et al., 2009), in which students with Specific Learning Difficulties seem to be short on (Polychroni, 2011). In fact, it is very important to provide quick and immediate feedback to students with Specific Learning Difficulties - while the student is working or as soon as he / she finishes his / her work, in order to achieve the best possible learning efficiency (Reid et al., 2013).

6. A CASE STUDY

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

6.1 Student’s Learning Profile L. B. is an 11.5-year-old boy attending the fifth grade of a state elementary school. Based on information gathered from his family environment, L. B. is the only child in the family after the mother’s physiological pregnancy. At nine months he crawled and at twelve months he walked. At the age of two, he began to become more independent in his daily needs, such as using the toilet. He started using his first words when he was about two and a half years old, and at the age of three he participated in his first discussions. His mother tongue is Greek. Furtermore, L. B. lives at home with both parents, whose education level is relatively low (Primary Education). More specifically, the father has difficulty with speaking, since he has no clear speech, as some consonants (/s/, /z/) are not properly articulated. Both parents work as taxi drivers, they speak Greek and their speech is high in volume, a characteristic adopted by L. B. In addition, L. B. is dealing with many health issues, as at the age of four he had tonsillarectomy, and he has been facing childhood obesity. Furthermore, L. B. is introverted and does not have sufficient social interaction. It is also important to note that L. B. does not know the concept of right - left. It is a common phenomenon that on a practical level L. B. confuses objects with spatial planning, while L. B.’s school performance is characterized as low, based on the rating of L. B.’s teacher. More specifically, L. B. presents difficulties in reading and understanding a written text. In order to achieve decoding of a text, words need to be spelled out for him. After all, students with reading dyslexia have difficulty in their reading ability, as they need to read slowly and often need to spell each 168

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

letter in order to understand individual words (Archer, Gleason & Vachon, 2003, p. 78). According to Ogle (as cited in Pandeliadu, 2011, p. 81), who first referred to the term “agrafia”, it is obvious that the common profile of these children is the difficulty to transfer their ideas in a written assignment. L. B. makes many spelling mistakes, grammatical and etymological as well. In addition, it is difficult for him to comprehend and perform a variety of mathematical operations. Thus, in an attempt to balance his particularities, the school-family collaboration is considered essential for L. B.’s gradual integration into group activities within and outside the school context.

7. THE PROFILE OF A STUDENT WITH SPECIFIC LEARNING DISABILITIES

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

7.1 Difficulties in Reading According to the detailed information concerning L. B.’s profile collected by the classroom teacher, the student presents significant reading difficulties. L. B. faces no problems with decoding, as he does not replace, omit, or transpose letters when reading the texts. This is because the student learns how to read in the Greek spelling system, a system of high correspondence between graphs and phonemes (Papadopoulos, 2001; Porpodas, 1999). Researchers support the idea that high correspondence between graph-phonemes and systematic phonemes training in school are considered sufficient conditions for the development of phonological abilities of children with learning disabilities from the first grades of elementary school (Georgiou, Papadopoulos, Zarouna & Parroula, 2012). In transparent spelling systems (e.g., Greek Language) speed of reading is a dimension that distinguishes children with reading difficulties from typical readers (Protopapa & Scaloubakas, 2008). L. B. presents significant difficulties in speed of reading. L. B. reads a text very slowly. He spells out a word or reads it letter by letter. He reads a text without expression and prosody, and is often forced to repeat parts of the text in an attempt to comprehend the meaning of it. In addition, this student presents the profile of a non-strategic reader. His reading ability is limited in decoding the text. As Pandeliadu and Botsas (2007) revealed, students with learning difficulties do not reflect (Kougioumtzis, 2014) and do not evaluate the results of their reading effort. They continue reading a text, even if they do not comprehend the meaning of a paragraph, while their classmates who do not exhibit Specific Learning Disabilities stop reading and repeat it until they comprehend its meaning.

169

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

7.2 Difficulties in Written Expression L. B. has a limited vocabulary, since he constantly uses the same common words in every text. He is used to forming very short periods, while not using complex sentences. In addition, the introduction and the conclusion parts are mostly absent from his written texts. There is a large number of spelling mistakes in his texts. More specifically, L. B. does not apply basic rules of grammar, as he does not know how to use them. The student does not distinguish verbs ending in /ω/ (omega). He usually confuses verbs with nouns (e.g., he / she lives, instead of life), while having difficulty applying basic grammar rules (e.g., you have, instead of you wish). In addition, many etymological mistakes are observed (e.g., though rather than thought). These particular errors mirror difficulties in developing the complete spelling representations1 needed to create the spelling dictionary (Mouzaki & Protopapa, 2010). The phonological errors (eating instead of meeting) of L. B. are rare, indicating that in languages ​​with transparent orthography systems, the difficulty in phonological writing seems to be easily overcome (after the first grades of elementary school) (Wimmer, 1996). Finally, L. B. has difficulty in mathematics. The first obvious difficulty is that he does not understand how the problem is presented, resulting in his difficulty in solving the exercise, while at the same time he finds it hard to perform mathematical operations of multiplication and division. According to a plethora of researches (Shalev et al., 2001, p. 84) 5% -6% have severe learning difficulties in mathematics. Discalculia is a neurodevelopmental disorder and is characterized by the difficulty of the child to perform mathematical operations, of a lower level to his age, his mental level and the level of the class in which he is studying (Pestun, RoamaAlves & Ciasca, 2019, p. 151-155). Children with this type of difficulty usually fail to understand specific arithmetic operations, such as multiplication (Kakia & Kougioumtzis, 2016; Lyon, 1996). In conclusion, we would say that the student, L. B., has significant difficulties in reading, writing and mathematics. The recurring school failure he experiences causes him to believe that he does not have sufficient competencies and that his efforts are futile and unsuccessful (Licht & Kistner, 1986). This is a student with a high level of insecurity, social anxiety and low self-esteem. Even when he achieves the learning goals, he thinks that it is of little value and does not change his beliefs of “learned helplessness”, which he has been engaged in (Sideridis, 2005; Schunk & Miller, 2002). Therefore, this child’s psycho-emotional support is a necessary prerequisite for strengthening his or mental balance.

170

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

8. AN INDIVIDUAL INTERVENTION PROGRAM AND PROPOSED EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

8.1 Based on the Learning Difficulties Profile of L. B. An intervention program of activities has been designed in an attempt to help the student improve impairments in specific learning areas. More specifically, in the field of reading ability, given the difficulties encountered by the student, the cognitive strategy of re-reading can be implemented. A repeated reading strategy contributes to enhancing ease of processing and deeper comprehension of a text, as new skills are automated, avoiding confusion with new or similar material, and consolidation is achieved (Bonti et al., 2021). Furthermore, the re-reading strategy helps to understand the meaning of the text by generating new information from existing information and fill in the missing information in order to understand the meaning of it (Sofologi, Efstratopoulou, Kamari, Bonti & Katsiana, 2020; Rose, 2009). The educator can select an attractive text for the student (e.g., a fairy tale) and apply three effective methods of reading repeats: reading by echo (initial reading by a teacher or classmate and repeated by the student with Specific Learning Difficulties), collaborative programs [reading in pairs with a capable (adult or peer) and a child with Specific Learning Difficulties] and reading individual words (word lists with difficulty rating). Regarding the reinforcement of the understanding mechanism, it is very important to organize information into cognitive maps (lists, charts, conceptual maps). In addition, the student needs to be trained in developing strategies for narrative or informative text summaries (finding the main idea and key information, using “who”, “when”, “where”, “why” questions). Correspondingly, interaction with the text (keyword underlining, question mark next to unknown words, Pandeliadu, 2011) is of vital importance. As for spelling reinforcement, spelling exercises are implemented in order to learn basic grammar rules of the basic verbs and nouns. Secondly, a basic spelling dictionary is created with the frequent words of Greek (has, and, is) and the usual mistakes of the student, which is studied by the student on a daily basis (Mouzaki & Protopapas, 2010). Third, word classification exercises (verbs, common suffixes) are often performed and tree diagrams or vocabulary pyramids are created with word families or, even spelling cards are applied, for words that are mistaken each time, in order to enrich his vocabulary (HatziloukaMavri, Hatzigianni-Yiagou, & Papadopoulos, 2003). Additionally, concerning written expression it is of vital importance to support the learner to firstly be able to find the ideas (eg, using pictures, questions, presenting the beginning or end of a story, Spandidakis, 2008) and then organize them into a single text (Printezi & Polychroni, 2016). Another educational practice or strategy 171

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

is the so-called “three-minute writing prompts”, according to which, we give the student a topic for written assignment, and he needs to develop it by himself, recording information about it. When recording a student’s internal thoughts, the teacher focuses on generating progressively more complex sentences (using links, adjectives). The writing stage concludes with activities that aim at revising and correcting the text (self-evaluation and self-check lists, collaborative text correction), which these students appear to be lagging behind (Polychroni, 2011). Indeed, it is very important to provide students with Learning Difficulties with quick and immediate feedback - that is, while the student is working or just finishing his / her job, with the aim of achieving the best possible learning efficiency (Reid & Li Hagaman, 2013). In mathematics, it is very difficult to complete a mathematical operation of multiplication or division. Therefore, the practice of all arithmetic operations is implemented with emphasis on the tables of multiplication and division. This strategy is enhanced by cultivating mathematical thinking in simple problems. At the same time, the concept of multiplication is presented orally, in the form of tables, to make it clearer to the student. More specifically, it is simply stated what multiplication is and what concepts it includes. When, for example, in a mathematical problem the student L. B. sees words like dyads, triads, he should be able to distinguish what he needs to multiply. Similarly, in the concept of division, one should distinguish concepts such as what divide or separate mean. Practicing many arithmetic operations in vertical form with numbers of his own choice will aim to familiarize him with specific mathematical operations that he finds difficulty in (Bonti, Kamari, Kougioumtzis, Theofilidis & Sofologi, 2020; Kakia & Kougioumtzis, 2016). To sum up, designing an intervention program that covers gaps and misunderstandings of prior knowledge, using methods tailored to each student’s cognitive style (supervisory materials, verbal approach, audiovisual approach) will result in improvement and gradual treatment of Specific Learning Disabilities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

9. SUPPORTING THE STUDENT’S PSYCHOSOCIAL CHARACTERISTICS Considering the history of L. B., we realized that this is a very sensitive child. He is quite stressful, especially when it comes to expressing himself. After all, anxiety is a characteristic of children with Specific Learning Difficulties (Margalit & Shulman, 1986). Many times, he feels embarrassed when he wants to express something or when he wants to perform an activity. In the classroom L. B., often uses the phrase: “I can’t do it, Miss! I’m ashamed”. This is due to a lack of self-confidence. Children at this age, as they come to recognize their problem, experience a feeling of frustration.

172

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The sense of failure experience is pervasive when interacting with peers, but also with the wider family, school, and social context. This is also evidenced by his early friendships in primary education, as children with Specific Learning Disabilities are often marginalized (Wiener, Harris & Shiner, 1990). After all, marginalization and bullying of children with learning difficulties is a common phenomenon (Pepler & Craig, 1995). A prerequisite for avoiding bullying is for the child to develop appropriate social relationships and self-control, focusing on avoiding inappropriate behaviors (Kougioumtzis, Verykiou & Mallouchou, 2018). In addition, the creation of a positive psycho-emotional framework based on the needs of the child functions positively in the process of functional integration in the peer group. More specifically, during childhood, it is important to enhance self-esteem. Self-esteem is an important factor in promoting mental health. In contrast, low selfesteem influences the child’s later development, both at social and school levels (Harter, 1993). A good relationship with one of the parents, support, care and the feeling of being great works as a reinforcement for his self-image (Coopersmith, 1967, p. 179). Strengthening the child’s individuality, according to his / her level of cognition, developing positive self-esteem, optimism, self-regulation in various situations, and acceptance of his/her social environment, both at school and in the family environment, contribute to the promotion of all the above aspects of his/ her personality. It is essential that parents recognize their child’s individuality and reinforce the positive characteristics of his or her personality, as opposed to negative factors such as social anxiety, bullying, disapproval, school failure, reclusiveness, loneliness. There is a consensus that positive relationships with parents, acceptance from the social and school environment, and equal opportunities contribute to the child’s positive adjustment. In addition, participation in group activities, based on the child’s individuality and personal pleasure, the existence of good relationships with social entities, community groups and health services contribute towards the child’s protection. Finally, according to the theory of mental resilience, teachers play a crucial role, as they provide opportunities for students to develop not only at a cognitive level but also at an interpersonal level, as well (Blum & Libbey, 2004; Masten & Reed, 2002).

10. COLLABORATION WITH PARENTS AND INSTITUTIONS It is widely accepted that a multidimensional interaction between the cooperation of parents and the Diagnostic Centers exists. At first level, parents receive relevant training and guidance through an educational process, which is beneficial for their child’s subsequent positive development. At the same time, family counseling helps to identify and better cope with the child’s underlying problem. Indeed, in order for 173

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

counseling to be successful, an internal process needs to be initiated so that parents may be able to cope with negative behaviors, both at the level of interpersonal relationships and society’s reluctance to accept their child (Kroustalakis, 2005). Consequently, the role of parents takes on a multifaceted dimension: counseling, preventive, psychoeducational and therapeutic as well. According to Kroustalakis (2005), ever since the 1970s researchers have focused on both the family as a system and the child’s psycho-emotional support. A child’s awareness, socialization and control of negative emotional states play an important role, that of the “psychologist-therapist” assistant (Kroustalakis, 2005, p. 435). Both within-school intervention programs and KESYs (formerly KEDYs) have a potential role to play: They provide diagnostic content services and support pupils with special educational needs. They detect children’s learning difficulties through processes such as taking a child’s history, compose diagnoses of psychological and educational content, and develop interventional assessments to ensure the child’s smooth integration into the school framework and community, while, at the same time, developing a personalized intervention model based on the child’s Learning Difficulties. Parents also need to create and maintain a strong relationship with the child’s classroom teacher and special education teacher. The latter can observe the child a few times within his classroom setting during different lessons. Based on the difficulties that he presents, regarding his learning and his behavior, the special education teacher needs to collaborate with his classroom teacher in order to find different ways and approaches to differentiate the way the lesson is being delivered and activities given in order to promote a more inclusive learning setting for the child (Stasinos, 2016). Following this, his parents can be informed of the different approaches being used within the classroom setting and they can be advised on how they can use some of these approaches at home so that support could be continued at home as well. It is therefore important for the classroom teacher, the special education teacher and the child’s parents to collaborate together as a team in order to be able to support the child in the best possible way. It is also crucial to highlight that in order to get the most out of this collaborative relationship, each individual needs to offer their support based on their field of specialty and avoid getting into each other’s way. In other words, each individual needs to act based on their role, but at the same time keep in mind their common goal, which is to support the child in the best possible way in order to gain the most out of learning (Stasinos, 2016).

174

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

11. CONCLUSION - FUTURE SUGGESTIONS On completing the case study of L. B., we concluded that the basic prerequisite for the development of a personalized educational program is the determination of the child’s difficulties and capabilities. A key prerequisite for a successful intervention is differentiated teaching. That is, a teaching focusing on promoting the positive elements of the child’s personality (Kampitis, Haloulia & Kougioumtzis, 2016). Specifically, it is suggested that on the school’s part teachers should emphasize on reinforcing the child’s motivation by taking initiatives. Teachers, who could reshape their attitudes by undergoing a more focused training and programs designed for their personal and professional development, need to form a positive school climate, with fewer reproaches and more praise for children with Specific Learning Disabilities. Finally, it is essential to mention the development of a positive climate based on mutual support and cooperation between the school environment and the family so that this positive interaction can work in the medium term to shield the personality of students with Specific Learning Disabilities (Tsimpidakis, 2007).

REFERENCES Agaliotis, I. (2011). Teaching Mathematics in Special Education. Grigori. [in Greek] Aggelidis, P. (2011). Pedagogy of Inclusion. Diadrasi. [Greek] Aram, D. M., Morris, R., & Hall, N. E. (1992). The validity of discrepancy criteria for identifying children with developmental language disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(9), 549–554. doi:10.1177/002221949202500902 PMID:1431538 Archer, A., & Gleason, M. (1989). Skills for school success. Curriculum Associates.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Vachon, V. L. (2003). Decording and fluency: Foundation skills for struggling older readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 89–101. doi:10.2307/1593592 Ball, E. W., & Blachman, B. A. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 49–66. doi:10.1598/RRQ.26.1.3 Berkeley, S., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2010). Reading comprehension instruction for students with Learning Disabilities, 1995-2006: A Meta-Analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 423–436. doi:10.1177/0741932509355988

175

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Blum, R. W., & Libbey, H. P. (2004). School connectedness - Strengthening health and education outcomes for teenagers - Executive summary. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 231–232. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08278.x Bonti, E., Kamari, A., Kougioumtzis, G. A., Theofilidis, A., & Sofologi, M. (2020). Different Theoretical Perspectives on Specific Learning Difficulties in Mathematics. Implications for Special Educational Intervention and for Everyday School Practice: An overview study. International Journal of Education and Research, 8(2), 107–118. Bonti, E., Sofologi, M., Efstratopoulou, M., Katsiana, A., Papantoniou, G., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2021). Low Auditory-Verbal Cognitive Profile: A “Risk Factor” for Specific Learning Difficulties in Preschool Children in Greece. Psychology (Irvine, Calif.), 12(02), 181–204. doi:10.4236/psych.2021.122012 Bouchard, M. T. (2005). Comprehension strategies for English language learners. Scholastic. Cole, M., & Cole, S. R. (2001). The development of children. Worth. Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. W. H. Freeman. Georgiou, G. K., Papadopoulos, T. C., Zarouna, E., & Parrila, R. K. (2012). Are auditory and visual processing deficits related to developmental dyslexia? Dyslexia (Chichester, England), 18(2), 110–129. doi:10.1002/dys.1439 PMID:22419585 Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2005). Writing better: Effective strategies for teaching students with learning disabilities. Paul H. Brooks. Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2016). A Path to Better Writing: Evidence-Based Practices in the Classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 359–365. doi:10.1002/trtr.1432 Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). The Guilford Press.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Hammill, D. D. (1990). A brief history of Learning Disabilities. In P. Myers & D. D. Hammill (Eds.), Learning Disabilities: Basic concepts, assessment practices and instructional strategies. Pro-Ed. Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. In R. Baumeister (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept (pp. 1–37). Wiley. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-8956-9_5

176

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Hatzichristou, C., Lambropoulou, A., & Adamopoulou, E. (2013). Key Issues Child Development and Adaptation. Mental Retardation. Retrieved October 18, 2020, from shorturl.at/bfsG9 Hatzilouka-Mavri, E., Hatzigianni-Yiagou, E., & Papadopoulos, T. (2003). Reading and Writing in First Grade of Elementary School: Theory and Praxis. Cyprus: Ministry of Education and Culture - Cyprus Pedagogical Institute. [in Greek] Kakia, D., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2016). Dyscalculia and Advisory Educational Intervention. Journal of Regional Socio-Economic Issues, 6(2), 92-105. Kakouros, E., & Maniadaki, K. (2006). Child and adolescent psychopathology: A developmental approach. Typothito-Dardanos. [in Greek] Kambitis, I., Halioulia, E., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2016). Differentiated Teaching / Instruction & Counseling. Journal of Regional Socio-Economic Issues, 6(2), 32-45. Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2014). Teacher Mentoring: Reflection as a Guiding Tool. In K. Kasimatis & M. Argiriou (Eds.), International and European Trends in Education: Their Impact on the Greek Education System. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference, Volume I (pp. 120-126). Moschato-Lampiri Schools. Athens: ASPAITE – EEMAPE. [in Greek] Kougioumtzis, G. A., Verykiou, J., & Mallouchou, A. (2018). Bullying and Advocacy. In U. Thomas (Ed.), Advocacy in Academia and the Role of Teacher Preparation Programs (pp. 255–287). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-2906-4.ch015 Kroustalakis, G. S. (2005). Children with Special Needs in the Family and School: Psychological Intervention. Academic Press. [in Greek]

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Licht, B. G., & Kistner, J. A. (1986). Motivational problems of learning - disabled children: Individual 63 differences and their implications for treartment. In J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 225–255). Academic Press. Lovett, M. W., Steinbach, K. A., & Frijters, J. C. (2000). Remediating the core deficits of developmental reading disability: A double-deficit perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 334–358. doi:10.1177/002221940003300406 PMID:15493096 Lyon, G. R. (1996). Learning Disabilities. In E. J. Mash & R. A. Barkley (Eds.), Child Psychopathology (pp. 390–435). Guilford Press. Magnússon, G., Göransson, K., & Lindqvist, G. (2019). Contextualizing inclusive education in educational policy: The case of Sweden. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 5(2), 67–77. doi:10.1080/20020317.2019.1586512 177

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Manis, F. R., & Bailey, C. E. (2008). Exploring heterogeneity in developmental dyslexia: A longitudinal investigation. In G. Reid, A. J. Fawcett, L. S. Siegel, & F. Manis (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Dyslexia (pp. 149–173). Sage Publications. doi:10.4135/9780857020987.n8 Margalit, M., & Shulman, S. (1986). Autonomy perceptions and anxiety expressions of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(5), 291–293. doi:10.1177/002221948601900508 PMID:3711733 Masten, A. S., & Reed, M.-G. J. (2002). Resilience in development. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74–88). Oxford University Press. Mather, N., Wendling, B. J., & Roberts, R. (2009). Writing assessment and instruction for students with learning disabilities. Jossey-Bass. McBride-Chang, C., & Manis, F. R. (1996). Structural invariance in the associations of naming speed, phonological awareness, and verbal reasoning in good and poor readers: A test of the double deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing, 8(4), 323–339. doi:10.1007/BF00395112 McNamara, D. S. (Ed.). (2012). Reading comprehension strategies: Theory, interventions, and technologies. Psychology Press. Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S. A., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 322–352. doi:10.1037/a0026744 PMID:22250824 Padeliadu, S. (2011). Learning Disabilities and Educational Practice: What and Why. Pedio. [in Greek] Padeliadu, S., & Botsas, G. (2007). Learning Difficulties: Basic concepts and characteristics. Graphima. [in Greek]

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Paige, D. D. (2011). That sounded good! Using whole-class choral reading to improve fluency. The Reading Teacher, 64(6), 435–438. doi:10.1598/RT.64.6.5 Papadopoulos, T. C. (2001). Phonological and cognitive correlates of word-reading acquisition under two different instructional approaches. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(4), 549–567. doi:10.1007/BF03173197 Papadopoulos, T. C., Georgiou, G. K., & Kendeou, P. (2009). Investigating the DoubleDeficit Hypothesis in Greek: Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(6), 528–547. doi:10.1177/0022219409338745 PMID:19723979

178

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Papadopoulos, T. C., Kendeou, P., & Spanoudis, G. (2012). Investigating the factor structure and measurement invariance of phonological abilities in a sufficiently transparent language. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 321–336. doi:10.1037/a0026446 Pepler, D., & Graig, W. (1995). A peek behind the fence: Naturalistic observations of aggressive children with remote audiovisual recording. Developmental Psychology, 31(4), 548–553. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.31.4.548 Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), Decade of behavior. On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 67–86). American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10459-004 Pestun, M. S. V., Roama-Alves, R. J., & Ciasca, S. M. (2019). Neuropsychological and Educational Profile of Children with Dyscalculia and Dyslexia: A Comparative Study. Psico-USF, 24(4), 645–659. doi:10.1590/1413-82712019240404 Polychronis, F. (2011). Special Learning Difficulties-Dyslexia. Pedio. [in Greek] Printez, A., & Polychronis, F. (2016). Coping with Writing Difficulties: A Psychoeducational Approach. Pedagogical Discourse, 1, 153–174. Protopapas, A., & Scaloubakas, C. (2008). Evaluating reading proficiency for identif ying reading difficulties. Psychology, 15, 267–289. Ramus, F., Pidgeon, E., & Frith, U. (2003). The relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 44(5), 712–722. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00157 PMID:12831115 Rasinski, T. (2014). Fluency Matters. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 3–12.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Rasinski, T., Rupley, W. H., Paige, D. D., & Nichols, W. D. (2016). Alternative text types to improve reading fluency for competent to struggling readers. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 163–178. doi:10.12973/iji.2016.9113a Reid, R. C., Lienemann, T. O., & Hagaman, J. L. (2013). Strategy Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities. Guilford Press. Rose, J. (2009). Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties: an independent report. University of London - Digital Education Repository Archive (DERA).

179

Specific Learning Disabilities - Implementation of an Intervention Program

Schunk, D. H., & Miller, S. D. (2002). Self-efficacy and adolescents’ motivation. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents (pp. 29–52). IAP. Shalev, R. S., Manor, O., Kerem, B., Ayali, M., Badichi, N., Friedlander, Y., & Gross-Tsur, V. (2001). Developmental dyscalculia is a familial learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 59–65. doi:10.1177/002221940103400105 PMID:15497272 Sideridis, G. D. (2005). Goal orientations, academic achievement, and depression: Evidence in favor of revised goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 366–375. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.97.3.366 Sofologi, M., Efstratopoulou, M., Kamari, A., Bonti, E., & Katsiana, A. (2020). Different strategies for assessing reading comprehension in adults. From alpha to omega. European Journal of Special Education Research, 7(4), 38–53. doi:10.5281/ zenodo.3762660 Spandidakis, I. (2004). Problems with the production of school-age children. Ellinika Grammata. [in Greek] Spandidakis, I. (2008). Writing Problems of School-aged Children. Ellinika Grammata. [in Greek] Stasinos, D. (2020). Special Inclusive Education 2027. Papazisi. [in Greek] Tsibidaki, A. (2007). Child with Disabilities, Family, and School: An Interaction Relationship. Route. [in Greek] Tzivinikou, S. (2019). Evaluate, Plan, Teach: Effective Interventions in Reading kai Writing for Student with Learning and Other Difficulties. Readnet. [in Greek] Weiner, J., Harris, P. J., & Shiner, C. (1990). Achievement and social-behavioural correlates of peer status in learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13(2), 114–127. doi:10.2307/1510655

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Wimmer, H. (1996). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: Evidence from children learning to read German. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61(1), 80–90. doi:10.1006/jecp.1996.0004 PMID:8812031 Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading Acquisition, Developmental Dyslexia, and Skilled Reading Across Languages: A Psycholinguistic Grain Size Theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3–29. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.3 PMID:15631549

180

181

Chapter 8

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings:

Providing Reasonable Accommodations Shigeru Ikuta https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5065190X Otsuma Women’s University, Japan Yu Takagaki FukuyamaKita School for Special Needs, Japan

Reiko Sone Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan Keiko Ozaki Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Japan

Shinya Abe Gridmark Inc., Japan

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT One of the authors (Shigeru Ikuta) has organized a collaborative learning community with schoolteachers to provide reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities using newly developed multimedia-enabled dot codes. He created “Post-It-like” sticker icons on which dot codes were printed; each sticker icon could be linked with up to four multimedia mediums, in addition to up to four voices/sounds. Touching a dot code icon with a speaking-pen enables audios to be replayed and touching a dot code icon with a dot-code reader enables multimedia to be replayed. Four software packages to create self-made contents were developed by Gridmark Inc. The sticker icons, a speaking-pen and dot-code reader, and software packages are distributed to schoolteachers for free; they can now create original teaching materials for students in classes. The present newly developed software and tools are quite useful to support the students with various difculties in inclusive learning settings. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch008 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION A disability can be defined as being a condition judged to be significantly impairing, or a function which is significantly impaired, relative to the usual standard of an individual or group. The term is used to refer to an individual’s functioning—including physical impairment, sensory impairment, cognitive impairment, intellectual impairment, mental illness, and various types of chronic disease. On the other hand, learning disabilities are neurological-based processing problems. These processing problems can interfere with learning basic skills, such as reading, writing, and/or mathematics. The problems can also interfere with higher-level skills, such as organization, time planning, abstract reasoning, long- or short-term memory, and attention (Learning Disabilities Association of America, n.d.; American Psychiatric Association, n.d.). In some children, the loss of language is a major impairment. The inability to communicate often leads to intolerable frustrations, which in many students with severe cognitive disabilities leads to temper tantrums, screaming, biting, and self-abusive behavior. Each student with autism spectrum disorder also has some problematic core verbal and nonverbal communication symptoms (e.g., a delay in learning to talk or a complete lack of verbal ability) (National Institute of Mental Health, 2018; National Institute of Mental Health, n.d.; WebMD, 2018). The students having “reading-impaired” have obvious trouble with learning sound-symbol correspondence, sounding out words, and spelling words (Moats & Tolman, n.d.). An inclusive setting in education is usually defined as a place such as a school or college where children of all abilities learn together. Namely in an inclusive classroom, children with learning disabilities, such as dyslexia, and physical disabilities, such as deafness, learn alongside children of both average and exceptional ability (Koenig, 2020). In Japan, this inclusive setting in education is tried at the public schools but being not widely spread still now. Japan still has 1,149 separated schools for children with special needs; 144,823 students are enrolled, and 85,336 permanent teachers work in these schools. Almost half of such special needs schools is for students identified with intellectual disabilities (Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology, Japan, 2020). Outside of these special needs schools, Japanese public schools offer three methods of assistance that vary according to the severity of the children’s disabilities. The lowest-need group is taught within regular classes. The next approach is the resource room system, which such special needs students attend several times a week for special instruction. The third method includes special needs education classes. These classes are for children with relatively mild intellectual or physical/ motor disabilities, autism/emotional disturbance or health, visual, hearing or speech/ language impairment (Kawano, 2016; Isogai, 2017).

182

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

The schoolteachers, at the schools for special needs and the classes for special needs in public schools, have created self-made teaching aids and materials by using woodworking and metalworking for daily lessons. These teachers deeply feel that a teaching aid and specific materials suitable for one student may not serve another student. Indeed, they consider that each student with a disability may need individual self-made teaching aids and materials. Therefore, they need software and tools that are cheaper than the commercial ones and more user-friendly to create their own content for each student in their classes. To proceed the inclusive learning settings, the useful and attractive technologies and tools that can be used to provide the disabled students with reasonable accommodations and help them join in the class in inclusive settings are needed. The newly developed technologies and tools described in this paper are helpful for such students and the schoolteachers as one of the indispensable assistive technologies. In this chapter, the authors briefly present basic information on newly developed multimedia-enabled dot code, and then, describes in detail three activities performed at two special needs schools. They introduce the positive benefits and importance of collaborative learning community in providing reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities. They also describe the present technologies are quite useful for such students in inclusive learning class.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Background To create a productive and engaging class environment, collaborative learning community is essential for student success (Class blog, n.d.). The basics and importance of the collaborative leaning community in both K-12 classrooms and higher education are widely well-known and described (BRIGHT HUB EDUCATION, n.d.; Brophy, 2016; Classtime blog, n.d.; Collaborative learning, n.d.; Collaborative learning community, n.d.; eduplanet21, n.d.; Group Work and Collaborative Learning, n.d.; Miller, 2020; Smith & MacGregor; n.d.; VALAMIS, n.d.). Collaborative learning community between schoolteachers, between university professor and his/her students, and between university professors and schoolteachers is crucial to realize and support such fruitful collaborative learning. It is time that fruitful experiences, activities, and outcomes, performed in various educational settings including inclusive settings, all around the world, should be compiled and shared with schoolteachers, pre-service teachers, researchers, and parents. One of the authors, Ikuta, from the Otsuma Women’s University, Japan, has been involved in organizing a worldwide collaborative learning community with more than 200 schoolteachers both at the schools for special needs and the ordinary public schools, to develop original self-made teaching materials using advanced information

183

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

and communication technology (ICT), and has conducted school activities together, in partnership with the Japanese company Gridmark Inc. (Gridmark, n.d.). Ikuta has provided the schoolteachers with necessary software and tools to create their original self-made teaching materials and its know-how for free. Now, schoolteachers not only from Japan but also from the USA, the United Arab Emirates, Korea, China, Saudi Arabia, and Oman also join this community. Hisatsune, a teacher in the class for special needs at the regular-public school, conducted a school activity (“Investigation of favorite donuts”) for a second-grade female-student who uses a wheelchair due to total disorders of upper and lower limbs (paralysis of the extremities) by acute encephalitis sequelae, and gets an epileptic seizure almost every day (Ikuta & Hisatune, 2019a). In addition, the student always has stridor and cannot speech anything; she cannot adjust body temperature well; she tends to lose her physical condition and gets medical care and nasogastric tube nutrition. The teacher used a speaking-pen (noted in a later section in detail) as a communication tool for the student in an exchange learning with other students at both a regular class and the same regional public school, where she asked each second grader about her/his favorite donut with the help of a speaking-pen and asked her/ him to affix the seal on a space of a whiteboard corresponding to the donut she/he selected. This activity was lively very much; she asked, “Which donut do you want to eat” to the students, with the help of a speaking-pen; with this as a starting point, many second graders engaged in lively conversations like “I have eaten this,” “I like chewy donut,” “It’s sweet and yummy,” et al.; these conversations produced next wonderful conversations. She could have an enjoyable time with a pseudo conversation and get invaluable experiences with many students in inclusive learning settings; with the special needs class alone, she could not get such invaluable experiences. Morton, School for Young Children at University of Saint Joseph, utilized the speaking-pen as assistive technology in the classroom to support young children’s success in a preschool setting (Ikuta, Morton, et al., 2015). The children utilized the speaking-pen throughout the day when viewing charts for the daily schedule, snack routine, classroom rules, and steps for dressing for the outdoors. Children with a special need also utilized the speaking-pen with prompt cards for such tasks/ activities as transitioning to school, going to the bathroom, washing hands, and getting in line. A typical daily schedule chart is formatted chronologically to relate to the progression of the school day. The speaking-pen provided children with support in developing self-help and independence skills, as well as the opportunity to reinforce concepts of print and word recognition. The speaking-pen assistive technology was also used to support English as a second language for three-year-old boy. The boy’s mother showed her son that the family picture posted inside his cubby had a special symbol affixed to it that would allow him, with the use of the speaking-pen, to hear his mother’s voice by holding the speaking-pen to the symbol. When the boy 184

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

became sad and cried for his mother, he was guided to his cubby and encouraged to use the speaking-pen. Use of the speaking-pen assistive technology had plenty of interesting outcome in the preschool classrooms. Gallup et al. (2021), Idaho State University assisted educators at her neighbour schools in understanding how to create self-made content to support functional skills, through a multi-step recipe to cook a healthy meal, in a postsecondary transition program for students aged 18 - 21. Students were using the speaking-pen in both the home and classroom conditions to support repeated trials in their natural environment. She shared succinct description of implementing multimedia-enabled dot-codes into the classroom to support functional skills specific to individuals with ASD, since communication is one key skill that can help students with ASD reach their full potential. Children with ASD often avoid eye contact, struggle with both verbal and non-verbal communication, and have difficulty with executive functioning (EF) skills. The speaking-pen was used as an assistive technology tool to support these skills without frustration related to not being able to speak or struggling with EF (e.g., multi-step directions, shifting attention, or memory recall) and provided the ASD students with fruitful and effective outcomes.

MAIN FOCUS OF THE CHAPTER

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Importance of Self-Made Teaching Materials and Software and Tools Many schoolteachers hope that newly developed software and tools with ICT may improve individual learning for each student in K-12 classrooms effectively. However, the teachers—including at the schools for special needs—always have the following profound questions: What kind of software and tools really improve and deepen the students’ daily life and learning? How and when should such software and tools be used in the classrooms? One of the most powerful ICT applications has been the development and ongoing refinement of devices that can speak; such devices are designed to assist individuals who cannot speak when interacting with others. The technical term for this technology is “alternative and augmentative communication,” which is shortened to “augmentative communication” for convenience (Beukelman & Mirenda, 2012; Carpenter et al., 2014). Content and access tools need to be prepared specifically for each student, because each student’s needs and desires tend to be unique, as is their personality and character. In order to create original teaching materials for each student, easyto-handle and inexpensive software is indispensable for schoolteachers; having 185

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

access to less costly tools for enabling the use of such original content is also quite important. Author Ikuta, therefore, has been collaborating with Gridmark Inc. to develop easy-to-handle software and tools with which schoolteachers can create their original self-made teaching materials and conduct school activities for students with various disabilities.

Importance of Collaborative Leaning Community for Schoolteachers Every year, author Ikuta has compiled all the schoolteachers’ activities and published as a research report in the International Journal of HUMAN CULTURE STUDIES (http://journal.otsuma.ac.jp) and organized a symposium to share the year’s wonderful school activities with schoolteachers and researchers in the Conference of the Japanese Association of Special Education. He has also presented the valuable activities at international conferences and/or published them as chapter papers in edited books, sharing useful experiences with not only the members of the a collaborative learning community but also the schoolteachers and researchers all over the world (Ikuta, Endo, et al., 2013; Ikuta, Ishitobi, et al., 2017; Ikuta, 2018; Ikuta, Yamashita, et al. 2019b; Ikuta, Urushihata, et al., 2020a; Ikuta, Yoshida, et al., 2020b; Ikuta, Sakurai, et al., 2021a; Ikuta, Watanuki, et al., 2021b). He and his collaborative leaning community encourages the schoolteachers to provide reasonable accommodations for all the students with disabilities and help them join in the regular classes in inclusive settings at general public schools, by using newly developed ICT technologies like the multimedia-enabled dot-codes and EPUB3 eBooks with Read-Aloud.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Scope of the Chapter Author Ikuta has organized a collaborative learning community with more than 200 schoolteachers and collaborated with the Girdmark Inc. to develop newly easy-to-handle software and tools. Author Yu Takagaki is now a teacher at the FukuyamaKita School for Special Needs, Hiroshima Prefecture. Authors Reiko Sone and Keiko Ozaki are teachers at the Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Fukuoka Prefecture. Shinya Abe is a staff member of Gridmark, Inc., Tokyo, who has developed various software to create self-made teaching materials. In this chapter, the authors introduce the positive benefits and importance of collaborative learning community in providing reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities by using newly developed technologies and describe the usefulness of such technologies to help the disabled students join in the classes at the public school as in the inclusive learning settings.

186

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

SOLUTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Multimedia-Enabled Dot Codes Used in the Community

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

“Invisible” dot codes Grid Onput (Gridmark, n.d.) is a novel two-dimensional code technology consisting of extremely small dots that are so tiny that such dot codes can invisibly overlay any graphically printed letters, photos, and illustrations and never affect the designed images, meaning that letters, photos, and illustrations can be changed into information-trigger icons. A maximum of ten voices/sounds can be now linked to each icon as well as other media, such as movies. Simply touching the dot codes printed on ordinary paper with a speaking-pen (G-Speak or G-Talk) and a dot-code reader (G-Pen Blue and G-Pen BT) enables disabled students to directly access the digital information. Gridmark Inc. is the only company that provides the valuable software free of charge to the Ikuta’s learning community members, so that they can create self-made original contents; users may ask Ikuta to try this newly developed software packages and tools. Author Ikuta has created two types of original sheets (i.e., magical sheet) that can be overlaid with Grid Onput dot codes (Figure 1a and 1b). Each sheet has 117 or 130 “Post-it-like” sticker icons and paper controller icons on the lower part that can change a mode and record and delete the voice/sound linked to each icon, which can be taken off and pasted on any real items. Gridmark Inc. also created a dot sticker; each sheet in red, blue, and green has 100 “Post-it-like” sticker icons (Figure 1c). Up to four multimedia mediums (i.e., four modes), such as movies, in addition to up to four voices/sounds, can be linked to each sticker icon (Figures 1a, 1b, and 1c). Recently, Gridmark Inc. has put the new dot sticker, having a total of 1,000 icons, on the market (Figure 1d); and, also up to ten voices/sounds can be linked to each dot code icon by using the newly updated software Sound Linker. Teachers are able to obtain these magical sheets and dot stickers from author Ikuta free of charge.

187

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. a) Smaller size (each 1.2 square cm) of “magical sheet” with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; b) Larger size (each 2.0 square cm) of “magical sheet” with “Post-itlike” sticker icons, with a speaking-pen (G-Speak) and a dot-code reader (G-Pen Blue); c) Dot sticker with a total of 300 “Post-it-like” sticker icons by Gridmark Inc.; d) Dot sticker with a total of 1,000 “Post-it-like” sticker icons by Gridmark Inc.

188

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Four Software to Create Original Teaching Materials With the help of the Ikuta’s community, Gridmark Inc. has created and developed four software packages, namely GM Authoring Tool, Sound Linker, File Linker, and Gridmark Content Viewer (GCV) having the following functionalities: •

•

•

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

•

GM Authoring Tool: It allows users to put the multimedia-enabled Grid Onput dot codes on their designed document at any place, in any size, and in any number. The resulting documents can be used exactly as the “Post-itlike” sticker icons that Ikuta and Gridmark Inc. created. Sound Linker: It allows users to easily link audio clips to each dot-code icon and create a content for a speaking-pen. This updated software can now handle a new dot sticker having 1,000 “Post-it-like” sticker icons, and users can now link a maximum of ten voices/sounds to each sticker icon. This updated software is also able to handle all the types of the “Post-it-like” sticker icons shown in Figure 1. File Linker: It allows users to create a standalone application that can reproduce multimedia (e.g., movies). Users can replay the multimedia by touching the dot codes overlaid with GM Authoring Tool and/or the “Post-itlike” sticker icons, which they pasted on the real items, with a speaking-pen G-Speak connected with the personal computer (Windows OS PC). GCV: It allows users to easily create content that can replay multimedia (e.g., movies, photos, audio fles, and Web pages) on iOS devices, such as iPad and iPhone, by touching the dot-codes overlaid with GM Authoring Tool and/or the “Post-it-like” sticker with the newly released dot-code reader G-Pen Blue, which is equipped with Bluetooth functionality.

The default language of all the menus in GM Authoring Tool, Sound Linker, and File Linker programs is determined to be English; and the handling manual available for creating self-made contents is also prepared for the above four software both in Japanese and English, by one of the authors Ikuta. Users can refer to the published papers (Ikuta, Yamashita, et al. 2019b; Ikuta, Yoshida, et al., 2020b; Ikuta, Watanuki, et al., 2021b) for detailed descriptions on the above four software packages. Many schoolteachers usually create a content by just recording the voices/sounds with an internal microphone in the speaking-pen and, then, linking the recorded voices/sounds just by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icon. This simple method is very easy to handle and the users can create a content without using any software. However, if they want to create a content with clear and volume-adjusted voices/ sounds and/or want to link two or more than two voices/sounds to each dot code icon, they have to use specially designed Sound Linker software. As one choice, 189

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

instead of using the Sound Linker software, teachers may use a linkage-table file filelist.csv and an application program NANA.exe developed by Gridmark Inc. and Ikuta: filelist.csv defines the relation among the internal real number of dot code, its mode, and the corresponding audio file, and NANA.exe is an application to create a content for a speaking-pen (Ikuta, Ishitobi, et al., 2017). Users may ask Ikuta to try this software available on Windows OS and macOS.

School Activities Providing Reasonable Accommodations for Students With Disabilities In following examples, the valuable activities to provide disabled students with reasonable accommodations are described; these school activities were performed by three teachers at two special needs schools, based on the experiences and outcomes shared by the members (schoolteachers, researchers, university students, and the staffs of the Gridmark Inc.) in the Ikuta’s collaborative learning community. The present authors believe that these activities provide the schoolteachers with the invaluable hints to help the disabled students join in the regular classes as in the inclusive settings.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Fukuyama Special Needs School At the time of the project, Fukuyama Special Needs School, Hiroshima Prefecture, had 70 students with mainly physically disabilities, comprised of three divisions, namely elementary (33 students), junior high school (13 students), and senior high school (24 students) divisions; the school also had 12 students enrolled for a visiting class (i.e., the teacher visits his/her home). The school had 72 permanent staffs (teachers and office workers) and 28 part-time teachers. The teacher Yu Takagaki performed a school activity for a first-grade female junior high school student with both intellectual disability and Fukuyama congenital muscular dystrophy by using a speaking-pen in the classes of Japanese and selfreliance activities (jiritsu katsudou) and also home learning. This student basically needs help in everyday life (e.g., eating, excreting, and changing clothes). She uses an electronic-wheel chair to move. She can grasp things and/or hold the cup, but cannot raise the hand up to the shoulder. She has many understanding languages in daily life and can answer simple questions with a word or two words. She can communicate with others in simple conversation. She has somewhat selective mutism. Also, in situations where she is under pressure (e.g., unfamiliar or not understandable situations), she cannot be confident in what she says, so she responds only with a caliber imitation (i.e., mimic way of imitation) or in a low voice, or she often freezes. She can find and read her name and hiragana (e.g., “ま [Ma] and わ 190

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

[Wa]), but she cannot understand all the 50 Japanese syllabary characters. She is not good at writing letters, so she uses TEPRA and Talking-Aid to input letters. Both for an introduction of a speaking-pen to the student and learning with it, the teacher Takagaki first created a read-aloud content, where “Post-it-like” sticker icon was attached to each phrase of the “ぼくのカレーライス (My curry and rice)” in the textbook units (Figure 2a). Also, in order to promote the student’s acquiring vocabulary, the teacher created another content of vocabulary card for nouns, verbs, adjectives, adjective clauses, onomatopoeic mimetic words, and similar items, aiming at matching the illustrations used in daily life with the corresponding hiragana names and their readings (Figure 2b). The teacher faced the following two challenges for this target student: 1. Reading Activity of a Textbook: When the student first saw the speakingpen, she was eager to use it as soon as possible. She was able to operate it immediately with understanding how to replay voice/sound by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icon. On the other hand, she had difficulty in lifting her arm, and, therefore, she was apt to operate the speaking-pen by sliding sideways using the entire upper limb by pinching the pen tip, so that the speaking-pen had often separated away from her hand. Nevertheless, she could manage to touch the next “Post-it-like” sticker icon by herself after listening to the replayed voice. Also, she repeated the phrases of “けんちゃん (Ken-chan)” and “カレ ーライス (Curry and rice)” in the textbook reading with a speaking-pen and often asked them of the teacher. In her second reading, however, she could not wait for replaying the voice completely, and, then, she often could not help touching the next “Post-it-like” sticker icon with a speaking-pen (Figure 2c). 2. Reading Activity with Vocabulary Cards: Based on the experience on the textbook reading activities, the teacher recommended her to use an upper extremity orthosis in helping the movement of her arms. She was able to move her arm sideways more easily, but she still had a difficulty to move her arm up and down. Therefore, it took a long time for her to touch a small “Post-itlike” sticker icon with a speaking-pen. When she tried to hold the upper part of the speaking-pen, she had difficulty to hold it with her hand, due to its fat portion. Then, she used a support tool made of the rubber which could fix the palm and the pen in the activity (Figure 2d). The student first worked on learning the names of vehicles. She had already known the names of bus and the Shinkansen (Bullet train) and could pronounce such names without replaying the voices with the speaking-pen. On the other hand, since the monorail and taxi were not familiar to her, she did not repeat the names even when she replayed them with a speaking-pen. However, when the teacher 191

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

encouraged her to vocalize the replayed voices together, she became to mimic them with her mouth shape as caliber imitation. She next worked on learning onomatopoeic and mimetic words. She usually used to use onomatopoeic and mimetic words such as “にこにこ (NikoNiko: smiling)”, “こんこん (KonKon: a sound knocking a door)” and “どすん (Dosun: a sound with thud),” but she could not pronounce any words at all by just looking at the illustration and text cards. After replaying the voice of such onomatopoeic and mimetic words known to her with a speaking-pen, the student often became to mimic its replayed pronunciation in the low voice. However, when she replayed the voices of the unfamiliar words by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icons, and she changed the card at once to the next one without mimicking it by herself. The teacher deeply felt that it seemed difficult for her to learn onomatopoeic and mimetic words more at the present stage. The student also tackled to learn verbs, adjectives, and adjective verbs (as feelings and antonyms), but she showed a similar behavior. The teacher reconfirmed the steps such as “touching an icon with a speaking-pen,” “listening to the replayed voice,” and “pronouncing the replayed voice” together with the student, but she did not pronounce any words and only mimicked the mouth shape. On the other hand, she was highly interested in the present activity with the speaking-pen and told the teacher that she wanted to take the pen to her home. Then, she brought the speakingpen back home during the weekend, and sometimes performed her home-learning with the pen. The mother reported to the teacher: “She actively read books with a speaking-pen, but she frequently dropped the speaking-pen because she could not use an upper extremity orthosis at home.”

Achievements in These Practices

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

In this activity, the student achieved the following: 1. In using the speaking-pen for reading-aloud the textbook, the student mastered the operation and acquired the utilization skill of the pen. The student was able to have the prospect of the reading activity in which the lesson would start by the teacher’s calling of “let’s use the speaking-pen,” and, then, could tackle the activity smoothly. 2. In reading-aloud the lexical cards, she was able to touch various words, such as the names of things around her, onomatopoeic words, and mimetic words. The teacher thought that these activities seemed to have become the learning for the student to make the pronunciation and its illustration- and hiragana cards match each other. In addition, through this activity, the teacher could grasp the vocabulary the student had understood at that time. 192

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Figure 2. a) Textbook with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; b) Vocabulary cards with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; c) Touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icon pasted on the textbook with a speaking-pen; d) Touching the vocabulary card with a speaking-pen using an upper extremity orthosis

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Future Issues Through this challenge, the teacher realized that there is a problem with the order and quantity of study to be tackled. As a result of using various types of vocabulary cards, is the teacher found that the vocabulary the student can understand is biased; she mainly receives the information on reading from its illustration, instead of the hiragana characters. In order to increase her vocabulary, therefore, the teacher considers that it is necessary to make persistent efforts on the activity, such as learning the relation among hiragana character, illustration, and its pronunciation, through onomatopoeic and onomatopoeic words, which the student often uses. When the student was reading a picture book during a break, the teacher told her: “It would be nice if you could read a picture book with a speaking-pen.” She, at once, replied 193

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

with a positive comment to the teacher, such as “I want to read a picture book with a speaking-pen.” The teacher now wants to build up the instructional design based on the fact that the student could be able to read the picture book at home and tell her desires and wills to others with the utilization of a speaking-pen in her daily life. Also, in the 2019 school year, the teacher Takagaki continued to perform school activities for the same student; she is now a second-grade junior high school student. She has come to greet a person whom she meets for the first time and speak in front of large crowds, but she still needs a hint of the first initial of the conversation from her teacher. Resulting from the challenges in the previous year, she can now communicate with a familiar person in simple conversations. On the other hand, she still often has a negative reaction to something she has never done before. She can ask to the teacher and classmates by herself “why?” and “where?” but when she is asked with the 5W1H technique (i.e., who, what, where, when, why, and how), she only answers with “yes” or nods. She is able to read about 60% of hiragana characters such as “こ (Ko), も (Mo), etc,” but has not yet mastered all the Japanese 50 hiragana syllabaries. She has already understood the mechanism that the voice is replayed when she touches the speaking-pen on the “Post-it-like” sticker icon, and is able to operate the pen. Also, from the beginning, she used the support tool made of rubber and the arm auxiliary apparatus, fixed the hand arm and palm, and operated the speaking-pen. The teacher tried to extract various problems from the actual condition of the student and correlate each other, and determined the central study assignment to be guided. In relation to the student’s central task, the teacher observed: “She cannot pronounce any words when she speaks to a person to whom she is not used and when in an unexpected situation, and she becomes so nervous.” Then, the teacher proposed the next guidance goal: “Let’s increase what she can do by using what she has experienced in various situations.” As a result, this time, the purpose of the utilization of the speaking-pen is to connect it to her self-confidence through various experiences, and the teacher decided to instruct her to use the speaking-pen in reading textbook and to practice the lines of the play.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Created Teaching Materials and Activity The teacher created the following three self-made contents to promote the student activities: 1. The teacher created the reading-aloud books by pasting the “Post-it-like” sticker icons on each page of the “ないたおかおに (Crying red demon)” (Figure 3a) and “はんぶんこ (Let’s halve it!).” The purpose of the activity

194

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

was to acquire the experience of reading one whole story by herself, with the help of a speaking-pen. 2. Until last year, when the student was on day duty, the homeroom teacher presided at all the steps of the morning meeting instead of the student. In 2019 school year, the teacher hoped that the student would be able to predict the stream of the morning meeting through listening to voices replayed with a speaking-pen, step by step, by touching each “Post-it-like” sticker icon pasted nearby the illustration, and text on the document, with the help of a speakingpen (Figure 3b). 3. The teacher created the teaching material for her to be able to remember and practice the lines repeatedly (Figure 3c), so that she could speak, in front of the classmates and all the students, at the school festival and various event.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The Actual Look of Each Activity 1. Reading-Aloud Books: The student nicely operated the speaking-pen, because it was the same challenge for her as in the last year. When the teacher showed her a bag including a content pasted with “Post-it-like” sticker icons and a speaking-pen, she could immediately understand what she was going to do without being told anything. She opened the bag and took them out by herself. In reading the unit of the textbook “ないたあかおに (Crying red demon)” with a speaking-pen before, she only repeated saying “おにちゃん (Demon!).” The teacher thought that she could not have understood the whole story of the unit. Thus, the teacher decided to repeat the characteristic words with her together after all the phrases were replayed with the speaking-pen. When the teacher asked her “what was the red demon doing?” she gave utterance to “got angry” and “Demon cried.” The teacher further asked the student, “How do you think of the red demon’s feeling?” but she could not answer anything with the expression hardened in the appearance. Furthermore, the teacher created a picture book “はんぶんこ (Let’s halve with it!)” with “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on each page (Figure 3d), since she made a positive remark such as “I want to read a picture book with a speaking-pen.” This picture book was a favorite one for her, because the student had been reading it with the teacher since last year. As a result, she tried to read the book with a speaking-pen, without hesitation. The teacher urged her to read it by herself during the break; she could listen to the replayed voices by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icons with a speaking-pen, although it was not still easy for her to turn pages smoothly.

195

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

2. Presiding at a Morning Meeting: Until last year, the teacher instructed various preparations of the morning meeting to the students and presided at the meeting. The target student, therefore, could not have the prospect of the activity, and she had a difficulty to move to the next action. Therefore, the teacher stuck the “Post-it-like” sticker icons on the mini-board which was used in the morning meeting; the teacher urged the student to chair and progress the morning meeting, with the help of a speaking-pen. In the beginning, the student seemed to have no consciousness of performing presiding at a morning meeting, only by holding the speaking-pen over the “Post-it-like” sticker icons. Therefore, the teacher needed providing support by saying “Next is this icon” and pointing at that. The teacher instructed her the same challenge in the morning meeting every day. In a little while, she came to take out the speaking-pen from a bag by herself, even if the teacher her gave no instructions. Soon, the student was able to have the prospect of the activity (Figure 3e); whenever she could forward each step in the morning meeting with a speaking-pen, and, then came to the teacher to report “I have finished.” Based on the teacher’s instruction on the next step of the processes in the morning meeting such as “Health check for each student” and “Today’s schedule,” she became able to advance to the next voluntarily. On the other hand, since the mini-board is a vertically long board, it was difficult for the student to see down to the bottom. To touch the “Post-it-like” sticker icons on the bottom-side of the board, it was necessary for the teacher to move the mini-board and tell the student the location of the proper icons. 3. Memorizing Her Lines for the Play: In the school presentation festival, the second graders were decided to perform a play. When practicing face to face with the teacher in the classroom or when practicing on the stage with other students, the student could not speak any words, spoke only in a small voice, and/or forgot her lines. Then, the teacher decided to use the practice method, for her, such as “imitate the replayed voice” with the advantage of the speakingpen. The teacher showed the lines of the student in the script of the play by the marker and pasted the “Post-it-like” sticker icons nearby, so to allow her to practice in class, in the break, and at home. Initially, the student did not imitate the reproduced line by just simply holding the speaking-pen over the dot code icon. Even if the teacher encouraged her to speak together, she became more tense by meeting with the teacher and, thus, she only imitated the shape of the mouth. Besides, as the student had the distance between the desk and her wheelchair, she often took her a longer time to touch the small dot code icon with a speaking-pen, since she might miss its mark. Therefore, in practicing during the break, the teacher made her sit cross-legged, hold a towel under her armpits, and operate the speaking-pen (Figure 3f). One week after starting 196

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

to practice with a speaking-pen, she began to imitate the replayed line in a small voice. In addition, when she practiced with her friends, she seemed to enjoy the dialogue and came to practice her lines repeatedly, saying “let’s do it again.” In addition, she hoped to take a speaking-pen home in the weekend and to tackle as a home study; the teacher allowed her to take it home. Later, her parent reported to the teacher through a communication book: “She was serious about reading-aloud with a speaking-pen.” Though the student needed the support by the words such as the initial of the lines of the play, on the day of the school play, she held the microphone by herself and was able to speak in the firm sound-volume. After the presentation, her parent and other teachers praised the student by “I could hear you” and “you did good job,” and the student seemed very happy.

Achievements in These Practices In cooperation with her parents and the teachers in the same grade, the student could continuously utilize the speaking-pen in class and home study. She achieved the following three results:

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. In the reading-aloud activity by the teacher, the target student was in the skim reading condition, but she now became able to experience the reading of the story with the self-operation of the speaking-pen. The teacher thought that the student could have understood the vague outline of the story, since she could answer the teacher’s question with her acquired vocabularies. 2. In presiding at the morning meeting, the student was able to understand its flow, and she could often move the speaking-pen to the next “Post-it-like” sticker icon in anticipation of the next activity. In addition, whenever she had finished replaying the voice of each step in the morning meeting with the speaking-pen, she performed the action of “I’ve done!” reporting to the teacher. She could nicely accumulate the experience in which she could preside at the morning meeting by herself. In the presentation activity of the school play, the student became able to speak loudly in the public by the teacher’s setting the attitude and environment which were easy for her to tackle and repeat the practice of the voice imitation continuously. In addition, the teachers’ praise besides her parents’ praise gave her confidence and reduced her weakness of speaking in the public.

197

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 3. a) Textbook with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; b) Step board with “Postit-like” sticker icons in presiding at the morning meeting; c) Lines for school event with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; d) Picture book with “Post-it-like” sticker icons; e) Touching “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on the step board in presiding at the morning meeting with a speaking-pen; f) Touching “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on the lines with a speaking-pen.

198

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Future Issue In both reading-aloud and presiding at the morning meeting activities, the target student has only replayed the voices with the speaking-pen, where the posture to imitate the voice firmly as in the case of memorizing the line practice was not often seen. Especially in the reading activity, it is still difficult for the student to think properly about the feelings of the characters in the story just by listening to the replayed voice from the speaking-pen. Though it is a problem of her challenge from the last year, she cannot yet acquire enough vocabulary with which she can tell her mind to others. The teacher thinks that she needs to increase her experience to convey her feelings using the vocabulary used in her daily life. Although the student still experiences these challenges, she has almost no resistance to use the speakingpen. Moreover, she can smoothly preside at the morning meeting even with teachers other than the homeroom teacher. The teacher hopes that the student can become confident with more things by increasing her experiences, such as doing something by her own words and actions. Further, the teacher thinks that the speaking-pen may help her achieve favorite things, tell her wills and hopes to others, and be used as one of the useful tools in her daily life.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs School Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs School, Fukuoka Prefecture, has 450 students with both intellectual disabilities (376 students) and physically handicapped (74 students). In the 2020 school year, the school comprised three divisions: Elementary (147 students with intellectual disabilities and 28 physically handicapped), junior high school (95 students with intellectual disabilities and 29 physically handicapped), and senior high school (134 students with intellectual disabilities and 17 physically handicapped). The teacher Reiko Sone performed an activity for a third-grade female student of an elementary school division. The student has autism spectrum disorder and no functional speech, but can act according to the teacher’s verbal instructions. The teacher tried to find a way so that the student could preside at the morning and farewell meetings with a speaking-pen, without any teacher’s advices, as much as possible. Up to that time, the student had used an application on iPad to preside at morning and farewell meetings, but the student had two serious problems. The first problem was the fact that the student always touched the iPad screen and could not help reproducing the next procedure’s voice. For example, in the meetings, each student had a time to tell his/her greeting to other classmates, but, within not completing these greetings, the student could not help producing the voice for playing a roll call for another student. The second problem was that the student paid attention only to 199

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

the rolling-over type of content (Figure 4a) other classmates used in the morning and farewell meetings, and needed the calling by the teacher when she had to touch the iPad to proceed the step. The teacher, therefore, determined to use a speaking pen, hoping that it would help her solve the two problems above.

Created Teaching Materials and Activity The teacher created the following three self-made teaching materials with the multimedia-enabled “Post-it-like” sticker icons: (1) The procedure table in presiding at morning and farewell meetings; (2) playing a roll call card for each student; (3) presenting a memorial activity. The teacher linked the voice of each step in presiding at the morning and farewell meetings to the “Post-it-like” sticker icon pasted on each sheet of turn-over content (Figure 4b). The teacher linked each student’s name to play a roll call to the “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted nearby each student’s photo. In the third content, the teacher linked the recording phrase such as “I enjoyed the music” to the “Post-it-like” sticker icons, pasted on the back of each card, and, thus, the student herself could present what she enjoyed in that day, at the farewell meeting (Figure 4c and 4d). The teacher used the first teaching material only when the target student presided at a meeting on her day duty. The student used the second teaching material when she played a roll call for each student to check his/her health in the morning meeting and when she played a roll call for each student to tell his/ her joyful memory on the day at the farewell meeting. The student performed these activities with the help of the speaking-pen.

Achievements in These Practices

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The teacher could get the following three fruitful outcomes in these activities: 1. The student could adjust and wait the timing for turning over the proper sheet of the contents and replay the corresponding voices in the morning and farewell meetings. Even in the fairly long step such as “greeting in the morning meeting,” “greeting in the farewell meeting,” and “singing a farewell song,” the student could wait without turning over the sheet. 2. The student became able to move herself according to the instruction from the chair-person, and, little by little, bow in accordance to her classmates together at the greeting step in the farewell meeting. 3. With the help of the speaking-pen, the student could present her own pleasant memory on the day, even without the instruction from the teacher. She could come to select a suitable sheet of a daily schedule content and present each event of the day. 200

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Figure 4. a) Content to preside at the morning meeting without “Post-it-like” sticker icon; b) Content with “Post-it-like” sticker icon to preside at the morning meeting; c) Content to present today’s memorial activity (the front side); d) Content with “Post-it-like” sticker to present today’s memorial activity (the reverse side)

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Future Issues Two major issues need to be addressed in the future. The first issue is that the student could not often carry out the morning and the farewell meetings correctly, yet, without the instructions from the teacher. Without the teacher’s words such as “please start” or “please touch it,” the student was often unable to turn over the content board. Also, during the steps in “today’s schedule and school lunch,” “tomorrow’s schedule,” and “morning greeting,” the student sometimes tried to touch the “Post-it-like” sticker of the next step, without waiting for completing each step. The second issue is that, in her presiding at a farewell meeting, the student often played a roll call for the next classmate one after another, even when a classmate was still telling the pleasant memory on the day. The student focused on only touching the “Post-it-like” sticker 201

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

icon pasted nearby the classmate’s photo, and, therefore, she could not often help playing a roll call for another student before a student finished his/her speaking. The teacher thinks that one of the reasons for these occurrences is that the student has difficulty with understanding the end of each step in the activity. Especially in the step of “today’s (tomorrow’s) schedule and school lunch,” the teacher talked much about the date and time, the weather, the timetable, and the school lunch, so that the student could not understand when the teacher’s speech ended. The teacher thinks that each step in the morning meeting, such as “date and weather,” “timetable,” and “school lunch,” should be clearly divided, and that the teacher should say “let’s take a rest here” at the end of each step to the student. The student may have another difficulty as that she cannot tell clearly her own behavior from others’ behavior. For example, she may not be able to distinguish the two different behaviors between touching the sticker icon to play a roll call for her friend’s name and being replied by him/her. The teacher asked the next year’s homeroom teacher to continue the activities with a speaking-pen; the teacher hopes that the student would accumulate her own experiences, for example, in playing a roll call for the classmates and become to get replying from the classmates. The other teacher in the same school, Keiko Ozaki performed a school activity for a first-grade male student of an elementary division. He has Down’s syndrome, but can use expressions such as “A さんがした (student A did it)” to the teacher with his ambiguous pronunciation. He understands most of what adults say and answers to the speech with “はい (yes)” and “いいえ (no).” The student often has simple conversations with his friends, such as “しよう (let’s do)” “いいよ (okay),” and “ ごめん (sorry).” The student loves to play with his friends and adults, and is very friendly. He watches the surroundings closely and is happy to imitate teachers’ and friends’ movements or he loves to come to the front of the classroom to present. When he is asked to end what he is doing or is recommend to go to the bathroom, he often sits down saying “いや (No).” The student often drops a print placed on the desk to attract the teacher’s attention. When the teacher says, “you dropped it,” he laughs only.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Guidance Goals for the Student As his entrance to the school, his parents hoped that he could acquire the words and become able to speak clearly. In addition, as the handover from the nursery school, comments such as “he is a wheedling child and sometimes asserts his feelings strongly” were raised as concerns. From the actual condition of such a student and the aspect after his entering school, the teacher set the following two guidance goals in 2019 school year: (1) The student can pay attention to his friends’ behaviors and

202

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

feelings and act according to his surroundings; (2) the student becomes able to tell his feelings to others by increasing the words he can understand and speak. Table 1. List of the student’s spontaneous words カテゴリー Category

(1) Words the Student Had Been Talking Before Entering School

(2) Words the Student Has Started to Talk after Entering School

身近なもの Familiar object

お家　タオル　帽子 Home, towel, cap.

シャツ　した(靴下) Undershirt, socks.

身近な人 Familiar person

先生 Teacher.

〇〇ちゃん(友達の名前) Names of classmates.

食べ物 Food

パン Bread.

りんご　人参 Apple, carrot.

挨拶 Greeting

バイバイ　礼　はよう(おはよう) Bye-bye, bow, good morning.

学習に関すること Learned items in class

バス　1　2　3 Bus, one, two, three.

天気 Weather

曇り　晴　雨 Cloudy, clear, rainy.

身体に関すること About body

足　おしり　頭 Leg, buttocks, head.

動きや様子 Words for movement and appearance

暑い　待って　しよう　あった　 痛い　行く　出た Hot, wait, let’s do, I found it, achy, I’ll go, going out.

入ってる　入らん(入らない) 反対　一緒　こっち　ちー(おしっこ) Present, I can’t get in, opposite, together, this way, pee.

その他 Other words

これ This.

これ何?　チェック　これする What’s this? Check, I’ll do this.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Created Teaching Materials and Activity By referring to the teaching materials in the age of the Ogori Special Needs School, the teacher created the self-made sheets bundled with a string (Figure 5a), so that the student would preside at the morning and farewell meetings. The teacher added the face photograph sheets of each student to the material, so that the student would play a roll call for his friends. The teacher pasted the “Post-it-like” sticker icons on the teaching material, so that touching them with a speaking-pen reproduced the linked voices nicely. A Bluetooth transmitter and a speaker were connected to the speaking-pen, so that all the students in the classroom could hear the replayed voices clearly (Figure 5b). The student of the day duty came forward and proceeded to preside at the morning and farewell meetings according to the proceeding steps listed in the content. Some students in the same class, however, had a difficulty 203

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

with memorizing the step of his/her own presiding, so the teacher created one more teaching material composed of small cards bundled with a ring, where each card included just one step in the procedures, instead of another material with several steps on one sheet.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Outcome in the Activity While the student compared the two above-mentioned teaching materials, the student could touch the proper “Post-it-like” sticker icon with the speaking-pen and preside at the meetings by himself (Figure 5c). He noticed well the pictures and “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on each card and/or sheet, and understood well what he should do next. As the student repeatedly performed the presiding activity, he started to mimic the voices reproduced with the speaking-pen. As the student became to speak more, the number of words he could use increased. The employees who came to pick him up for after school said: “The number of words has increased recently. And I can clearly understand what he is saying.” His parents also wrote in the communication book that “he started talking a lot.” The homeroom teacher also realized that the number of words the student spoke had increased, and decided to compile a list of spontaneous words he spoke in his learning and living situations for a two-week period, while observing the student’s behavior. In addition, the teacher asked his mother to take a look at the created list (Table 1) and divide them into two groups, namely (1) words that he had been talking about for a long time and (2) words that he has started to talk after entering the school. When looking at the words that the student started to speak after entering the school, the teacher could find out many words to be used, especially in the morning meeting and farewell meeting, such as “シャツ (undershirt) and (くつ)した (socks)” used when dressing in personal appearance check, “りんご (apple) and にんじん (carrot)” used when checking the menu of school lunch, “くもり (cloudy), はれ (clear), and あめ (rainy)” used when checking today’s weather, and “1, 2, and 3” used when checking today’s schedule. In addition, the teacher asked his mother to list up the words that the student had recently learned to speak at home; then, she listed up the following ones: “誰 (who?),” “だめでしょ (never do it),” “あ (ah),” “違った (I missed),” “ウッディ (woody),” “ママ (mammy),” “して (please, do it for me),” “上 (up),” “下 (down),” “風呂入った (I took a bath),” “歌行きたい (I want to go to Karaoke.),” “オケ(カ ラオケ)(Karaoke),” “プール行きたい (I want to go to a swimming pool),” “明日 バス (Can I take a bus tomorrow?).”

204

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 5. a) Content to preside at the morning and farewell meeting; b) Connecting a Bluetooth transmitter to a speaker-pen; c) Touching “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on the content to preside at the morning meeting with a speaking-pen; d) Showing the pose of “I did it!”

The student was very happy that he could preside at the morning and farewell meetings, and he recently came to take the chair, saying “する (I’ll do it!)” (Figure 5d). The student came to pay close attention to the activities of his friends during the class and actively join those activities. In the activities of playing a game and creation, he came to show his enthusiasm, saying “これする (I’ll do this).” By using the same words repeatedly in the morning and farewell meetings, the teacher thinks that the scene and the thing used there and those names became easy to be connected, and, then, that he could have fixed as a voluntary word. In addition, as the student paid more attention to his friends, the teacher began to see more scenes in which he played the game, that had been played in the class before, with his 205

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

friends during breaks; he made close friends and started playing together at various situations. He often spoke to his classmates with his words, such as “一緒に行こ う (Let’s go together)” and “こっち (Come on).” Looking at the words, listed up by his mother, which the student has recently acquired, it is no wonder that those words are relating to the places and things of his strong interests, namely プール (swimming pool) and カラオケ (karaoke), and are relating to his daily repetitions, namely バス (bus) and お風呂 (bath), for example.

Future Issue Recently, the teacher often sees the student trying to tell “how he feels and what he wants to do” to his friends and the teacher. While listening to the teacher’s speech and the voices reproduced by the speaking-pen, the student often starts to imitate and pronounce in the same way. The student is increasingly interested in and able to understand activities at school, so this has led to a gradual increase in the number of words he can speak. The present initiatives alone might have not led to an increase in the number of words spoken by the student; for him, it might be just a nice timing when understandable languages were easily linked to the language of expression. During just this period, the acquisition of the words and phrases effectively by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted nearby the picture cards and photo cards with a speaking-pen might have been promoted. On the other hand, even in the scenes of morning and farewell meetings, his vocabulary is still limited and not enough to express what he wants to convey. The teacher thinks that he comes to memorize more words by touching the “Post-it-like” sticker icons pasted on picture books and dictionaries in which he is interested, with the help of a speaking-pen. The teacher also believes that an original teaching material combined with videos would be effective for the student to acquire verbs, adjectives, and other words that express movements and behaviors. Thus, the teacher is now making a plan to create such teaching materials, including video clips by using a GCV application and a dot-code reader G-Pen Blue.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

FUTURE RESEARCH DIRECTIONS Developing Easy-to-Handle Software and Hardware Gridmark Inc. has developed four software packages—the GM Authoring Tool, the Sound Linker, the File Linker, and the GCV—for the present collaborative learning community. These software packages are very easy to use for teachers, even those who are not good at ICT, and now distributed to the schoolteachers in free by one of 206

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

the authors, Ikuta. Only the Sound Linker that can support linking up to maximum of 10,000 audios is now put into the market. Gridmark Inc. is still in the process of developing two software programs—the GM Authoring Tool and the GCV—with the help of author Ikuta’s community. The further discussions with the staffs of Gridmark Inc. will bring the positive and fruitful benefits to produce more suitable and easy-to-handle tools and software.

Developing the Collaborative Learning Community Content that is useful and effective for one student is not always applicable to other students, as each student has a different set of needs and desires, degrees of disability, and learning history. Therefore, teachers need to create independent content which is customized to each student with his/her own difficulty. Sharing own experiences and outcomes in the activities with other schoolteachers, researchers, developers, and parents is crucial to develop self-made original contents more suitable for the target student and advance the present collaborative learning community in a more profound way. The Ikuta’s collaborative learning community with more than 200 schoolteachers is quite important in providing reasonable accommodations for students with disabilities, such as students with autistic behaviors, intellectual challenges, Down syndrome, physical handicaps, visual impairments, selective mutism, learning disabilities et al. University students’ help plays a key role in creating original content and conducting school activities for young students at both special needs and public schools, since the schoolteachers especially in Japan are very busy in their every days’ school-lives. International collaboration with foreign teachers and researchers could also lead to new developments in self-made materials and more effective activities for disabled students in inclusive learning settings around the world.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Usage of the Present Technologies in Inclusive Learning Settings The present simple ICT technologies has proved to be quite useful for the students with disabilities, who tried to attend the classes in the public school as inclusive learning settings; where the teachers have created self-made teaching materials for such students and helped them join in their classes (Ikuta, Sakurai, et al., 2021a; Ikuta, Watanuki, et al., 2021b; Ikuta, Ouchi, et al., 2021c). For the disabled students at the school for special needs who attended the class at his/her regional public school as inclusive settings, the self-made original contents, created with the present multimedia-enabled dot codes, could nicely promote the exchange event with the student’s peers (Ikuta, Yoshida, et al., 2020b). The authors are convinced that the 207

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

present newly developed technologies help the schoolteachers realize inclusive learning settings more effectively and skillfully.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CONCLUSION Sharing the know-how within the members of the collaborative learning community, in creating self-made teaching materials with multimedia-enabled dot-codes and conducting long-term school activities for students with disabilities, is quite useful and effective in promoting the learning such as word recognition and its reading, learning sound-symbol correspondence, automatic recall of word spellings, and communication skills. It is crucial that teachers develop “original” content for each student, as each student has different thoughts, feelings, and learning history. Students with expressive language disabilities, in particular, are unable to express what they want to say, which often results in violent and frustrated outbursts. In such cases, tools, such as a speaking-pen, that can reproduce the recorded voices of teachers, classmates, and parents, are often very effective to provide them with reasonable accommodations. In the examples the authors performed, some students were able to understand that tools such as the speaking-pen were able to assist them in making their desires known to others, and they often put the speaking-pen to their ear or mouth. Through long-term school activities, some of the students were able to master some of the phrases used in daily life in society. The present newly developed multimedia-enabled dot code technology can help the disabled students join in the inclusive classes and learn together with the students of both average and exceptional ability. Collaboration with software and hardware houses is also another important issue in the development of focused collaborative learning community. Support given by Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research and by Otsuma Women’s University is also important to ensure continuation of the development of useful and effective content and to conduct appealing activities at both the special needs and public schools. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Otsuma Women’s University. Before the study, the schoolteachers received permission from their principals to conduct the current school-based activities. The authors explained the study purpose and methods orally, and obtained informed consent from the students and their parents.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT Author/researcher Shigeru Ikuta thanks “Grant-in-Aids for Scientific Research” (C) (JP16K04844) and “Otsuma Grant-in-Aid for Individual Exploratory Research” 208

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

(Grant Numbers: s2810 and s2912). The authors thank all the students and teachers at Fukuyama Schools for Special Needs, Hiroshima Prefecture, and Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs Education, Fukuoka Prefecture. The authors would like to thank eContentPro International (www.econtentpro.com) for the English language review.

REFERENCES American Psychiatric Association. (n.d.). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2012). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (4th ed.). Paul H. Brookes Pub. Co. Bright Hub Education. (n.d.). Improving student learning with collaborative learning communities and activities. https://www.brighthubeducation.com/teaching-methodstips/79528-encouraging-collaborative-learning-in-your-classroom/ Brophy, B. (2016, October 22). Collaborative learning community: Obesity. Medium. https://www.coursehero.com/file/20056920/Collaborative-Learning-Community/ Carpenter, L. A. B., Johnston, L. B., & Beard, L. A. (2014). Assistive technology: Access for all students (3rd ed.). Pearson Education. Classtime blog. (n.d.). Turning your classroom into a collaborative learning community. https://www.classtime.com/blog/classroom-collaborative-learningcommunity/ Collaborative Learning Community (CLC). (n.d.). University of Louisville. https:// louisville.edu/ideastoaction/site/programs/communities/collaborativelearning

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaborative learning. (n.d.). Cornell University: Center for Teaching Innovation. https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/collaborativelearning eduplanet21. (n.d.). Collaborative learning communities. https://eduplanet21.com/ professional-learning/collaborative-learning-communities/ Gallup, J., Perihan, C., Tatsuma, Y., & Ikuta, S. (2021). Creative Inclusive Functional Content Using Dot Codes: An Exploration of Multistep Recipes for Individuals with Autism in Post-Secondary Setting. In Y. Kats & F. Stasolla (Eds.), Education and Technology Support for Children and Young Adults with ASD and Learning Disabilities (pp. 149–166). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7053-1.ch008 209

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Gridmark Inc. (n.d.). Invisible two-dimensional dot-code technology, Grid Onput. http://gridmark.co.jp/en/technologies Group Work and Collaborative Learning. (n.d.). University of Virginia: Teaching Continuity. https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/ collaborative-learning Ikuta, S. (2018). Multimedia-enabled dot codes as communication technologies. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (4th ed., pp. 6464–6475). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch561. Ikuta, S., Endo, E., Nemoto, F., Kaiami, S., & Ezoe, T. (2013). School activities using handmade teaching materials with dot codes. In D. G. Barres, Z. C., Carrion, & R. L.-C. Delgado (Eds.), Technologies for inclusive education: Beyond traditional integration approaches (pp. 220-243). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2530-3. ch011 Ikuta, S., & Hisatsune, Y. (2019a). Handcrafted customized content and school activities with newly developed technologies. In S. L. Gronseth & E. M. Dalton (Eds.), Universal access through inclusive instructional design: International perspectives on UDL (pp. 164–172). Routledge. Ikuta, S., Ishitobi, R., Nemoto, F., Urushihata, C., Yamaguchi, K., & Nakui, H. (2017). Handmade content and school activities for autistic children with expressive language disabilities. In Y. Kats (Ed.), Supporting the education of children with autism spectrum disorders (pp. 85–115). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/9781-5225-0816-8.ch006.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Ikuta, S., Morton, D., Kasai, M., Nemoto, F., Ohtaka, M., & Horiuchi, M. (2015). School activities with new dot-code handling multimedia. In L. Lennex & K. Nettleton (Eds.), Cases on instructional technology in gifted and talented education (pp. 311–338). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6489-0.ch015. Ikuta, S., Ouchi, C., Tomiyama, J., Katagiri, Y., Hoshi, S., Sakai, N., Kisaka, C., Hara, N., Nakamura, H., & Ozaki, K. (2021c). School Activities for Autistic Children Using Newly Developed Software and Tools. In Y. Kats & F. Stasolla (Eds.), Education and Technology Support for Children and Young Adults with ASD and Learning Disabilities (pp. 125–148). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7053-1.ch007

210

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Ikuta, S., Sakurai, E., Takayanagi, M., Suzuki, N., Horiuchi, M., Nakano, H., Tamai, Y., Sugibayashi, K., Yoshida, M., Kaneko, C., Nakazawa, M., Nakano, Y., Yamashita, S., Oshima, M., & Abe, S. (2021a). University Students: Schoolteachers Partnership With Newly Developed Technologies. In D. Farland-Smith (Ed.), Enhancing Learning Opportunities Through Student, Scientist, and Teacher Partnerships (pp. 133–157). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-4966-7.ch008 Ikuta, S., Urushihata, C., Saotome, N., & Abe, S. (2020a). School activities for disabled students using self-made contents with multimedia-enabled dot codes. In D. Schmidt-Crawford (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1990–1999). https://www. learntechlib.org/primary/p/215981/ Ikuta, S., Watanuki, M., & Abe, S. (2021b). Multimedia-enabled dot codes as communication aids. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Handbook of research on modern educational technologies, applications, and management (pp. 331–345). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-3476-2.ch020. Ikuta, S., Yamashita, S., Higo, H., Tomiyama, J., Saotome, N., Sudo, S., Hoshi, S., Endo, T., Narushima, T., Suzuki, K., & Watanuki, M. (2019b). Original teaching materials and school activities with multimedia-enabled dot codes. In S. Ikuta (Ed.), Handmade teaching materials for students with disabilities (pp. 50–75). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6240-5.ch003. Ikuta, S., Yoshida, A., Ishitobi, R., Kudo, M., Sekine, M., Yamashita, S., Edagawa, Y., Edagawa, T., & Abe, S. (2020b). Software handling multimedia-enabled dot codes and school activities for students with disabilities. In S. Ikuta (Ed.), Handbook of research on software for gifted and talented school activities in K-12 classrooms (pp. 217–242). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-7998-1400-9.ch010. Isogai, K. (2017). Recent Developments in Japan’s Special Needs Education – Promoting an Inclusive Education System. NISE Bulletin, 16, 28–32.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kawano, K. (2016, November 1). GPlusMediaInc: SAVVY Tokyo: Special Needs Education in Japan. Medium. https://savvytokyo.com/special-needs-education-japan/ Koenig, D. (2020, July 14). eHow: What is an inclusive setting? Medium. https:// www.ehow.co.uk/facts_7487293_inclusive-setting.html Learning Disabilities Association of America. (n.d.). Types of learning disabilities. https://ldaamerica.org/types-of-learning-disabilities/

211

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Miller, A. (2020, January 3). eduTopia: Creating effective professional learning communities: If managed well, these teams can help teachers innovate in the classroom and improve student outcomes. Medium. https://www.edutopia.org/article/creatingeffective-professional-learning-communities Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology, Japan. (2020). Gakko kihon chosa 2020 [Report on the school basic survey in 2020 academic year]. https:// www.mext.go.jp/b_menu/toukei/chousa01/kihon/kekka/k_detail/1419591_00003. htm Moats, L., & Tolman, C. (n.d.). Types of reading disability: Reading pockets. https:// www.readingrockets.org/article/types-reading-disability National Institute of Mental Health. (2018, March). Autism spectrum disorder. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/autism-spectrum-disorders-asd/index.shtml National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). What are reading disorders? https:// www.nichd.nih.gov/health/topics/reading/conditioninfo/disorders Smith, B. L., & MacGregor J. T. (n.d.). What is collaborative learning? https://evergreen. edu/sites/default/files/facultydevelopment/docs/WhatisCollaborativeLearning.pdf VALAMIS. (n.d.). What is collaborative learning? https://www.valamis.com/hub/ collaborative-learning WebMD. (2018). What are the types of autism spectrum disorders? https://www. webmd.com/brain/autism/autism-spectrum-disorders#1

ADDITIONAL READING

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Dell, A. G., Newton, D. A., & Petroff, J. G. (2012). Assistive technology in the classroom: Enhancing the school experiences of students with disabilities. Pearson Education. Fahey, K. R., Hulit, L. M., & Howard, M. R. (2018). Born to talk: An introduction to speech and language development (7th ed.). Pearson Education. Hardy, C., Ogden, J., Newman, J., & Cooper, S. (2002). Autism and ICT: A guide for teachers and parents. David Fulton Publishers Ltd. Jacobs, J. (2018). Core words for classroom & home: Developing verbal communication skills and augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) abilities. Blue Lake Publishing. 212

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Leaf, J. B. (2017). Handbook of social skills and autism spectrum disorder: Assessment, curricula, and intervention. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62995-7 Lindfors, J. W. (1987). Children’s language and learning (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon. Papert, S. (1984). New theories for new learnings. School Psychology Review, 13(4), 422–428. doi:10.1080/02796015.1984.12085122 Theng, L. B. (2011). Assistive and augmentative communication for the disabled: Intelligent technologies for communication, learning and teaching. IGI-Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-60960-541-4 Wendt, O., Quist, R. W., & Lloyd, L. L. (2011). Assistive technology: Principles and applications for communication disorders and special education. Emerald Group Pub. Ltd.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

KEY TERMS AND DEFINITIONS Collaborative Learning Community: Schoolteachers should create self-made original teaching materials to provide reasonable accommodations for each individual with disabilities, for examples, using multimedia-enabled dot-codes. They conduct school activities, analyse the results, and share the stories and outcomes with all the community members. Dot-Code Reader: Multimedia files, such as movies, can be linked to the dot codes overlaid with the GM Authoring Tool and “Post-it-like” sticker icons of the “magical sheet.” The linked multimedia is replayed on the screen of iOS or Windows OS devices by touching the dot codes with a dot-code reader. File Linker: This software can create a standalone application on Windows OS. A maximum of ten multimedia-like movies can be linked to each “Post-it-like” sticker icon or dot-code overlaid using a GM Authoring Tool. Touching the dot codes with a dot-code reader replays the corresponding multimedia on a screen of PC. GM Authoring Tool: This software can overlap the dot codes on users’ designed document at any place, in any size, and in any number. A maximum of ten audio and multimedia files can be linked to each unique set of dot codes. Gridmark Content Viewer (GCV): This software can create content available on iOS devices, such as the iPad and the iPhone. Using G-Pen Blue with Bluetooth functionality users can replay the multimedia, such as movies, photos, audios, and Web pages on the screen of an iOS device. Multimedia-Enabled Dot Code: Invisible dot codes developed by Gridmark Inc. are a novel two-dimensional code technology consisting of extremely small 213

Collaborative Learning Community Facilitating Inclusive Learning Settings

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

dots. Each “Post-it-like” sticker icon or dot-code overlaid with a GM Authoring Tool program can now be linked to up to ten audios. A maximum of ten multimedia, such as movies, can be also linked to the same icon. A simple touch by a speakingpen and dot-code reader on the dot codes enables a link between the paper and the digital content. “Post-It-Like” Sticker Icon: Each “magical sheet” and “dot sticker” are overlaid with dot codes beforehand. The icons can then be taken off, pasted onto a target object, and then touched with a speaking-pen or dot-code reader. School Activity: School activities in special needs education can be improved through the use of original and individual self-made teaching materials and aids tailored to each student with disabilities, as each student has different thoughts, feelings, needs, and desires. Sound Linker: A software that can create content for a speaking-pen. A maximum of 10 audios can now be linked to each “Post-It-like” sticker icon or dot code overlaid with using the GM Authoring Tool program. Created content is copied into a microSD card in a speaking-pen. Touching the icon with a speaking-pen, such as G-Speak and G-Talk, replays the corresponding audio. Speaking-Pen: The G-Speak and G-Talk speaking-pens reproduce original voices and sounds simply by touching the “Post-It-like” sticker icons or overlaid dot codes printed directly on a paper. These speaking-pens connected to Windows PCs can also replay multimedia, such as movies, using a standalone application created using the File Linker program.

214

Section 3

Considerations for Inclusive Communities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

In the final section of this book, readers will consider professional learning communities and expansion of practice for inclusion.

216

Chapter 9

Professional Learning Communities:

An Inclusive Solution for Engagement and Collaboration Lindsey Jarvie Purdue University Global, USA Jason Waldow Purdue University Global, USA

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT Thriving in today’s global society means meeting the demands for success by simple provisional steps or internal and organizational paradigm shifts. As organizations command numerous departments, oversee a diverse workforce, and have various agendas and goals, creating and maintaining a culture of collaboration and inclusion is vital but challenging. Professional learning communities (PLCs) are a way for colleagues from all areas of an organization to connect. PLCs have been a proven strategy for fostering collaboration, expanding scholarship, and enhancing professional efcacy. The intention of a PLC is to confront a challenge, meet a goal, or implement a change for the good of the organization while also building a sense of community through collaboration. This chapter will emphasize how PLCs contribute to experiential learning, inclusive learning settings, and address common communication challenges.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch009 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Professional Learning Communities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

INTRODUCTION Collaboration and inclusion are essential for an organization to survive in a globalized society. Educational institutions must simultaneously command multiple departments, support a diverse workforce, and meet numerous agendas and goals. To meet this demand, organizations have the unique opportunity to integrate creative strategies, processes, and solutions. These processes can often become segmented as departments aim to reach their respective requirements to achieve departmental objectives and individual employee goals. While all departments may be working in tandem towards the organization’s common good, focus on the organizational vision can be problematic with siloed communication channels and a diverse organizational population functioning independently in separate work environments. To encourage a focus on the institution’s vision and a feeling of inclusion rather than isolation, organizations can create communities by providing ways to interact — erasing potential departmental barriers. The following chapter presents the varying degrees of involvement for all participants and an overview of strategies for successful implementation, functionality, and efficiency. One way to establish a sense of inclusion and evade feelings of isolation within an educational setting is to establish a professional learning community (PLC). PLCs are made up of education professionals from across an educational institution and promote a collaborative approach towards shared goals or visions to ensure student learning (DuFour, 2004). Educational institutions have experienced a shift in the 21st century with the rapid advancement and necessity of technology, infrastructure, and the overall speed of information and ideas exchange. Any working professional has likely felt the effects of rapid globalization on many levels and has adopted alternative approaches to collaboration and inclusive working environments (Mumby & Kuhn, 2018). Collaborative relationship building and inclusive learning practices have also been adapted to meet the increasing need for virtual settings and hybrid workspaces. PLCs are a proven strategy for fostering collaboration, erasing departmental boundaries, expanding scholarship, and enhancing professional efficacy in virtual and traditional educational settings (Bettersby & Verdi, 2015). The primary purpose of a PLC is to tackle a challenge, meet a goal, or implement a change for the organization’s good while encouraging individual growth. While much of the foundational research and implementation of PLCs was founded in education (notably the K–12 setting), today, PLCs are increasingly being used by major organizations and corporations worldwide to promote and foster a collaborative culture and a focus on learning. This chapter explores what PLCs are and emphasizes how the inclusion of PLCs contributes to experiential learning, offers varying degrees of involvement, and deepens the efficacy of all participants (Sternberg & Zhang, 2000). An overview and 217

Professional Learning Communities

analysis of common communication challenges are included, along with strategies for successful implementation, functionality, and efficiency of professional learning communities. Additionally, there will be a particular focus on a multi-channeled PLC approach. It will provide practical examples of implementing these successful strategies and why they are important to faculty development, persistence, and efficiency for student learning. Successful implementation of PLCs can propagate scholarship efforts; enrich faculty, staff, and student connections; and improve overall instruction (Owen, 2016). The chapter will present ongoing objectives, benchmarks, and highlights of successful strategies from leading education researchers and professionals, contributing to a supportive and positive learning environment for staff, teachers, and students. The objective of the chapter is to encourage professionals toward employing professional learning communities as a strategic tool to advance ongoing inclusive learning environments; emphasize collaboration for faculty to strengthen professional skills; motivate colleagues to share and develop strategies for diverse educational settings and students; and focus on efficiency so that all involved gain clear results.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

BACKGROUND The concept of the professional learning communities originated from Peter Senge’s 1990 book, The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. He explored how organizations can create a learning culture that relies on group problem-solving. Senge (1990) introduced five theoretical foundations for building a learning organization: accountability, understanding, influence, shared vision, and systems. The first four concepts in practice help individuals within an organization refocus their energy to be pragmatic, action-oriented, and reliant on dialogue. Senge (1990) connected these concepts by relying on systems theory for his fifth theoretical foundation. At its core, systems theory focuses on the interaction among elements of a larger process and consists of parts, attributes, internal relationships among the parts, and the system’s environment (Littlejohn, 2002). Using systems theory, Senge (1990) concluded that people in various departments from different fields could and should work together with a shared mission, utilizing the ability to adjust if needed while continually examining the actions and results of a shared mission. The overarching effect of this was to build a learning environment that reinforces itself. Systems and procedures can formulate the process to offer group members stability, reduced anxiety, and develop an atmosphere of attentiveness (Schein, 2017). The concepts of aligning to a central mission and lending accountability to group members using collaborative dialogue were transferred into the education 218

Professional Learning Communities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

arena by Donald Schön, who focused on reflective practice. Schön (1991) saw how Senge’s approach to building a learning organization could be used at educational institutions to improve departmental communication. However, Meyers and Meyers (1995) combined aspects of Schön’s thoughtful perspective and Senge’s learning organizational concept that created today’s professional learning community. A professional learning community brings people together, typically colleagues in education, to work collaboratively towards a shared goal. According to Richard DuFour (2004), professional learning communities encourage collaboration and enrich learning for any diverse setting it is employed. In fact, DuFour (2015) notes that any organization with a mission statement can implement a PLC and do so within the critical concepts of focusing on learning, creating a culture of collaboration, and emphasizing results (DuFour, 2004). The systems perspective notes differences between a separate set of components and a collection of parts that operate together to establish a purposeful whole (Eisenberg et al., 2010). A PLC is a facilitation and collective ideas exchange system that works towards a shared goal or mission. Using the systems approach as a theoretical foundation for building PLCs allows educators and professionals to gain insight from individual talents adding to the PLC, including different instructional methods, research interests, and educational backgrounds. All PLC members uniquely contribute to help build an active community. This distributes added benefit to the PLC’s members and permeates throughout the organization, adding benefit to the entire organization employing PLCs. There are four pillars of the modern professional learning community which are necessary for success. The foundational pillars include a clear mission, a shared vision, collective values, and defined goals (DuFour, 2015). Educators can use the pillars to ask focused, specific questions when establishing goals and make the overall purpose more focused. This preliminary step is critical to the ongoing functionality and productivity of a PLC as it must include the careful consideration and constructive participation of all team members. PLCs provide an inclusive setting for open dialogue, the ability to investigate change, and offer a collaborative space for growth and development, making PLCs an exceptional addition to any educational setting.

PLC OVERVIEW Benefits and Implementation While there are several short- and long-term benefits to professional learning communities, the most significant is the inclusive collaboration that erodes 219

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Learning Communities

departmental barriers and integrates diverse professional experiences and backgrounds. Globalization has increased accessibility to information and has essentially promoted a more diversified K–12 and higher education population, including faculty, staff, and students. PLCs provide a unique formula for an inclusive learning setting that integrates everyone’s ideas, values, and perspectives while working together to meet a common goal or overcome a challenge. PLCs provide a backdrop for ongoing and open dialogue, the ability to investigate change, and offer a collaborative space to problem solve. As a collaborative group working towards an organizational goal, PLCs are channels for professional development and require consistent interaction. As a result, participant persistence is a unique and rewarding element contributing to the long-term benefits of goal setting and ongoing rapport building. PLCs enrich the principle of learning by doing and cultivate experiential learning opportunities (DuFour, 2004; Sternberg & Zang, 2000). Members of professional learning communities have the extraordinary opportunity to collectively advocate for creating new avenues for experiential learning and collective advocacy for ongoing progress and successful results (Sternberg & Zhang, 2000). All the while, members are gaining the secondary, but certainly no less significant, benefits of having a sense of accomplishment, sense of belonging, and being part of an organizational community as they contribute to the betterment of their workspace or learning environment. These benefits cannot be overstated. While PLCs are effective for any educational institution to break down communication barriers and build relationships among professionals, they have been particularly successful in the K–12 educational setting. PLCs can be used to help K–12 instructors highlight the critical connection of what works by reflecting on and examining their teaching styles, effective practices, and student achievement (National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, 2010). Therefore, PLCs can help K–12 instructors bridge these connections in practice with their students and focus on what is most effective. Due to the tiered nature of K–12 programs, such as student grade advancement and the required hands-on training needed for programs such as CASE (curriculum for agricultural science education) or STEM (science, technology, engineering, math), instructors have found great value in PLC work (Brown et al., 2018; National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future, 2010). Student achievement and teacher perception are shown to improve in the K–12 system when school leaders successfully implement PLCs thus improving the institution’s culture (Brown et al., 2018). When considering K–12 education settings, PLCs are particularly important because they have been used to guide novice special educators by partnering them with established special needs instructors, offering them a safe space to collaborate and share experiences, ideas, and strategies (Hardman, 2015). Additionally, the framework of a PLC that meets regularly can help special education instructors build 220

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Learning Communities

professional development practices because special education is a student-centered practice requiring teachers to frame and adjust their professional development needs. PLCs offer that space for reflection and growth (Hardman, 2015). PLCs also create formal and informal networking opportunities allowing special educators to connect with and share best practices and experiences with general education instructors (Hardman, 2015). This benefits general education instructors in effectively guiding special needs students when being introduced to general education classroom rooms. The term professional learning community has become so widely used and loosely defined that this can quickly become an obstacle during the implementation phase (DuFour et al., 2006). Research highlights widely established guides and discussions on creating PLCs for professionals, practitioners, and educators alike to implement a PLC successfully. However, the foundational aspect for success relies on the importance of maintaining a focus on learning and collaborative culture, or the fundamental reason for a PLC will be overlooked (DuFour et al., 2006). The formation of PLC group members can either be assigned or left to individuals to opt-in; this will largely depend on organizational leadership or those that have opted to implement PLCs for collaborative staff feedback. In either case, establishing the PLC group requires focus and commitment. Upon group formation, members of a PLC should collaboratively decide on the PLC’s direction and have a definitive purpose as this will dictate the trajectory of workflow. It is important to note that PLCs are not exclusive to institutional leadership. Students can benefit from what a PLC offers as well, and can gain tremendous professional development, critical thinking, and communication skills through involvement. While the benefits of implementing PLCs are many, structure, strategy, and systematic elements are also imperative for optimal efficiency and productivity. Learning how to create and adequately govern a PLC can cultivate and strengthen leadership skills and develop additional opportunities for members to gain stronger connections with diverse populations, including colleagues and students (Battersby & Verdi, 2015). PLCs are comprised of interdepartmental and interdisciplinary team members, which can include students, who each offer an incredible benefit in the arenas of skills, knowledge, and experience to be shared. While these benefits are highly valuable, they can also pose a challenge when developing a shared vision or approach for the PLC. It is not a requirement, but a PLC should employ organization, structure, and systems to stay on task, focus on the desired results, and encourage an inclusive and collaborative environment. These recommendations or requirements might come from leadership or those that introduced the PLC, or it might be up to group members to enact these items. Either way, there should be adequate recordkeeping of each step, meeting attendance, and general input or ideas exchange to encourage accountability and maintain the utmost organization for the collective PLC.

221

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Learning Communities

To maintain the efficient operation of a PLC, time management and organization are necessary to the overall function of a PLC. Depending on the organizational resources, requirements, and needs, all PLC members should be prepared to dedicate the time needed for prioritizing the PLC and meeting the proposed challenge or goal successfully. While meeting often and having a shared vision are crucial, research also highlights that to be successfully implemented, a professional learning community needs a shared leadership aspect; it should offer room for collective creativity (Battersby & Verdi, 2015). The shared leadership roles are vital to reinforcing the supportive conditions for all and not creating a power imbalance as the community forms, grows, and works towards the outcome or solution. A supportive and equal environment lends to a shared personal practice that fosters the development and efficacy of each team member (Battersby & Verdi, 2015). As with other PLC elements, the time requirement might be dictated by leadership or those that implemented the PLC. If there is no set requirement, group members should decide on this to encourage accountability with strategic planning. Particular focus should be placed on a multi-channeled, pragmatic PLC approach while also employing innovative strategies for talent development, persistence, and inclusion of all team members’ ideas and experiences. In most instances, PLCs include team members from varying professional backgrounds and experience levels. Depending on the goal, mission, and overall objective, these elements should be closely considered for efficient PLC functioning. A central piece of PLCs as a collaborative entity is that members have a shared interest in the outcome(s), and the varying backgrounds and skillsets should be harnessed for group benefit. These collaborative PLC opportunities will propagate research efforts, enriched interdepartmental connections, and improve overall productivity (Owen, 2016). As has been presented, an essential component of a PLC is to have a common goal or learning outcome. This is the catalyst for the collaborative function of a PLC and the secondary benefits that emerge beyond that. Technology has largely dictated how working professionals communicate. The accelerated advancement of technology has also changed the face of educational settings and continues to do so. Technology is a tool for support and innovation and should be employed to benefit a PLC. Several prominent platforms exist for meeting space, data collection, and collaborative workspaces. Depending on the PLC’s needs, it is critical to decide what will work best for group communication and achieve the desired outcomes, both short- and long-term. Remember, PLCs are intended to be ongoing processes for collaboration. To that end, consider members’ varying skills and knowledge of technology as the group navigates options for the most effective platform for its needs. This consideration will also reinforce the community aspect of working together. For example, Google offers several platforms and services for collaborative work, but every PLC member might not have the same degree 222

Professional Learning Communities

of knowledge or experience with these platforms. It is important to discuss these items during the implementation phases of a PLC. Lastly, there should also be consideration given to a centralized place for all work to be housed. For instance, maintaining a shared folder or other such entity helps keep the PLC’s work organized and accessible to all members. While most information should be synchronous, asynchronous communication is vital as members of the PLC work independently before and after regularly scheduled meetings.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Group Communication Communication is essential to the workplace for efficiency and productivity. Professional learning communities likewise rely on group communication to be successful. Foundationally, group communication is based on a shared purpose or goal and an overall sense of belonging and accomplishment. These elements contribute to group decision-making and problem-solving, where group members entrust one another to contribute to the overall goal or purpose (Guirdham & Guirdham, 2017). This is an inherent property and product of a PLC. As a result of globalization, enhanced technological infrastructure, and increased connectivity, today’s workplaces, especially educational institutions, boast highly diverse student and staff populations. Culturally diverse groups or teams can present many challenges, such as different experiences and culturally divergent perspectives on decision-making and group roles, but this can also undoubtedly be a tremendous benefit. Guirdham and Guirdham (2017) present the effects of cultural differences on group decision-making and how a general sense of awareness and inclusion can help overcome these challenges, leading to a more collaborative and inclusive work and learning environment. Virtual collaboration can be a challenge, but it can also be an opportunity to develop personal and professional connections in unique ways, thus encouraging every member to contribute their ideas to the ongoing PLC project. This is yet another way PLCs thrive on each member’s varying personal and professional backgrounds, experiences, and skillsets. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions (Greene, 2019) offer a framework to evaluate cultural values and apply them to group communication, contributing to the awareness of the effects of cultural differences. They have been used to assess and offer perspective on the cultural differences affecting decision-making, problem-solving, and communication in general. Hofstede’s dimensions are readily applied across disciplines, including to national cultural groups or smaller cultural subgroups, such as PLCs (Greene, 2019). When used to evaluate culture, the cultural dimensions contribute to creating a culturally aware and inclusive group by offering insight into group members’ differences. Suppose PLC members are unfamiliar with Hofstede’s cultural dimensions, or a collaborative workgroup is a new entity to an educational 223

Professional Learning Communities

setting. In that case, this framework can be beneficial in adding perspective and creating a culture of inclusive, responsible communication and cultural awareness. Figure 1. Hofstede’s Cultural Dimensions

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are a framework used to examine cultural differences in communication and values. This table shows how the dimensions can be applied to considering differences in group communication practices. Adapted from Communicating Across Cultures at Work (4th ed., p. 113), by M. Guirdham and O. Guirdham, 2017, Palgrave Macmillan. Copyright 2017 by Maureen Guirdham and Oliver Guirdham.

A professional learning community thrives on member differences. Different ideas are embraced, diverse approaches are welcomed, and even differing opinions are part of a PLC’s community aspect. By being inclusive and welcoming diversity in all forms, PLC results lend themselves to positive group communication and a healthier educational setting overall. It cannot be overstated — successful PLCs must rely on a shared vision or goal. Consider Knapp’s relational model, which shows how coming together to build rapport helps reach a common goal. The notion of transparency in obtaining a shared common goal and reliability of that transparency is paramount to get a successful deliverable from the PLC (Knapp & Vangelsti, 2009). A PLC necessitates clear purpose, shared values, and mindful meeting facilitation. A PLC’s success results in 224

Professional Learning Communities

the team’s collective efficacy, resulting in the group’s shared belief in its capability to organize and accomplish the courses of action required to produce given attainment levels (Azama, 2020). This goal can potentially change or be adjusted as the shared vision lends itself to new information. Flexibility is developed as each PLC member takes ownership and responsibility for their part in the group interaction, and trust is developed.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Inclusivity, Diversity, and Collaboration Research explores diversity and inclusivity in the arena of professional learning communities through two fields of thought. One field of thought illustrates PLCs forming with the shared goal or purpose of creating a more diverse and inclusive educational setting. Having the primary goal of the PLC focus be on ways to create a more diverse or inclusive institution is highly beneficial to the organization as a whole. This type of PLC focus has many benefits. Yet, the scope of research is limiting, and results may not transfer reliably from the PLC to the educational institution as a whole. The second field of thought, which the authors of this chapter subscribe to, is focused more on the naturally diverse and inclusive essence of a PLC, breaking down communication barriers within the PLC process. Bringing members from an educational setting together with different backgrounds and skillsets, and focusing on a shared outcome, embraces the inclusive process and sets up a servant leadership model, welcoming diversity for all those with whom they interact (Clemons & Hopkins, 2020). This is evident when applied through the lens of micro- to macro-organizational implementation strategies of PLCs that successfully meet their target goals and outcomes. For a PLC to be effective, current research highlights PLC activities need to be driven by professionals in the group, nurture diversity and collaboration, and have a focused, unified vision (Courtney et al., 2017). This requires that members of the PLC hold each other accountable and take ownership of their membership. Diversity within a PLC incorporates every sense of the term through race, gender, ethnicity, and age, experience, leadership levels, and even different organizational departments (Courtney et al., 2017). Current literature and research show that a successful PLC is defined by how well diverse and inclusive practices are embraced to build community. A diverse environment is crucial; there must be an environment that lacks judgment, offers voice equity, and provides the opportunity to adjust members’ perspectives. All members must pay close attention to how the PLC is established, valuing diverse viewpoints that cultivate strong communication skills (Azama, 2020). Research shows that organizational leadership, including the diverse workforce behind them, plays an important role in achieving inclusive institutions guided 225

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Learning Communities

by cultural awareness and mutual respect (U.S. Department of Education, 2016). PLCs, for example, are instrumental in fostering those elements for an inclusive work setting and can include all members of the organization’s workforce as long as they have a shared goal in mind. A PLC is an inclusive entity and a strategic tool that will positively reflect the entire institutional workforce by nurturing a better representation and support for each member. Conversely, the lack of exposure to particular diversity elements or a less inclusive setting can promote bias or ignorance and limit members’ cultural competency and awareness (Meaby, 2018). Research highlights that when members are directly involved or chosen to become actively involved in a PLC’s collaborative process, they are exposed to new practices, creative approaches, and even begin to endorse equality and diversity (Meaby, 2018). Wright et al. (2019) suggest that the development of approaches for understanding the experiences and positionality of an organization’s workforce can potentially inform how an organization approaches the design of future professional learning environments. Collaborative teams offer a framework for inclusivity and an environment to welcome diverse voices and even challenge them. A safe environment that welcomes radical vulnerability offers self-reflective opportunities to explore prejudices and biases, helps break down any communication barriers, and foster productivity (Meaby, 2018). The foundation of a professional learning community is collaboration. According to Biro (2013), collaboration is the key to a successful team. Consequently, when team members collaborate, focus on the mission, ask questions, and focus on the task at hand, each member’s best efforts and attributes are revealed, which is evident in the final deliverable. Individuals from all backgrounds, fields, departments, and hierarchical levels of an organization come together to work for a common goal that benefits the individual and the organization — this is the essence of a PLC. Mattessich and Johnson (2018) characterize collaboration as a defined and mutually beneficial relationship, including a commitment to shared goals and responsibility accountability, resources, and rewards. This definition truly highlights the nature of the PLC collaborative effort as they encourage and require collaboration to function effectively (Battersby & Verdi, 2015). A 2017 study found that around 40% of workers feel that there is not enough collaboration in the workplace (David, 2017). According to the same study, factors that would encourage collaboration include positive recognition of input shared (50% of participants stated this), general encouragement from senior staff, and sharing feedback with different departments easily. Collaboration is a powerful tool for professional development that can offer a sense of upward mobility and organizational support (Tallman, 2020). As with diversity and inclusivity, research on PLC collaboration exists within two fields of thought. The first highlights how PLCs can be a catalyst for creating a more macro-level, collaborative environment. In this sense, PLCs can be highly 226

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Professional Learning Communities

beneficial for organizations that tend to have siloed departments or isolated specialist employees who generally do not receive much support due to the nature of their work. The structure and interaction of mandatory meetings and shared goals can help create a collaborative environment that breaks down communication barriers within the organization and builds a community culture. A professional culture by design can offer a supportive environment, but depending on the longevity of hierarchical and communication practices, an innovative strategy such as a PLC would prove beneficial (Battersby & Verdi, 2015). The value people place on relationships strongly influences whether they participate and how they collaborate (Cullinan, 2018). The other field of thought regarding collaboration and PLCs focuses on how people can effectively collaborate within a professional learning community. The authors of this chapter place greater focus on this field of research because it supports the successful implementation of a PLC and highlights why PLCs are vital for collaboration. Research supports the implementation of innovative tools for an otherwise inclusive environment focused on a shared mission. PLCs are a proven way to build stronger rapport, reinforcing a collaborative foundation to create an even greater collaborative culture to address difficult issues that may arise. Mattessich and Johnson (2018) highlight factors that influence the success of a collaborative effort to benefit PLCs, and these factors include environment, membership, structure, communication, purpose, and resources. Focusing on these elements and the concept of distributive leadership is an essential aspect of PLCs. It reinforces shared commitment, responsibility, and standards so the PLC can focus on outcomes while strengthening the collective (Whalen et al., 2019). A PLC creates an environment that develops a complex interdependent communication process for a comprehensive community of collaborators (Rheingold, 2005). Therefore, the process needs to be nurtured with compassionate communication, showing appreciation of what each member offers, and use the shared goal or deliverable as guidance for this communication (Manning et al., 2012). With the shared goal in mind, gaining momentum and workflow can happen more efficiently and create a positive groupthink outcome, ensuring collaboration that is generally in line with the organization’s values (Levene, 2017; Evans, 2018). Goudreau (2012) proposes a positive strategy to embrace collaborative communication by noting the importance of keeping communication results-oriented, being sensible, voicing concerns, avoiding “I” statements, and noting nonverbal cues. Research shows that PLCs welcoming this type of collaborative communication tend to achieve surprising results and even attract individuals to the PLC who might otherwise have avoided the interaction altogether (Wolff, 2018).

227

Professional Learning Communities

Figure 2. Characteristics of a PLC

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. Characteristics of a PLC are important to keep in mind as they can serve as a guide for group function, goal setting, and overall effectiveness. Adapted from Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work™ by R. DuFour, R. DuFour, R. Eaker, and T. Many, 2006, Solution Tree. Copyright 2006 by Solution Tree Press.

228

Professional Learning Communities

PROFESSIONAL LEARNING COMMUNITIES Professional learning communities benefit the organization as a whole and each member that is actively participating. They offer a unique opportunity to create an inclusive, diverse community to share knowledge and understand one another. Figure 2 shows the characteristics of a PLC, which include collaboration, vision, shared leadership, and individual growth. Each has a macro effect for any educational institution and therefore, PLCs should be utilized as a strategic tool for success (Owen, 2016). PLCs offer an opportunity to cross interdepartmental boundaries, organizational hierarchies and bring diverse groups together in an environment working towards a common goal. This fosters collaboration and contributes to an inclusive educational setting. When members rely on the structured gatherings that PLCs offer and continue this routine for an extended period of time, this can lead to a re-energized workforce excited about new ideas, working with new people, and even working for their respective organization (Owen, 2016; Berry, 2019). While the initial advantage of creating a PLC is paramount, the secondary benefits that individual members can gain are quite extensive. Individual benefits from PLCs can include professional development, potential organizational upward mobility, and most importantly, a sense of community and belonging. While technology helps connect, digital work environments can evoke a strong sense of isolation due to siloed departments within an organization or even general communication barriers. Yet, PLCs serve as a bridge to alleviate the feeling of isolation, especially in a virtual environment. Trust within a PLC is a key component. That trust can resonate to build friendships, stronger bonds amongst colleagues, and even a sense of security to take chances by making additional contributions to the organization. There are many characteristics of a PLC beneficial to an organization and gratifying to each of its members. No matter the desired outcomes, PLCs are a strategic tool for an intellectual community to emphasize their commitment to learning. PLC members rally around actionable results and create a community where diversity and inclusivity collide to create a culture of collaboration.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Implementation Strategies and Functionality While PLCs are often interdepartmental and interdisciplinary groups, it is an important distinction to make that a PLC is not merely another committee or meeting obligation. A defining feature of PLCs is that team members work interdependently and are “mutually accountable” to one another (DuFour, 2015). A genuine PLC experience is focused on collaboration and encourages a meaningful exchange of ideas with the collective purpose of achieving the desired outcome within a learning environment (DuFour & Reeves, 2015). When forming a PLC, remember that the 229

Professional Learning Communities

PLC process is collaborative and that there should be forethought given to the organizational culture, including the members’ mindset, philosophy, expectations, and commitments (DuFour, 2015). PLCs members are from varying professional experience levels, and thus, depending on the goal, mission, and overall objective, these elements must be closely considered for efficient PLC functioning. Depending on how the PLC is implemented, group members may be assigned, they may choose their PLC, or participation in a PLC may be completely optional. The goal is to ignite excitement for involvement and collaboration amongst colleagues. These elements are dependent on the desired results and outcomes of the larger department, district, etc. For instance, if a department has an overarching challenge that they would like to find a solution to, multiple PLCs may be created to disperse responsibilities and problem solve from different perspectives.

Figure 3. The Initial Formation and Implementation of a PLC: Items to Consider

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. Working collaboratively requires a certain level of clarity on desired outcomes and is done so more effectively with proper planning in the beginning stages. Adapted from Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work™ (pp. 60-61), by R. DuFour, R. DuFour, R. Eaker, and T. Many, 2006, Solution Tree. Copyright 2006 by Solution Tree Press.

230

Professional Learning Communities

Figure 4. The Four Pillars of a PLC

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. The four pillars of a PLC are the basis for this type of collaborative workgroup. The foundational framework works to guide focus and outcomes for the PLC. Adapted from Learning by Doing: A Handbook for Professional Learning Communities at Work™ (pp. 124), by R. DuFour, R. DuFour, R. Eaker, and T. Many, 2006, Solution Tree. Copyright 2006 by Solution Tree Press.

The formation and implementation of a PLC can occur in various ways and largely depends on the number of people involved; the size of the department, district, or organization (whoever is participating); and the desired outcome(s). Figure 3 illustrates a general overview of the initial steps to creating and implementing a PLC, but again, this is customizable to fit the organization’s needs. It is important to remember that every step in the PLC process is collaborative and that there is a level of flexibility to accommodate emerging changes and ideas. The intent behind the design of a PLC is collaborative culture, and this is essential to keep in mind during the development phases. One such instance is finding the “why” of the PLC and ensuring that all team members support that. Depending on how and why a PLC or PLCs were implemented initially, leadership or a leadership team might decide the desired outcome. Again, to operate as a truly interdependent and collaborative team, each member must embrace and support the overall purpose.

231

Professional Learning Communities

While group roles in a PLC are not required, they may organically form, and in this instance, it is helpful to have a group member act as the administrator for the group’s collaborative work. Ultimately, this will help maintain open collaboration and communication and consolidate all PLC work into one centralized workspace accessible to the group. It is good practice to focus on systems so that the desired outcomes naturally occur as a result. Remember, there must be a shared value and awareness of the organization’s current reality and the desired outcomes to effectively meet students’ needs and ultimately create an ideal, inclusive learning environment.

DuFour Model of Professional Learning Communities The DuFour model of professional learning communities is perhaps the most widely used and is arguably the one that pioneered the practice and implementation of PLCs. While this model was initially developed for K–12 school districts, it has become a readily applied model to all levels of education and beyond to various other professional disciplines. Defining characteristics include focusing on learning, facilitating a culture of collaboration, and exercising a results-oriented approach overall. DuFour et al. at Solution Tree (2006) developed the Professional Learning Community at Work™ model, which provides guiding principles and necessary elements for an effective and productive PLC in a learning environment. The model was founded in education but has become a model applied across many disciplines and professions. As can be seen in Figure 4, the model is based on four pillars that serve as the foundation for all work outlined in a PLC — mission, vision, values, goals.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Conflict and Communication While PLCs are an effective strategy in education and beyond, like with any group setting, there are uncertainties, challenges, and the possibility for unavoidable conflict. The foundations of PLCs lay the groundwork for achieving shared missions, goals, and visions of a collaborative culture in education; however, any working group of the most dedicated members is likely to experience the inevitability of group conflict or communication breakdowns. In a PLC, the goal is to encourage each member to contribute their unique skill sets to accomplish goals and highlight the efficiency of working as a collaborative group. But again, relative to standard communication networks, PLC group members should be mindful of how to overcome communication breakdowns, ensuring the overall effectiveness of the PLC.

232

Professional Learning Communities

Figure 5. The Five Dysfunctions of a Team

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Note. Using the five dysfunctions of a team as a framework in a group setting can give a framework for possible conflicts and allow for more effective problem-solving. From The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable (p. 188), by Patrick Lencioni, 2002, Wiley. Copyright 2002 by Patrick Lencioni.

Patrick Lencioni (2002) presents five dysfunctions of a team that reflect challenges teams or groups face during collaborative work (see Figure 5). The goal of highlighting these possible disruptions during workflow is to anticipate the conflict trends and try to avoid them if possible. Conflict can present opportunity in the form of mutual respect, understanding, and even contribute to the generation of new ideas. Still, the overall group cohesiveness and willingness to collaborate in this arena are pivotal. Familiarity with the five dysfunctions of a team model can help a PLC consider possible solutions to conflict during their ongoing work. Awareness of these group vulnerabilities will ultimately contribute to better group functioning and more effective workflow towards the end goal and the learning environment. Starting from the bottom, the absence of trust might be probable if group members are working together for the first time. This might be especially true in a virtual team. Foundations of trust are critical for team functioning and will likely develop over time and through the showcase of group members’ ongoing work. It is not 233

Professional Learning Communities

uncommon for there to be a fear of conflict when working in a group since it could derail productivity. However, studies have shown that conflict results in positive outcomes most of the time, but in a virtual environment in particular, there is likely to be less conflict (Walker, 2019). A PLC is formed to confront a shared goal or outcome, and there is the potential for conflict if there is a lack of commitment. Conflict might arise as group members’ level of dedication to the desired outcome differs or resistant to the outcome in general. Still, a group member may not agree with a decision and might appear to lack commitment to the group. Depending on group formation and development, some PLC members may not feel accountable for contributing to the tasks at hand. All members of a PLC should remain accountable to one another to maintain group cohesion and collaboration. Encourage open dialogue and work through conflict with the optimism of coming out with new ideas and successful problemsolving. Tactful and constructive criticism can also help to mitigate instances of accountability avoidance. Lastly, if members of a PLC are not focused on results, this can hinder group functioning and productivity. Remember, a PLC’s mission is to enhance or improve a learning environment, which must be done by focusing on desired outcomes. Lencioni concludes The Five Dysfunctions of a Team: A Leadership Fable (2002, pp. 190) by presenting a more optimistic perspective for groups to consider, and that is that a collaborative team will:

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Trust each other. Engage in conflict as a way to arrive at new ideas. Committed to decisions and systems that lead to desired actions. Maintain group accountability for each member. Focus on results.

This chapter focuses on the more optimistic perspective, presents a possible conflict for contrast, and approaches implementing PLCs with forethought to these possibilities. People generally respond to communication issues within a workplace context, focusing on themselves, leading to an adversarial environment. This can be avoided if strategic planning is applied beginning with the implementation stages of a PLC. There should be full transparency of expectations and a clear outline of group accountability. A benefit of a PLC is transforming staff members’ view of conflict as an adversary to being a source of creative energy (DuFour et al., 2006).

234

Professional Learning Communities

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS As previously explored, there can be conflict or challenges that a PLC can face. The biggest challenge any PLC faces is group cohesion. Getting all members to embrace a shared vision requires a collective effort, open dialogue, and dedicated time. While implementation strategies have been presented in this chapter, remember that a critical component to buy-in is that all members be present at the first group meeting. PLCs can face a significant regression if members who want to join or are assigned to a specific PLC do not attend the first meeting as the vision is being developed. The first meeting is also a time when group cohesion is happening in general introductions and open discussion — a general getting to know one another. If a member is absent, this can create a setback and potentially lead to a lack of interest and accountability for the duration of the PLC’s work. Collective involvement is critical. Members can begin to feel like a PLC is more of a task or obligation if expectations are not set at the onset of the PLC. The community aspect of a PLC helps create an energized atmosphere in which working on new ideas or projects leads to exciting and useful outcomes. A PLC seen as a task or requirement will take away from the positive elements of a PLC. Another challenge for PLCs can be the online environment. Establishing a PLC online can have unique setbacks, including members in various time zones, varying technology availability, and the sense that the PLC is another task to be completed. PLCs can be fully sustained online and offer a wide array of benefits, including creating a sense of community and a broader sense of professional development (Blayone et al., 2017). PLCs are an incredibly effective way to create a sense of bonding with colleagues and open potential avenues of interest in the online environment. PLCs can erase any otherwise siloed interactions experienced from working in an online environment when fully established online. Time commitment is perhaps the most significant recommendation for successfully running an online PLC. Adhering to specific meeting times is vital as this may be the only time people in this type of group setting will ever cross paths. Social interaction during PLC meetings can encourage many positive outcomes in this online community effort, including aligning group member interests and sharing general knowledge about the organization. PLCs that operate exclusively online can promote professional development and benefit organizational culture by building a greater sense of community and belonging.

CONCLUSION PLCs are an opportunity for enhanced collaboration and motivate group members to develop learning strategies for diverse student populations and beyond. The 235

Professional Learning Communities

innumerable benefits of PLCs are not solely focused on collaboration but extend to each group member’s personal and professional development. Having a purposeful intention and appropriate PLC model as a guide, education professionals can focus on gaining clear results to improve student learning and success and group member efficacy and retention. As technology becomes even more essential to connect across the workplace, educators and professionals should see it as a catalyst for collaboration and a necessary PLC tool. Learning and success are the primary goals of educators everywhere, and there is no shortage of ways to get there. Professional learning communities are merely one way to achieve organizational outcomes or goals, and they are an incredibly beneficial tool to advance inclusive learning environments. PLCs are an invaluable strategic tool that thrives on each member’s unique contributions and where diversity and inclusivity collide to create a culture of collaboration.

REFERENCES Azama, Y. (2020). Leveraging diversity and inclusivity in Japanese teacher community in an American high school district. Japanese Language and Literature, 54(2), 415–421. Advance online publication. doi:10.5195/jll.2020.135 Battersby, S. L., & Verdi, B. (2015). The culture of professional learning communities and connections to improve teacher efficacy and support student learning. Arts Education Policy Review, 116(1), 22–25. doi:10.1080/10632913.2015.970096 Berry, S. (2019). Faculty perspectives on online learning: The instructor’s role in creating community. Online Learning, 23(4), 181–191. doi:10.24059/olj.v23i4.2038

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Biro, M. (2013, March 3). Smart leaders and the power of collaboration. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/meghanbiro/2013/03/03/smart-leaders-and-the-powerof-collaboration/ Blayone, T., vanOostveen, R., Barber, W., DiGiuseppe, M., & Childs, E. (2017). Democratizing digital learning: Theorizing the fully online learning community model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 1–16. doi:10.118641239-017-0051-4 Brown, B. D., Horn, R. S., & King, G. (2018). The effective implementation of professional learning communities. Alabama Journal of Educational Leadership, 5, 53–59.

236

Professional Learning Communities

Clemons, M., & Hopkins, T. (2020). Facilitating success: Using self-regulated learning and servant leadership in the college classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning With Technology, 9(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.14434/jotlt.v9i1.29176 Courtney, M. B., Constantine, J., & Trosper, J. (2017). Best practices guidebook: Professional learning communities. Bluegrass Center for Teacher Quality, Inc. Cullinan, R. (2018, July 24). In collaborative work cultures, women carry more weight. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/07/in-collaborative-workcultures-women-carry-more-of-the-weight David, S. (2017, September 17). The power of team collaboration in the workplace. Huffington Post. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/zach-cutler/the-power-ofteamcollabo_b_5836742.html DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership: Schools as Learning Communities, 61(8), 6–11. http://www.ascd.org/ publications/educational-leadership/may04/vol61/num08/what-is-a-professionallearning-community.aspx DuFour, R. (2015). In praise of American educators. Solution Tree. DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learn by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Solution Tree. Eisenberg, E. M., Goodall, H. L. Jr, & Trethewey, A. (2010). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint (6th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin’s. Evans, L. (2018, December 19). Why you should completely change the way you view collaboration. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/90279110/howto-change-the-way-you-think-about-collaboration Goudreau, J. (2012, October 8). The secret art of negotiation: Take your ego off the table. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2012/10/08/the-secretart-of-negotiating-take-your-ego-off-the-table/

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Greene, J. M. (2019). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Guirdham, M., & Guirdham, O. (2017). Communicating across cultures at work (4th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-52637-3 Hardman, E. (2015). How pedagogy 2.0 can foster teacher preparation and community building in special education. Social Inclusion (Lisboa), 3(6), 42–55. doi:10.17645i. v3i6.415 237

Professional Learning Communities

Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2009). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (6th ed.). Pearson. Levene, J. (2016, September 5). Solving the problem with problem-solving meetings. Professional Development. https://www.extension.harvard.edu/professionaldevelopment/blog/solving-problem-problem-solving-meetings Littlejohn, S. (2002). Theories of human communication (7th ed.). Wadsworth/ Thomas Learning. Manning, C., Waldman, M. R., Lindsey, W. E., & Newberg, A. (2012). Personal inner values: A key to effective face-to-face business communication. Journal of Executive Education, 11(1), 37–65. Mattessich, P. W., & Johnson, K. M. (2018). Collaboration: What makes it work (3rd ed.). Wilder. Meaby, V. (2018). Establishing professional learning communities to support the promotion of equality and celebration of diversity: Reflections from a north-east community learning teacher. Teaching in Lifelong Learning, 8(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.5920/till.538 Mumby, D., & Kuhn, T. (2018). Organizational communication: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Sage. Myers, C. B., & Meyers, L. K. (1995). The professional educator: A new introduction to teaching and schools. Wadsworth. National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2010). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: A knowledge synthesis. https://www2.wested. org/www-static/online_pubs/resource1097.pdf

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Owen, S. (2016). Professional learning communities: Building skills, reinvigorating the passion, nurturing teacher wellbeing and “flourishing” within significantly innovative school contexts. Educational Review, 68(4), 403–419. doi:10.1080/00 131911.2015.1119101 Rheingold, H. (2005). The new power of collaboration [Video]. TED. https://www. ted.com/talks/howard_rheingold_on_collaboration Schien, S. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley. Schon, D. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on the educational practice. Teachers College Press.

238

Professional Learning Communities

Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization (4th ed.). Doubleday, Random House. Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. F. (2000). Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Routledge. Tallman, T. (2020). How teachers experience collaboration. Journal of Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0022057420908063 U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Advancing diversity and inclusion in higher education: Key data highlights focusing on race and ethnicity and promising practices. https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/advancing-diversity-inclusion.pdf Whalen, S., Swain, S., Fedele-McLeod, M., & Thacher, M. (2019). Professional learning communities in prisons. Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education, 94–98.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Wolff, B. (2018, August 14). The future of work is creative collaboration. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminwolff/2018/08/14/the-future-of-work-iscreative-collaboration/#74c464c03228

239

240

Chapter 10

Instruction Expanded:

Culturally-Mediated Talent Development and Inclusive Access Jessica Manzone University of Southern California, USA Julia Nyberg Purdue University Global, USA

ABSTRACT

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The concept of inclusiveness encompasses more than just the integration of students with special needs into the general education setting. It involves modifying and reorienting access to the curriculum so that the learning experience encourages talent development that reinforces scholarly traits that are refective of the needs, interests, abilities, and cultural backgrounds of the learners in the classroom. In this chapter, the authors overlay two instructional strategies for classroom teachers—scholarly traits and the talent development model—and articulate how they can reinforce the building blocks of a culturally mediated and inclusive learning environment that broadens access to the curriculum. The goal of this chapter is to model how research-based pedagogical strategies can be altered to intersect, tailored to reinforce, and reworked to be responsive using aspects of universal design for learning and culturally-mediated instructional practices to create inclusive learning experiences for all students.

DOI: 10.4018/978-1-7998-6816-3.ch010 Copyright © 2021, IGI Global. Copying or distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.

Instruction Expanded

THE CONNECTION BETWEEN INCLUSION AND EQUITABLE ACCESS FOR TEACHERS The need for equity pedagogy and inclusivity is not new. For decades educational theorists and classroom practitioners have argued that experiences for some learners have not been equal or equitable to that of others. In 1975, Congress passed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in response to the growing concern that the education for learners with special needs was not equal to that of their peers. The IDEA consisted of several key requirements; one of which focused specifically on the learning environment or the setting in which students would receive their instruction. Defined as the least restrictive environment, this requirement stated that children with disabilities should be educated with general learners “to the maximum extent possible” (Lipkin, et. al, 2015, p. 1651). This requirement led to the creation of the term inclusion. Inclusion was first presented as a pedagogical practice in 1994 at the World Conference on Special Needs and became a globally mandated practice in 2006 by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Krischler et al, 2019). Inclusion can be defined both specifically (placement) and generally (social and academic needs). Placement inclusion refers to the location where students receive their instruction and involve the integration of students with special needs into the general classroom (Krischler et al, 2019). Inclusion can also be generalized to include the relationship that all learners have with the learning experience. Under this definition, the learning experience has been designed to promote active engagement in all learners with support in place to help all learners reach their learning goals (Krischler et al, 2019). The connection between inclusion and equity under the general definition is critical. Francisco, et. al, (2020) contend that inclusion benefits all learners, not just learners with special needs. However, that does not mean that we can treat all students in the same manner. Pedagogical practices must be modified to account for the specific needs of English Learners, students of color, students in rural areas, students from low socio-economic households, and students with disabilities.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Culturally Mediated Instruction: A Move Towards Inclusive Access Inclusion can no longer respond solely to students who are special needs but must consider the needs of students who have been historically underserved and systemically marginalized. These needs include the inclusion of the linguistic and cultural plurality that exists in our classrooms. Culture represents behaviors and beliefs that are learned and exhibited by groups of people (Yosso, 2005). Culture is then shared through the development of concrete and abstract products. Yoon (2020) argues that students 241

Instruction Expanded

of color have “ghosts of trauma” that center around cultural constructs associated with race, identity, systemic racism, and poverty. Trauma has been reinforced by a deficit perspective in a society that has dismissed the cultural knowledge and skills from marginalized groups as valid forms of contribution (Freire, 1973). Inclusive practices must take these variables into account and utilize pedagogical strategies and organizational structures that “affirm the personhood” of children of color (Yoon, 2020, p. 3). For inclusion to truly accomplish the goal of supporting the needs of all learners, it must utilize supports that are culturally mediated, thereby empowering the cultural knowledge and skills of all learners in the classroom. Culturally mediated instruction was initially proposed as an element of culturally responsive pedagogy by Ladson-Billings (1994). In this element of responsive pedagogy, the educator purposefully integrates diverse cultural ways of understanding and representing information during instruction. Designing instruction that encourages students to be active participants in learning invites individuals to share their perspectives about their own cultural and social experiences (Nieto, 1996). Integrating culture into the curriculum can reduce stereotypes and force learners to reexamine their implicit biases. Culturally mediated instruction validates and reaffirms the student’s culture, allowing the culture of previously marginalized groups to be restored and sustained over time (Ladson-Billings, 2014).

Universal Design for Learning (UDL): A Move Towards Equitable Access UDL provides principles for the classroom teacher that contribute to creating equitable access in a learning experience. UDL offers three ways in which a teacher can increase access in their lessons: • •

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

•

Multiple Means of Representation: The teacher can modify how learners comprehend information during the lesson (CAST, 2018) Multiple Means of Action and Expression: The teacher can establish ways for students to express what they know during the learning experience (CAST, 2018) Multiple Means of Engagement: The teacher can engage learners in various ways, and subsequently providing motivation for their desire to learn (CAST, 2018)

The guidelines suggested by UDL serve to increase access to the learning experience by responding to the social, emotional, developmental, and academic needs of the learner in these three facets of the learning experience.

242

Instruction Expanded

CONVERGING THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Laying the Foundation: Equity Pedagogy and Curriculum Reform for Scholars and Society The culturally mediated definition of inclusion forces the educator to examine equitable access to the development of academic and intellectual potential for students from all ethnic, socioeconomic, and linguistic groups, with a disproportionate emphasis on those who are Black or African American, American Indian, English Learners, and those students who have special needs. Expanding the definition of inclusion to include underrepresented and underserved groups, who have experienced educational prejudice over time also requires an examination and a reorientation of the curriculum as well as pedagogical strategies used to enact that curriculum. In 1949, Ralph Tyler wrote a book titled Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction. In this text, he outlines three sources that must be considered when designing effective curricular experiences: scholars, society, and students. In response to a diverse student population, Bennett (2019) would infuse two dimensions of multicultural education into Tyler’s (1949) curriculum design stance: equity pedagogy and curriculum reform. The curriculum must be designed with both authenticity for the subject matter and flexibility for new ideas and diverse perspectives. Tyler’s (1949) reference to the scholars highlights how any meaningful learning experience must be based on the concepts and ideas of subject matter experts, and Bennett (2019) would suggest they need to come from a variety of multiethnic and global perspectives. This encourages the learner to examine the disciplines and the universal concepts and big ideas that transcend all knowledge domains, whereas the teacher is required to adopt an inquiry approach with the curriculum to include the contributions of scholars who represent diverse groups and perspectives (Tyler, 1949; Bennett, 2019). The link between seminal (scholars) and contemporary ideas (society) provides the foundation necessary for the development of complex learning. The curriculum does not exist in a vacuum. It must reflect the problems, practices, and values of society. The curriculum must address current aspects of society such as structural inequities and systemic patterns of suppression, including, but not limited to, racism, sexism, classism, sexuality, and prejudice against religion or disability (Sleeter & Grant, 2009; Bennett, 2019). Learners can engage in the study of current events, solve problems in interdisciplinary ways, and critically analyze the perspectives of diverse scholars that focus on changing the attitudes and behaviors of the dominant group (Teaching Tolerance, 2016). Finally, the curriculum must be connected to the learners for whom it has been designed, reflecting an equity pedagogy approach that is responsive to the school and classroom climate (Bennett, 2019). The needs, interests, abilities, culture, and funds of knowledge from the community from students matter, and 243

Instruction Expanded

must be reflected in the experiences and resources built into the curriculum (Moll et al., 1992; González et al., 2005). Bransford et, al., (2000) contend that meaningful curricular experiences provide students with opportunities to get excited about the content, make connections to their own lives, and apply what they have learned in authentic ways to the community that surrounds them. An equity pedagogy approach would create fair and equal opportunities to develop the potential for every student in the classroom, ensuring teacher expectations, community relations, and the classroom climate is conducive to talent development (Bennett, 2019). Students are the true consumers of curriculum and must see themselves and their community in the lessons, experiences, and resources in the classroom. Merging Tyler’s (1949) and Bennett’s (2019) rationale, an inclusive curriculum for all learners must include pedagogical strategies that are contextually responsive and culturally mediated. The curriculum must be universally designed to promote access to knowledge acquisition and cultivate talent development and potential with the total student population. The following questions could be used to determine the degree to which any curriculum or set of experiences connects with the scholars, society, and students through equity pedagogy and curriculum reform lens. Gaps in one or more of these areas could be a great place for teachers and school site administrators to start designing more inclusive classrooms.

Questions to Target Equity Pedagogy • •

In what ways does the curriculum adapt to changes in student inquiry in response to problems, practices, and values of the community (society and students)? What is the philosophical stance of the curriculum? Does that stance align with the needs, interests, abilities, and cultural beliefs of the learners in my classroom, school, and community (society and students)?

Questions to Target Curriculum Reform

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

• •

244

What types of knowledge domains are targeted in the curriculum? Are there opportunities for students to move from facts to concepts to big ideas (scholars)? Do the learning experiences presented in the curriculum represent various points of view and use diverse primary, fction, and non-fction sources to facilitate a culture of inclusion (scholars, society, and students)?

Instruction Expanded

THE PILLARS FOR INSTRUCTIONAL ACTION: SCHOLARLY TRAITS AND TALENT DEVELOPMENT The authors of this chapter contend that two major shifts in curriculum reform and equity pedagogy must occur under this culturally mediated definition of inclusion: (a) the development of intellectualism via scholarly traits, and (b) the integration of talent development into core learning experiences. Both shifts function like Tyler’s (1949) screens and should be activated and approached through the lens of culturally mediated instruction. Figure 1 illustrates the interrelationship between these elements of pedagogical practice. Each element can exist on its own within a curriculum. This chapter outlines a description with examples of how each screen can be used as a means of creating inclusive learning experiences in the classroom. The screens can also overlap to create an integrated and layered approach to curriculum design. Under this paradigm, the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) act as a common thread; a unifying element that weaves together pedagogical strategies from each screen. This allows teachers to build targeted, connected, and inclusive learning experiences rather than disjointed activities. Teachers can begin the process of inclusivity by examining their current curriculum to determine the degree to which the screens of scholarly traits and talent development are present.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 1. Converging Theoretical Frameworks for Instructional Action: Scholarly Traits and Talent Development

The first step of curriculum reform requires that teachers philosophically believe that context and community are important. They must get to know the community; the people, the beliefs, the culture, and the mores of the learners in their classroom. 245

Instruction Expanded

The knowledge of who students are, as learners and as people, can then be filtered through each of the screens, as depicted in Figure 1. This moves the curriculum from a one-size-fits-all approach to something that is much more individualized. Inclusivity demands personalization.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

A CONNECTING MORTAR: UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING This chapter was written for and by classroom teachers. The authors were inspired by Waitoller and Thorius’ (2016) piece titled Cross-Pollinating Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Towards an Inclusive Pedagogy that Accounts for Dis/Ability. In this article published in the Harvard Education Review, Waitoller and Thorius (2016) articulate the intersection that exists between two asset pedagogies: culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning (UDL). They highlight how teachers must “design and implement goals, materials, instructional methods, and assessments that account for complex identities and cultural repertoires their students bring” (Waitroller and Thorius, 2016, p. 384). The authors of this chapter have attempted to actualize the areas of overlap described by Waitroller and Thorius (2016) by creating a series of questions and classroom examples that teachers can use to modify any curricular program or grade level as the means of developing inclusive access for all learners. This chapter outlines research-based pedagogical practices: scholar identity, and talent development and demonstrates how they can be reorganized and reoriented to promote culturally mediated inclusion. The goal of this chapter is to provide classroom teachers with a practical understanding of how to translate these strategies into culturally mediated, inclusive learning opportunities that connect to assets in the student’s home and community. Universal Design for Learning (UDL) encourages the type of pedagogy that is personalized for students and within the control of the classroom teacher. UDL provides principles that can act as a roadmap to creating inclusive classrooms in a learning environment. UDL also offers a flexible way in which a teacher can determine three critical variables related to a learning experience: (a) the “what” of acquiring knowledge, or how learners comprehend information during knowledge acquisition (CAST, 2018), (b) the “how” of acquiring knowledge, enabling students to express what they know during the learning experience (CAST, 2018), and (c) the “why” of acquiring knowledge, providing a foundation for engaging various learners, and subsequently providing motivation for their desire to learn (CAST, 2018). These guidelines serve as major access points for teachers as they plan as well as make in-real-time modifications to learning experiences based on the social, emotional, developmental, and academic needs of the learner. Table 1 has been cultivated from 246

Instruction Expanded

the original UDL framework (CAST, 2018) and represents a subset of the larger list of strategies available to classroom teachers. Table 1. UDL Strategies Multiple Means of Engagement

Multiple Means of Representation

Include options for self-regulation during the learning experience Include options for sustaining effort and persistence during the learning experience Include options for recurring interest during the learning experience (CAST, 2018)

Include options for comprehension during the learning experience Include options for language, mathematical expression, and symbols during the learning experience Include options for perception during the learning experience (CAST, 2018)

Multiple Means of Expression Include options for executive functions during the learning experience Include options for expressive skills and fluency during the learning experience Include options for physical activity during the learning experience(CAST, 2018)

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The UDL guidelines can be combined with Bennettt’s (2019) concept of equity pedagogy with a curriculum reform stance to design an instructional experience for an inclusive learning environment. The intersection of UDL, equity pedagogy, and curriculum reform reshapes the concept of inclusion to develop the potential for all students from various ethnic, linguistic, socioeconomic, and personal backgrounds. The following chart extends the original strategies presented in the UDL framework (CAST, 2018) to include a series of guiding questions written from the perspective of equity-based pedagogy. Combining the frameworks of UDL and equity-based pedagogy into a learning experience reduces the barriers to knowledge acquisition necessary for all learners to be successful. Applying these guidelines to a classroom environment further enhances the learning experience, transforming it from passive to active engagement. The many and varied access points created in a learning experience promote inclusion. The framework and strategies provided by UDL and equity pedagogy serve as both a conceptual and practical orientation for this chapter as described in Table 2.

247

Instruction Expanded

Table 2. Integrating Equity Pedagogy with UDL Strategies UDL Strategy

Multiple Means of Engagement

UDL Access Point

Integration of Equity Pedagogy Guiding Question

Options for Recruiting Interest

How can community contexts serve as a means to engage and motivate learners?

Options for Sustaining Effort and Persistence

How can learners collaborate with the community?

Options for SelfRegulation Options for Perception Multiple Means of Representation

Options for Language and Symbols Options for Comprehension Options for Physical Action

Multiple Means of Action & Expression

How can the teacher’s expectations and beliefs be equitable and motivating for all students? How can content match the learner’s cultural norms for auditory input and visual means to share information? How can the information be shared and communicated in a variety of languages? In what ways can the learner comprehend culturally responsive information? How can learners respond using a variety of mediums that reflect their cultural norms for communication?

Options for Expression and Communication

In what ways can the learner express themselves in a variety of ways that are reflective of their cultural and linguistic means of representation?

Options for Executive Functions

How can the learner set goals that are reflective of their cultural values?

CREATING CULTURALLY MEDIATED INCLUSIVE ACCESS

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Taking Action in Your Instruction: Empowering Scholarly Traits Tomlinson et. al (2009), argues that intelligence is developmental and that it is affected, either positively or negatively, by environment and opportunity. Intelligence is also expressed and defined differently in various cultures and in ways that align with people’s socio-cultural context. The education system has a history of not recognizing and validating the cultural knowledge, skills, abilities, and intelligence possessed by marginalized groups and communities of color (Yosso, 2005). Bourdieu and Passeron (1977) argued that knowledge and intelligence of the upper and middle class were reinforced through the hierarchical values in the education system. The premise that certain groups, identified by race, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or disability, have a deficit and lack the social and cultural capital to advance the intellectual cannon must be challenged and dismantled in an inclusive classroom. With an equity pedagogy stance, educators should examine the origins of knowledge and the identities associated with intelligence to promote talent, skills, and abilities of all students, but particularly those who have been historically marginalized and oppressed (Anzaldúa, 1990; Bennett, 2019). 248

Instruction Expanded

According to Sternberg’s theory of intelligence (1996), the development of intellectualism is based on three factors: (a) the recognition of strengths and the belief that everyone is good at something, (b) the ability to compensate for one’s challenges with the understanding that no one excels at everything, and (c) the ability to adjust and adapt one’s thinking or behavior to the environmental conditions of a situation or setting. Kaplan, et al., (2009) defines the development of intellectual attributes as “scholarly behaviors.” Scholarly behaviors represent a series of affective dispositions or traits that individuals embody and employ as they engage in the study of a topic or a discipline. Educators can provide opportunities for learners to mold scholarly traits to their socio-cultural profile through questions, projects, and authentic learning experiences in the community. Introducing all learners to scholarly traits and building a classroom culture around these behaviors helps promote inclusion in the classroom. All learners have the right to develop intellectual dispositions and engage in the types of thinking activated by these traits. The series of scholarly behaviors are defined below and can be introduced to students as the means of empowering intellectual growth and talent development in all learners in the classroom. •

Scholars engage in the art of questioning

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

The art of questioning represents the ability to not only answer questions but encourages them to ask questions as well (Kaplan et al., 2009). Students engage in the art of questioning when they can make distinctions between the various types of questions, determine the relationship that exists between a question and a response, and formulate a series or chain of questions within a line of thinking. The student is encouraged to ask questions that incorporate their inquiry in relation to themselves, their relationship to the community, and their wonderings about the world. The art of questioning is at the heart of individualization, choice, autonomy, and critical thinking and can be built explicitly into classroom learning experiences to empower authentic inquiry. Enabling student questions to drive the inquiry process empowers marginalized and underrepresented students to become the holders and creators of knowledge (Delgado Bernal, 2002). •

Scholars engage in academic risk-taking

Academic risk-taking is the ability to enter into a brave and safe space within a learning experience (Kaplan et al., 2009). Students take academic risks when they answer open-ended questions that are void of a direct or correct answer, when they try something new and are afraid of failure, when they intellectually disagree with classmates and the instructor, and when they are able to express themselves in a 249

Instruction Expanded

variety of ways. The ability to take an academic risk requires a level of comfort and security with oneself as well as the environment that is either built or destroyed by past experiences. •

Scholars tolerate ambiguity

The ability to tolerate ambiguity represents the amount of comfort a learner has with the unknown; with the lack of clarity and specificity in a set of knowledge and skills (Kaplan et al., 2009). As students are presented with tasks that reach the challenge area of their zone of proximal development, academic discomfort sets in (Vygotsky, 1962; 1978, Woolfolk, 2013). The more tolerant of that discomfort, the longer a learner will be able to exist and function in that uncomfortable space. Students can be taught to work within this ambiguity and to move through the discomfort that exists within any complex and meaningful task or learning experience. •

Scholars engage in purposeful practice

The colloquial saying “practice makes perfect” is misleading in this context. It makes the assumption that if you just practice something over and over again, in the same way, for a long enough time, that learning will take place. The development of intellectual potential occurs however through the integration and application of purposeful practice (Kaplan et al., 2009). Activities and tasks must be constructed that increase the level of sophistication related to the skill and/or concept and that vary the conditions under which the skill and/or concept is used. Teachers can collaborate with the community to build a variety of experiences for learners that demand that they practice and apply the skill in many and varied ways.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

•

Scholars engage in short and long-term goal setting

The ability to get goals and to engage in the follow-through necessary to achieve those goals are behaviors found in experts across the disciplines (Kaplan et al., 2009). Goal setting requires an analysis of the relationship that exists between the conditions and constraints of the task and the student’s own needs, interests, abilities, and funds of knowledge. In this way, goal setting moves from passive (those set by a rubric or the teacher) to active and created by the student. Student-driven goal setting is a major tenant of the development of self-regulated learners. •

250

Scholars engage in task commitment

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Instruction Expanded

Renzulli (1978) defined task commitment as the “energy” that a student brings to the study of a particular task or project. The key piece to this definition is the word “particular.” Task commitment is task-specific and task-dependent (Kaplan et al., 2009). This makes task commitment different from motivation. Motivation represents the general energy that people use to get things done. For example, a teacher is motivated to grade the pile of essays waiting on their desk. Task commitment is the specific energy that the teacher uses to engage in the grading of those essays, the energy that they need to sustain their work until all of the essays have been read, and the targeted skills they use to accomplish this task. Teachers can build opportunities for students to engage in sustained amounts of time on task as it relates to interest-based projects and authentic learning experiences that respond to problems, practices, concerns, or values in the community. Scholarly behaviors can be introduced to students as the means of developing intellectual potential in inclusive learning environments. Under this paradigm, intellectualism can be fostered, purposefully planned, carefully constructed, and empowered in a community. Curricular experiences can be built around “rich in opportunities” and provide activities for students to explore, discover, and expand their range of intelligence (Tomlinson et. al., 2009, p. 4). The following chart aligns the scholarly dispositions with guidelines for UDL. The intersection and overlap of these two practices are described with concrete classroom examples and guiding questions. Teachers can pose these questions to students as the catalyst for granting all students empowerment over the intellectual discourse that occurs in the classroom, with the goal of granting them control of the development of knowledge using the scholarly traits. When implemented, this inclusive practice offers all students an equitable chance for authentic learning, as demonstrated in Table 3. A concomitant outcome of the development of a students’ scholar identity is a focus on metacognition. Metacognition refers to our ability to think about our own thinking (Flavell, 1979). A major tenet of inclusive classrooms is their responsiveness to the individual learner and the development of student self-regulation. Metacognition is a vital part of becoming a self-regulated learner and is dependent on the learner’s ability to recognize effective strategies and transfer that knowledge to new situations (Ormrod, 2008, p. 266). The degree to which a learner has knowledge of self and is able to communicate their self-awareness significantly influences the course of learning (Flavell, 1979; Pintrich, 2010). McCombs and Marzano (1990) also indicate that students’ attitudes and confidence levels affect their metacognition and their ability to make decisions about how they think about learning. Competence and confidence are motives that affect how people value the task at hand and how they see themselves as successful learners within the learning experience. The importance and value of a situation depend upon the degree of alignment between a person’s “internal structures and the demands of the environment” (Renzulli, 251

Instruction Expanded

Table 3. Overlap of UDL and Scholarly Traits

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Scholarly Traits

Overlapping Inclusive Practices using Universal Design for Learning

Classroom Example

Guiding Questions

The Art of Questioning

Maximize transfer and generalization - Multiple Means of Representation Strategy: Option for Comprehension Individual choice and autonomyMultiple Means of Engagement: Option for Recruiting Interest

Teachers can provide students with an opportunity to think about what they want to know at the beginning of a unit of study in relation to their funds of knowledge and the community (Moll, et al., 1992; González, et al., 2005). Student-generated questions become the basis for research and engagement throughout the experience.

What do you want to know about the topic? How can one question lead to a chain of related questions? How can I connect this topic to my own interests and talents? How can I connect this topic to my home, family, or community?

Academic RiskTaking

Minimize threats and distractions - Multiple Means of Engagement Strategy: Option for Recruiting Interest Vary demands and resources to optimize challenge- Multiple Means of Engagement; Sustaining Effort and Persistence

Teachers can provide students with opportunities to communicate their strengths and challenges using a variety of verbal and non-verbal methods. Engaging in small or whole group conversations related to the “fear of failure” and the purpose of constructive feedback can help develop the intellectual courage needed to take academic risks in the classroom. Teachers must also model these behaviors in their own response patterns with students.

Where in this task or project can I use my strengths, talents, and abilities? What in this task might pose a challenge for me and how can I work to overcome it? How can I disagree politely with my classmates/friends? Where are there opportunities for me to challenge myself in this learning experience? How can you communicate your strengths and challenges using a variety of ways for this task?

Tolerating Ambiguity

Facilitate personal coping skills and strategies - Multiple Means of Engagement Strategy: Option for Self Regulation Support planning and strategy development- Multiple Means of Action & Expression; Option for Executive Functions

Teachers can provide students with opportunities to engage in open-ended tasks and questions that require a justifiable response rather than a “right” answer. Teachers can also challenge students’ preexisting schema and misconceptions about a topic or area of study.

What did I learn in this experience that caused me to re-think something in a different way? Where in this experience can I make connections between the new content and what I already know? Can I link this new knowledge to my home, family, or community? How can I determine if my response is in alignment with the question or task being asked? Where in this experience is there a chance for me to develop positive social and personal identities?

Engaging in Purposeful Practice

Maximize transfer- Multiple Means of Representation; Option for Comprehension Foster collaboration and community- Multiple Means of Engagement; Option for Sustaining Effort & Persistence

Teachers can provide students with opportunities to utilize skills across various knowledge domains. Teachers can vary the requirements and difficulty level of the skill or procedure so that students can practice the use of that skill in different contexts and situations.

How can I use the skills I have learned in new and different ways? How can this skill be applied to my community? What additional skills or processes do I need to learn in order to be successful in this task/project? Is there an opportunity to collaborate with my community? Where in this experience was there an opportunity for me to build empathy, respect, and understanding for others?

Setting Short and Long Term Goals

Guide appropriate goal-setting - Multiple Means of Action & Expression Strategy: Option for Executive Functions Enhance capacity for Monitoring Progress- Multiple Means of Action & Expression: Option for Executive Functions

Teachers can provide students with opportunities to examine the parts as well as the whole of the learning experience. Teachers can help students articulate individual goals and outcomes based on their interests, talents, needs, and funds of knowledge.

What is one goal I have for myself as a scholar and thinker during this experience? What resources and materials do I need in order to accomplish my goals? How will I know if I am successful in completing my goals? Was there an opportunity for me to speak out against exclusion and injustice? What goal could I set for myself in promoting justice through action?

Teachers can provide students with opportunities to develop self-regulation and self-efficacy related to the intended outcomes of the unit. Teachers can engage in small group or individual meetings with students throughout the experience and students can document their progress in a reflective journal.

What are my needs in this unit and how can I convey them to my teacher? How can I set manageable deadlines so that I can complete this task on-time and to the best of my ability? What strategies and/or technologies do I have access to that can assist me in completing this task? Can this task respond to problems, practices, or values in my community? Where could this learning opportunity provide me with a chance to speak up and take a stand against bias in my everyday life?

Committing to a Task

252

Use multiple means of Communication -- Multiple Means of Action & Expression Strategy: Option for Expression & Communication Develop self-assessment and reflection- Multiple Means of Engagement: Option for SelfRegulation

Instruction Expanded

1984, p. 11). Simply stated, students will not be as successful in situations that they do not value or that they are not valued in. This is why the creation of inclusive learning environments and experiences is critical. Students must be provided with the agency and opportunity to apply the dispositions of a scholar between and across learning experiences that are meaningful, authentic, and connected to their cultures and backgrounds. When students are “seen” within the curriculum; when they are provided with learning experiences that are inclusive and culturally relevant and sustaining, they begin to develop the learning-to-learn strategies necessary to transfer and apply knowledge and skills to unknown contexts in their communities (Kaplan et al., 2009).

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Taking Action in Your Instruction: Developing Talent Inclusive of All A talent development model can be used to provide a pedagogical structure that integrates the students’ social, cultural, and linguistic experiences into the curriculum. Drawing on constructivist views of learning, students interpret or construct new information based on what they already know, which is further reinforced by the funds of knowledge from their home and the community (Good & Brophy, 2003; Moll et al., 1992; González et al., 2005). Constructivist-oriented instructional strategies think about the material to be learned from the lens of students’ funds of knowledge, therefore highlighting their community as a space for advocacy, social conscientiousness, and scholarliness (Moll et al., 1992; González et al., 2005). Under this framework, students are not just expected to remember and copy, but to internalize concepts associated with the content, intersect them with their own schema, and apply it to new contexts outside of their classrooms to the community around them. According to Renzulli (2005), students must move from “lesson-learners” who move through experiences in a rote fashion to makers and creators involved in hands-on applications of knowledge and skills to address problems, practices, or values in the community (p. 3). The remainder of this chapter will demonstrate how a talent development model called the Enrichment Triad Model (Renzulli, 1976) can be used as the vehicle to create culturally mediated instructional experiences in a learning environment. The goal is to highlight how modifying the instruction through the use of interest-based, culturally-mediated opportunities, in turn, provide inclusive access to the curriculum for all learners, especially for historically marginalized groups. The Enrichment Triad Model (Renzulli, 1976) was designed to facilitate three types of instructional experiences for all learners that promote the development of potential and intellectualism. Pivotal to each “tier” of the model is the activation of students’ interests and preferred mode of expression. The model provides access points or pathways to the content that include: exploratory activities (Tier I), training 253

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Instruction Expanded

activities (Tier II), and group investigations of real problems (Tier III). The use of the Enrichment Triad Model as a means of creating the instructional opportunities necessary to uncover potential and talent is nothing new. According to Renzulli (2011), providing students with appropriate and challenging experiences is critical to maximizing potential. Explicitly including the experiences of culturally diverse students is appropriate and critical to place the experiential knowledge of the community as a central building block of developing potential (Yosso, 2005). The authors of this chapter are building on Renzulli’s (1976; 2011) mission, and have created a framework for inclusive virtual learning experiences that merge the talent development model with the tenets of culturally mediated knowledge development (Ladson-Billings, 1994; 2014). Through this intersection, all students have the ability to engage in a Tier I Exploratory Activity, a Tier II Training Activity, or a Tier III Group Investigation and Real Problem activity by using their community and learning environment as the foundation for a pursuit to foster knowledge development. Table 6 highlights how the original Talent Development Model can be used as the foundation for integrating culturally mediated knowledge. This approach takes the original purpose for each tier of the Talent Development model and operationalizes it through the lens of students’ cultural wealth and funds of knowledge (Moll et al., 1992; González et al., 2005; Yosso, 2005). According to Ladson-Billings (2014), truly inclusive pedagogy can only be sustained through the integration of one’s identity, sense of self, cultural capital and wealth, into the curriculum (Yosso, 2005). Inclusive instructional experiences for all learners must be contextualized through culture; opportunities created for all learners to engage in an inquiry that offers a window to self-reflection, personal interest, and talent development within the context of their community. Curriculum and instructional practices of and for the future must work together to validate and promote the cultural capital of the learners in the classroom. Authentic pedagogy and instructional experiences are critical to promoting inclusion and sustaining the culture and the development of individual identity. This chapter integrates the purpose of the original talent development model with one that promotes justice and action to sustain culture within a community situated in a learning environment. Renzulli (2005) insisted that the Talent Development Model be used with all learners and based his model on the belief that everyone’s role in society could be enhanced if they were provided “experiences, opportunities and encouragement” (p. 6). Table 7 highlights how the strategies outlined in UDL (CAST, 2018) act as a thread to connect the original purpose and structure of the Talent Development Model (Renzulli, 1976) with culturally mediated knowledge development (LadsonBillings, 1994; 2014) to form inclusive classroom experiences for all learners. The classroom examples provided do not represent an exhaustive list or function as the only means by which the UDL strategies can be activated. They do however provide 254

Instruction Expanded

teachers with concrete examples of how these general strategies can be utilized in a learning environment. Table 6. A Culturally Mediated Talent Development Model Tier I: Exploratory

Enrichment Triad Model based on Renzulli’s (1976) Original Work

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Culturally Mediated Instruction (LadsonBillings, 1994; 2014)

Provides students with a range of experiences to gauge interest in a content area.

Provide opportunities where students can learn within the context of their culture by having them explore topics of interest in their community (Sheets, 1999; Ladson-Billings, 1994; 2014; Yosso, 2005). Teachers can provide learners with a variety of resources to explore the core content and develop their own research questions based on an area of interest and personal connection.

Tier II: Training Activities

Tier III: Group Investigations and Real Problem

Encourages the development of specific skills and enhances conceptual development in a content area.

Extends knowledge in a content area as in the context of an authentic and real-world problem.

Encourage students to interview members of their community and serve as a virtual apprentice to gain knowledge on the topic (Delgado, 1993; Olmedo, 1997). Students begin to research their selected topic with a focus on community-oriented action research. Students can use research skills to analyze the impact of structures of power within organizational systems from their perspectives (Anzaldúa, 1990).

Use student-directed research groups to research diverse perspectives associated with a real-world problem in their community (Brisk & Harrington, 2002). Students can develop an authentic product that offers a solution to a problem of practice in their community. Under this approach, students promote community change and reflect on the outcomes from various stakeholder perspectives (CCEL, 2020). As students solve problems in their own communities, they become more invested in those communities and see themselves as agents of change.

A Tandem Approach to Culturally Mediated Instruction for Inclusive Access Classrooms, whether they exist virtually or in-person, follow a similar pattern. The teacher selects the content and designs a learning experience they believe will engage learners and result in deep levels of meaning. The teacher utilizes best-practices in terms of pedagogy and instruction in order to deliver the content in ways that respond to students’ academic, social, and developmental needs. Under the best circumstances, 255

Instruction Expanded

the teacher is reflective; critically analyzing the experiences they create to ensure that they are inclusive in design and culturally mediated in execution. The teacher then presents the lesson to the students and repeats the pattern.

Table 7. Culturally Mediated Talent Development Model using UDL for Inclusive Access Pedagogical Rationale based on Renzulli’s (1976) Original Work

Tier I: Exploratory

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Tier II: Training Activities

Tier III: Group Investigation and Real Problem Solving

256

Provides students with a range of experiences to gauge interest in a content area.

Encourages the development of specific skills and enhances conceptual development in a content area.

Extends knowledge in a content area as in the context of an authentic and realworld problem.

Culturally Mediated Knowledge Development (LadsonBillings, 1994; 2014)

UDL Inclusive Access in a Learning Environment

Provide opportunities where students can learn within the context of their culture in a virtual setting by having them explore topics of interest in their community (Sheets, 1999; Ladson-Billings, 1994; 2014)

Provide opportunities to activate prior knowledge by using graphic organizers, visuals, or audio segments on areas of interest connected to the content area -Multiple Means of Representation; Options for perception. Provide a range of alternatives for exploring interests by using physical manipulative, technologies, or motor materials-Multiple Means of Action & Expression; Options for physical action. Provide learners with autonomy and choice in the degree of challenge when exploring interests connected to the content area by using choice boards or extension menus-Multiple Means of Engagement; Options for recruiting interest.

Encourage students to interview members of their community and serve as a virtual apprentice to gain knowledge on the topic.

Provide opportunities for students to collect and share information using multiple languages to gain knowledge on the topic by using Flipgrid-Multiple Means of Representation; Options for language and symbols. Provide opportunities for students to use sentence starters, sentence strips, outlining tools, and concept maps to convey findings of the topic in Google DocsMultiple Means of Action & Expression; Options for expression and communication. Provide opportunities for students to use cooperative groups in shared Google Classroom folders with scaffolded roles and responsibilities when learning new information about a topic-Multiple Means of Engagement; Options for sustaining effort and persistence.

Use student-directed research groups to research diverse perspectives associated with a real-world problem in their community (Brisk & Harrington, 2002).

Provide students with diverse ways of representing information using Google Docs that is congruent with the students’ culture on real-world problems (Nieto, 1996)-Multiple Means of Representation; Options for perception. Provide students with opportunities to collect information using multiple media such as text, illustrations, story-board, or video on the real-world problem-Multiple Means of Action & Expression; Options for expression and communication. Provide students with an opportunity to engage in feedback from peers to reflect on self-regulation during the investigation of the real-world problem using Google Forms-Multiple Means of Engagement; Options for sustaining effort and persistence.

Instruction Expanded

The previous sections of this chapter have presented a set of screens by which teachers can use to engage in the critical reflection of their curriculum for its alignment to culturally mediated inclusive practices. Each screen has been described in detail and demonstrated via a set of questions that can be applied to the analysis of any curriculum, content, or grade level. The authors contend that the screens of scholarly traits and talent development can be used individually by a classroom teacher to modify their existing curriculum to create culturally mediated learning experiences. Although each screen exists on its own as a culturally mediated pedagogical practice, the screens can be combined to create an inclusive experience. Figure 2 highlights how the three screens can be used in tandem, with the pedagogical practices occurring concurrently, rather than consecutively or separately, to tailor and personalize the core experience for all learners.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Figure 2. Tandem Use of Culturally Mediated Talent Development

In this tandem approach, the Talent Development Model (Renzulli, 1976) becomes the dominant pedagogical practice that filters and funnels the other screens. Under this approach, the Talent Development model acts as the structural framework for the learner and the community designing the learning experience rather than a 257

Instruction Expanded

strategy used to modify an existing experience (Renzulli, 1976; Ladson-Billings, 2009; 2014). The screens of scholarly traits are then used as supporting strategies to reinforce the development of inclusive activities where the learner is the source and the community is the resource of knowledge and skills (Ladson-Billings, 2009; 2014). This approach is philosophically and pragmatically different from the ones outlined above. It requires a true redesign of the core curriculum to learn from the learners and the community rather than minor adjustments or modifications to learn about the learners and the community (Ladson-Billings, 2014). This chapter has argued that culturally mediated, inclusive strategies can be woven throughout the general experience and can be created at the beginning, middle, and end of a lesson. When the learning experience has been designed using the Talent Development Model as a lesson planning template, the activation of talent and potential in all learners becomes the overarching focus of the learning experience. The lesson plan, activities, resources, and means of instruction are all created to uncover talent, unlock potential, and sustain student interests. Table 8 provides a concrete classroom example of a learning experience that has been created using the talent development model as the framework for centralizing experiential knowledge from the learners in the classroom (Solórzano, 1997; 1998). The content focus of the unit is on the study of the United States Government, a topic replete in the standards across grade levels. Rather than focus on the narrow standard related to the three branches of government, the tandem talent development model extends the learning to include: (a) connections to larger themes, (b) analysis of contemporary and community social issues, (c) relationships to other disciplines or areas of study, and (d) student-generated research questions and communal funds of knowledge.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

TAKING ACTION AND NEXT STEPS: BEFORE, DURING, AND AFTER INSTRUCTION Creating culturally mediated inclusive learning experiences is an iterative process where teachers must continue to break apart pedagogies that support structures of inequity associated with systemic racism, sexism, and classism which are further reinforced with oppression based on immigration, sexuality, language, and culture in their practice. Waitoller and Kozleski (2013) assert that inclusive education must continue to work towards the goal of creating “the opportunities for marginalized groups to represent themselves in decision-making processes that advance and define claims of exclusion and the respective solutions that affect their children’s educational futures” (p. 35). This chapter aligns with that goal. The purpose and intent of this chapter are to help classroom teachers of any grade or subject area critically reflect on their own practice and take the steps necessary to flip the power dynamic in their 258

Instruction Expanded

classrooms. Through the integration of strategies such as scholarly traits and talent development, students are provided with the tools necessary to learn and research on their own; to infuse themselves into the content, and to create their own context for learning. Classrooms then do not become a platform where teachers control the access to the knowledge, but a brave and safe space for students to create, design, and develop their own sense of self as rooted in the assets from their home and community (Yosso, 2005). Table 8. Tandem Access: An Inclusive Classroom Example Tier I - Generate Interest and Engagement for ALL Scholarly Trait: The Art of Questioning Is the structure of government helpful or harmful? What examples from my own life address this question? How do aspects of government impact me and my community on a daily basis? Are the rules of government designed to unit or divide?

Tier II - Skill and Concept Development

Tier III - Addressing an Authentic Problem of Practice

Scholarly Trait: Tolerating Ambiguity What examples of governmental power have I experienced in my community? How has governmental power and structures united or divided my culture and community over time? What patterns of governmental power exist overtime as a dominant or uniting force?

Scholarly Trait: Task Commitment How will I be able to recognize examples of how power and privilege impact the government’s relationships with different groups of people? What will I do when I recognize discrimination and injustice at the governmental level? What can I do to stand up against current structures of power in our government?

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Classroom Examples

The teacher can provide access to various resources to explore the three branches of government from a variety of perspectives in the community and disciplines (economics, law, politics, sociology, etc.). The students can generate their own questions related to how rules and laws have been constructed to historically benefit some people and not others. The students can self-select current event issues related to governmental structures and power to research.

The students can explore the universal concept of Structures and Power and examine the many and varied examples of power structures in governments over time (e.g., racism, police brutality) The students can attend town hall meetings to explore the relationship between power and governmental structures in their community. Students can be connected with mentors in the public and private sectors who are addressing the imbalance of power in governmental structures. The students can research current political and social justice movements to determine how they are standing up to governmental power structures. They can generate possible justice and action opportunities based on this research.

The students can engage in thinking like an expert as they use the research tools and methodologies of scientists to address their community-based problems of practice related to some aspect of the structure and power of government. The students can form talent teams with various skill sets to address their social justice problem of practice. Each member of the group will use their talent and strength in the completion of the final project. The students can execute their projects in the community. They can receive authentic feedback from practicing practitioners in the various disciplines as well as community stakeholders. The students can reflect on their relationship with the government and how it has evolved as a consequence of their study of structure and power.

259

Instruction Expanded

Next Steps for the Teacher Saphier et. al, (2008) contend that a reflective teacher must analyze the learning experience from the student’s point of view. In their book, The Skillful Teacher, they outline a series of questions such as: What are the students experiencing in their environment?, What are the attributes of the activity?, and What is it like from the student’s perspective? (Saphier, et al., 2008, p. 412). Although these questions are important, they lean on the teacher’s assumptions. The authors believe that an additional set of questions needs to be included specifically to address inclusiveness within experiential knowledge to legitimize and deem appropriate the knowledge, skills, abilities, and communities of our student populations (Yosso, 2005; Paris, 2012). . In addition to the worked examples provided in the body of the chapter, the following questions in Table 9 can be used by the teacher to stimulate thinking related to the planning, implementation, and evaluation of this model. These questions do not represent an exhaustive list, but the start of thoughtful planning and reflective dialogue. A relationship to the screens of scholarly traits and the Talent Development Model has been articulated.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Table 9. Questions for the Teacher Before Planning the Learning Experience

During the Implementation of the Learning Experience

After Concluding the Learning Experience

How can I sustain the linguistic, literate, and cultural practices of the community through my instruction? How can I build in the use of authentic products and inclusive, culturally relevant, responsive, and sustaining resources? Who is most “seen” in this curriculum and who remains hidden? How can I create opportunities for all learners to find an access point into my lessons? How am I going to effectively communicate this pedagogical (teaching) approach to my stakeholders -- students, colleagues, parents, administrators, and the community?

What do I notice students gravitating towards in this experience? How are students responding to the varied resources selected for this experience? What is the level of student engagement I am witnessing during this experience? What are the many and varied ways that students are participating in this experience? How is this experience meeting the needs of the various learners in my classroom? What could I do differently between now and the end of this experience to provide targeted opportunities for learners to engage? What opportunities include the home and community that reflect the student’s funds of knowledge?

What have we (the learner, community, and school) determined as the basis for “success” under this model? How will I know that I have achieved my goals? How will I know if my students have achieved their goals? How will I know the degree to which the students have developed intellectual growth, scholarly traits, and talent as a consequence of this experience? How can my students document their successes under this instructional paradigm? How can I continue to provide learners with opportunities to extend the interests and talents demonstrated by this experience?

260

Instruction Expanded

Next Steps for the Student Teachers are responsible for creating inclusive learning experiences, but it is the student who is the true consumer of the curriculum, and therefore, they need to see themselves and their community as controlling the production of the narrative in response to the learning experience. Too often, the curriculum is designed and implemented without any input, thoughts, or reflections from the students themselves. The authors of this chapter believe that paradigm needs to change. Students are exceptionally knowledgeable about how they best think and learn; what excites, interests, and challenges them. Students are the primary source when it comes to describing their culture and funds of knowledge (Paris, 2012; Moll et al., 1992; González et al., 2005). We, as teachers, just never ask. The following set of questions have been designed to provide students with a seat at the curriculum design table. Teachers can pose these questions to their students before, during, and after the learning experience to determine the degree to which this culturally mediated inclusion model has actually met student’s needs.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Table 10. Questions for Students Before Engaging in the Learning Experience

While Engaging in the Learning Experience

As a Result of Participating in the Learning Experience

What is something I want my teacher to know about me as a learner before I engage in this experience? What is my greatest asset or strength as a student and as a person? What are the greatest assets from my home or community in connection to this content? What is something that poses a challenge for me in the context of this classroom? What strategies or scaffolds do I need in order to complete my best work? How do I like to engage with content? What resources are most useful to me as I learn something new? What is my interest level at the start of this experience? What is my family’s or community’s perception of this content?

What is something that is grabbing my attention during this experience? What is something that I am struggling with during this experience? To what degree are the resources the teacher selected helpful to me in this experience? To what degree did the resources from the community help me during this experience? What would be an additional resource that could be added to this experience to make the content more meaningful to me? What is my level of interest during this experience? Has it increased or decreased since the start of this experience? What additional perspectives from my community might contribute to the knowledge or discourse on this topic?

What did I learn about myself as a scholar as a consequence of this experience? What new skill did I learn as a result of this experience? What was my favorite part of this learning experience and why? What was something I wish I could have changed during this experience to better meet my needs? What is my level of engagement at the end of this experience? Has it increased or decreased and why? What is the relationship between my level of interest and the level of effort that I put into this experience? How does this content impact and sustain my community?

261

Instruction Expanded

By considering these questions before, during, and after instruction, the teacher and student can establish a collaborative dialogue on creating a culturally mediated talent development environment. This allows the curriculum to be shaped by a dialogue between teacher and student, thus genuinely reflecting the needs, interests, abilities, and cultural backgrounds of the learners in the classroom. In this chapter, the authors have shown how two instructional strategies for classroom teachers: Scholarly traits (Kaplan, 2006; 2019) and the Talent Development Model (Renzulli, 1978; 2005), and demonstrate how they can be reinforced by the building blocks of a culturally mediated and inclusive learning environment. The teacher and student can collaborate to alter the delivery of the curriculum to intersect, reinforce, and be responsive using aspects of Universal Design for Learning and culturally-mediated instructional practices to create inclusive learning experiences for all students.

REFERENCES Ali, T.T., & Herrera, M. (2020). Distance learning during COVID-19: 7 equity considerations for schools and districts. Southern Education Foundation. Anzaldúa, G. (1990). Haciendo Caras/making face, making soul: creative and critical perspectives by women of color. Aunt Lute Press. Brisk, M. E., & Harrington, M. M. (2000). Literacy and bilingualism: A handbook for all teachers. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage. CASEL. (2020). Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved from https://casel.org/about-2/

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http://udlguidelines.cast.org CCEL. (2020). Center for Community Engaged Learning. Retrieved from https:// communityengagedlearning.msu.edu/ Delgado, R. (1993). On telling stories in school: A reply to Farber and Sherry. Vanderbilt Law Review, 46, 665–676. Delgado Bernal, D. (2002). Critical race theory, LatCrit theory and critical racedgendered epistemologies: Recognizing Students of Color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126. doi:10.1177/107780040200800107 262

Instruction Expanded

Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-development inquiry. The American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Francisco, M. P. B., Hartman, M., & Wang, Y. (2020). Inclusion and special education. Education in Science, 10(238), 1–17. Freire, P. (1973). Pedagogy of the oppressed. The Seabury Press. Good, T. E., & Brophy, J. E. (2003). Looking in Classrooms (9th ed.). Allyn and Bacon. González, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Erlbaum. Kaplan, S. (2019). Advocating Differentiating Differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 42(1), 58–59. doi:10.1177/1076217518805785 Kaplan, S. N. (2006). Advocacy by discussion: Dialogues about differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 25(1), 35–38. doi:10.4219/gct-2006-193 Kaplan, S. N., Guzman, I., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). Using the parallel curriculum model in urban settings, grades K-8. Corwin Press. Krischler, M., Powell, J. J., & Pit-Ten Cate, I. M. (2019). What is meant by inclusion? On the effects of different definitions on attitudes towards inclusion education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34(5), 632–648. doi:10.1080/088 56257.2019.1580837 Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers. Jossey-Bass Publishing Co. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. doi:10.3102/00028312032003465 Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. doi:10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751 Lipkin, P.H., Okamoto, J., & The Council on Children with Disabilities, and The Council on Schools. (n.d.). The individuals with disabilities act (IDEA) for children with special education needs. American Academy of Pediatrics, 136(6), 1650-1662.

263

Instruction Expanded

Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. doi:10.1080/00405849209543534 Nieto, S. (1996). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (2nd ed.). Longman. Olmedo, I. M. (1997). Voices of our past: Using oral history to explore funds of knowledge within a Puerto Rican family. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 28(4), 550–573. doi:10.1525/aeq.1997.28.4.550 Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational Psychology (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc. Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. doi:10.3102/0013189X12441244 Parkay, F. W., Hass, G., & Anctil, E. J. (2010). Goals and values. In Curriculum Leadership: Readings for Developing Quality Educational Programs (9th ed.). Allyn & Bacon. Pintrich, P. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219–226. doi:10.120715430421tip4104_3 Renzulli, J. S. (2011). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition: giftedness needs to be redefined to include three elements: above-average intelligence, high levels of task commitment, and high levels of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(8), 81–82. doi:10.1177/003172171109200821 Renzulli, J. S. (2005). Apply gifted pedagogy to total talent development for all students. Theory into Practice, 44(2), 80–89. doi:10.120715430421tip4402_2 Renzulli, J. S. (1976). The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible programs for gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20(3), 303–326. doi:10.1177/001698627602000327

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Renzulli, J. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Reexamining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180–261. Rugg, H. (1921). Needed changes in the committee procedure of reconstructing the social studies. The Elementary School Journal, 21(9), 688–702. doi:10.1086/455035 Saphier, J., Haley-Speca, M. A., & Gower, R. (2008). The Skillful Teacher: Building your Teaching Skills. Research for Better Teaching.

264

Instruction Expanded

Schwab, J. (1969). The Practical: A language for curriculum. The School Review, 78(1), 1–23. doi:10.1086/442881 Sheets, R. (1999). Relating competence in an urban classroom to ethnic identity development. In R. Sheets (Ed.), Racial and ethnic identity in school practices: Aspects of human development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1999). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender (3rd ed.). Wiley. Solórzano, D. (1997). Images and words that wound: Critical race theory, racial stereotyping and teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24, 5–19. Solórzano, D. (1998). Critical race theory, racial and gender microaggressions, and the experiences of Chicana and Chicano Scholars. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education : QSE, 11(1), 121–136. doi:10.1080/095183998236926 Tomlinson, C.A. (2009). The rationale and guiding principles for an evolving conception of curriculum. In The Parallel Curriculum (2nd ed.). Corwin Press. Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. The University of Chicago Press. Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanf-mann & G. Vakar, Trans.). MIT Press. doi:10.1037/11193-000 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press. Yoon, I. H. (2020). Haunted trauma narratives of inclusion, race, and disability in a school community. Educational Studies, 55(4), 420–435. doi:10.1080/0013194 6.2019.1629926

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Waitoller, F. R., & Kozleski, E. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 25–45. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.11.006 Waitoller, F. R., & Thorius, K. A. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Towards inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. doi:10.17763/19435045-86.3.366 Woolfolk, A. H. (2013). Educational Psychology (12th ed.). Pearson. Yoon, I. H. (2020). Haunted trauma narratives of inclusion, race, and disability in a school community. Educational Studies, 55(4), 420–435. doi:10.1080/0013194 6.2019.1629926 265

266

Compilation of References

Adams, D., Harris, A., & Jones, M. S. (2016). Teacher-parent collaboration for an inclusive classroom: Success for every child. Malaysian Online Journal of Education Sciences, 4(3), 5872. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1106456.pdf Adseriaas, R. P., Charleston, L. J., & Jackson, J. F. L. (2017). What style of leadership is best suited to direct organizational change to fuel institutional diversity in higher education? Race, Ethnicity and Education, 20(3), 315–331. doi:10.1080/13613324.2016.1260233 Afflerbach, P. (2012). Understanding and using reading assessment K-12 (2nd ed.). International Reading Association (IRA). Agaliotis, I. (2011). Teaching Mathematics in Special Education. Grigori. [in Greek] Aggelidis, P. (2011). Pedagogy of Inclusion. Diadrasi. [Greek] Ainscow, M. (2016). Diversity and Equity: A global education challenge. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 51(2), 143–155. doi:10.100740841-016-0056-x Akinyemi, A.F., Rembe, S., & Nkonki, V. (2020). Trust and positive working relationships among teachers in communities of practice as an avenue for professional development. Education Sciences, 10, 1-15. doi:10.3390/educsci10050136 Albers, A. E., & Greer, R. D. (1991). Is the three-term contingency trial a predictor of effective instruction? Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(3), 337–354. doi:10.1007/BF00947188

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Alesech, J., & Nayar, S. (2020). Acceptance and belonging in New Zealand: Understanding inclusion for children with special education needs. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 16(1), 84–116. Ali, T.T., & Herrera, M. (2020). Distance learning during COVID-19: 7 equity considerations for schools and districts. Southern Education Foundation. Alsubai, M. A. (2016). Curriculum Development: Teacher Involvement in Curriculum Development. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(9), 106–107. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1095725.pdf American Psychiatric Association. (n.d.). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm

Compilation of References

Angelides, P. (2011). Forms of leadership that promote inclusive education in Cypriot Schools. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40(1), 21–36. doi:10.1177/1741143211420614 Anzaldúa, G. (1990). Haciendo Caras/making face, making soul: creative and critical perspectives by women of color. Aunt Lute Press. Aram, D. M., Morris, R., & Hall, N. E. (1992). The validity of discrepancy criteria for identifying children with developmental language disorders. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25(9), 549–554. doi:10.1177/002221949202500902 PMID:1431538 Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Vachon, V. L. (2003). Decording and fluency: Foundation skills for struggling older readers. Learning Disability Quarterly, 26(2), 89–101. doi:10.2307/1593592 Archer, A., & Gleason, M. (1989). Skills for school success. Curriculum Associates. Armendariz, F., & Umbreit, J. (1999). Using active responding to reduce disruptive behavior in a general education classroom. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(3), 152–158. doi:10.1177/109830079900100303 Ashikali, T., Groeneveld, S., & Kuipers, B. (2020). The Role of Inclusive Leadership in Supporting an Inclusive Climate in Diverse Public Sector Teams. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 1–23. doi:10.1177/0734371X19899722 Ayllon, T., & Azrin, N. H. (1968). The token economy: A motivational system for therapy and rehabilitation. Appleton-Century-Crofts. Ayllon, T., Layman, D., & Burke, S. (1972). Disruptive behavior and reinforcement of academic performance. The Psychological Record, 22(3), 315–323. doi:10.1007/BF03394096 Azama, Y. (2020). Leveraging diversity and inclusivity in Japanese teacher community in an American high school district. Japanese Language and Literature, 54(2), 415–421. Advance online publication. doi:10.5195/jll.2020.135 Baker, J., & Zigmond, N. (1990). Mainstreaming learning disabled students: The impact on regular education students and teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, MA.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Balbay, S. (2019). Enhancing critical awareness through Socratic pedagogy. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 515–536. doi:10.32601/ejal.651348 Ball, E. W., & Blachman, B. A. (1991). Does phoneme awareness training in kindergarten make a difference in early word recognition and developmental spelling? Reading Research Quarterly, 26(1), 49–66. doi:10.1598/RRQ.26.1.3 Barbetta, P. M., Miller, A. D., Peters, M. T., Heron, T. E., & Cochran, L. L. (1991). Tugmate: A cross-age tutoring program to teach sight vocabulary. Education & Treatment of Children, 14(1), 19–37.

267

Compilation of References

Bar-Eli, N., & Ravin, A. (1982). Underachievers as tutors. The Journal of Educational Research, 75(3), 682–685. doi:10.1080/00220671.1982.10885370 Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., & Cullinan, V. (2001). Relational frame theory and Skinner’s Verbal Behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 23(1), 69–84. doi:10.1007/BF03392000 PMID:22478339 Barrio, B. L., & Combes, B. H. (2015). General education pre-service teachers’ levels of concern on Response to Intervention (RTI) implementation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 38(2), 121–137. doi:10.1177/0888406414546874 Battersby, S. L., & Verdi, B. (2015). The culture of professional learning communities and connections to improve teacher efficacy and support student learning. Arts Education Policy Review, 116(1), 22–25. doi:10.1080/10632913.2015.970096 Bauwens, J., Hourcade, J. J., & Friend, M. (1989). Cooperative teaching: A model for general and special education integration. Remedial and Special Education, 10(2), 17–22. doi:10.1177/074193258901000205 Becker, W. C., Madsen, C. H. Jr, Arnold, C. R., & Thomas, D. R. (1967). The contingent use of teacher attention and praise in reducing classroom behavior problems. The Journal of Special Education, 1(3), 287–307. doi:10.1177/002246696700100307 Bell, K. (2018). Shake up learning: Practical ideas to move learning from static to dynamic. Dave Burgess Consulting. Beninghof, A. (2016). To clone or not to clone? Educational Leadership, 73(4), 10–15. Berkeley, S., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2010). Reading comprehension instruction for students with Learning Disabilities, 1995-2006: A Meta-Analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31(6), 423–436. doi:10.1177/0741932509355988 Berliner, C. C. (1990). The case for peer tutoring: Research. Instructor, 99, 16–17. Berry, S. (2019). Faculty perspectives on online learning: The instructor’s role in creating community. Online Learning, 23(4), 181–191. doi:10.24059/olj.v23i4.2038

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Beukelman, D. R., & Mirenda, P. (2012). Augmentative and alternative communication: Supporting children and adults with complex communication needs (4th ed.). Paul H. Brookes Pub. Co. Bhroin, Ó., & King, F. (2020). Teacher education for inclusive education: A framework for developing collaboration for the inclusion of students with support plans. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 38–63. doi:10.1080/02619768.2019.1691993 Biro, M. (2013, March 3). Smart leaders and the power of collaboration. Forbes. https://www. forbes.com/sites/meghanbiro/2013/03/03/smart-leaders-and-the-power-of-collaboration/

268

Compilation of References

Blayone, T., vanOostveen, R., Barber, W., DiGiuseppe, M., & Childs, E. (2017). Democratizing digital learning: Theorizing the fully online learning community model. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 14(1), 1–16. doi:10.118641239-017-0051-4 Blitz, C. L., & Schulman, R. (2016). Measurement instruments for assessing the performance of professional learning communities (REL 2016–144). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Centre for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Regional Educational Laboratory Mid-Atlantic. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs Blum, R. W., & Libbey, H. P. (2004). School connectedness - Strengthening health and education outcomes for teenagers - Executive summary. The Journal of School Health, 74(7), 231–232. doi:10.1111/j.1746-1561.2004.tb08278.x Boniecki, K. A., & Moore, S. (2003). Breaking the silence: Using a token economy to reinforce classroom participation. Teaching of Psychology, 30(3), 224–227. doi:10.1207/ S15328023TOP3003_05 Bonti, E., Kamari, A., Kougioumtzis, G. A., Theofilidis, A., & Sofologi, M. (2020). Different Theoretical Perspectives on Specific Learning Difficulties in Mathematics. Implications for Special Educational Intervention and for Everyday School Practice: An overview study. International Journal of Education and Research, 8(2), 107–118. Bonti, E., Sofologi, M., Efstratopoulou, M., Katsiana, A., Papantoniou, G., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2021). Low Auditory-Verbal Cognitive Profile: A “Risk Factor” for Specific Learning Difficulties in Preschool Children in Greece. Psychology (Irvine, Calif.), 12(02), 181–204. doi:10.4236/psych.2021.122012 Borland, J., & James, S. (1999). The Learning Experience of Students with Disabilities in Carter, S. & Abawi, L-A (2018). Leadership, inclusion, and quality education for all. Australian JOURNAL of Special and Inclusive Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1017/jsi.2018 Borland, J., & James, S. (1999, January). Higher Education. A case study of a UK university. Disability & Society, 14(1), 85–101. doi:10.1080/09687599926398 Bouchard, M. T. (2005). Comprehension strategies for English language learners. Scholastic. Bourdieu, P., & Passeron, J. (1977). Reproduction in education, society and culture. Sage.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Bozkurt, A., & Sharma, R. C. (2020). Emergency remote teaching in a time of global crisis due to CoronaVirus pandemic. Asian Journal of Distance Education, 15(1), i–vi. Brendle, J., Lock, R., & Piazza, K. (2017). A study of co-teaching identifying effective implementation strategies. International Journal of Special Education, 32(3), 538–550. Bright Hub Education. (n.d.). Improving student learning with collaborative learning communities and activities. https://www.brighthubeducation.com/teaching-methods-tips/79528-encouragingcollaborative-learning-in-your-classroom/

269

Compilation of References

Brisk, M. E., & Harrington, M. M. (2000). Literacy and bilingualism: A handbook for all teachers. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. The American Psychologist, 32(7), 513–520. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Harvard University Press. Brophy, B. (2016, October 22). Collaborative learning community: Obesity. Medium. https:// www.coursehero.com/file/20056920/Collaborative-Learning-Community/ Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., Wakeman, S., Trela, K., & Baker, J. N. (2006). Aligning instruction with academic content standards: Finding the link. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(4), 309–321. doi:10.1177/154079690603100404 Brown, B. D., Horn, R. S., & King, G. (2018). The effective implementation of professional learning communities. Alabama Journal of Educational Leadership, 5, 53-59. https://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1194725.pdf Brown, B. D., Horn, R. S., & King, G. (2018). The effective implementation of professional learning communities. Alabama Journal of Educational Leadership, 5, 53–59. Bruneau-Balderrama, O. (1997). Inclusion: Making it work for teachers, too. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 70(6), 328–330. doi:10.1080/00 098655.1997.10543536 Bruno, L. P., Scott, L. A., & Willis, C. (2018). A survey of alternative and traditional special education teachers’ perception of preparedness. International Journal of Special Education, 33(2), 295-312. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1185629.pdf Bruns, H. C. (2013). Working alone together: Coordination in collaboration across domains of expertise. Academy of Management Journal, 56(1), 62–83. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0756 Bryan, L. C., & Gast, D. L. (2000). Teaching on-task and on-schedule behaviors to high-functioning children with autism via picture activity schedules. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30(6), 553–567. doi:10.1023/A:1005687310346 PMID:11261467

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Bunescu, L. (2021). Achieving inclusion in higher education by design. University World News: The global window of higher education. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post. php?story=20210215140003124 Burgstahler, S. (2005). Web-based distance learning and the second digital divide. In M. KhosrowPour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and information technology (pp. 3079–3084). Idea Group Inc. doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-553-5.ch548 Burgstahler, S. (2015). Opening doors or slamming them shut? Online learning practices and students with disabilities. Social Inclusion (Lisboa), 3(6), 69–79. doi:10.17645i.v3i6.420

270

Compilation of References

Burstein, N. D., & Cabello, B. (1989). Preparing teachers to work with culturally diverse students: A teacher education model. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 9–16. doi:10.1177/002248718904000502 Burstein, N., Sears, S., Wilcoxen, A., Cabello, B., & Spagna, M. (2004). Moving toward inclusive practices. Remedial and Special Education, 25(2), 104–116. doi:10.1177/07419325040250020501 Busby, R., Ingram, R., Bowron, R., Oliver, J., & Lyons, B. (2012). Teaching elementary children with autism: Addressing teacher challenges and preparation needs. Rural Educator, 33(2), 27–35. Busick, M., & Neitzel, J. (2009). Self-management: Steps for implementation. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina. Bussing, A. G., Menzel, S., Schnieders, M., Beckmann, V., & Basten, M. (2019). Values and beliefs as predictors of pre-service teachers’ enjoyment of teaching in inclusive settings. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 19(1), 8–23. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12474 Byrd, D. R., & Alexander, M. (2020). Investigating special education teachers’ knowledge and skills: Preparing general teacher preparation for professional development. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(2), 72–82. doi:10.33902/JPR.2020059790 Callahan, C. M., Plucker, J. A., & Gluck, S. (2020). Inclusion of academically advanced gifted students. In J. M. Kauffman (Ed.), On Educational Inclusion: Meanings, History, Issues and International Perspectives. Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780429344039-9 Canter, L. L. S., King, L. H., Williams, J. B., Metcalf, D., & Potts, K. R. M. (2017). Evaluating pedagogy and practice of universal design for learning in public schools. Exceptionality Education International, 27(1), 1–16. Carpenter, L. A. B., Johnston, L. B., & Beard, L. A. (2014). Assistive technology: Access for all students (3rd ed.). Pearson Education. Carr, E. G., & Darcy, M. (1990). Setting generality of peer modeling in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 20(1), 45–59. doi:10.1007/BF02206856 PMID:2324055

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Carreno, L., & Hernandez-Ortiz, L. S. (2017). Lesson co-planning: Joint efforts, shared success. GIST Education and Learning Research Journal, 15, 173–198. CASEL. (2020). Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved from https://casel.org/about-2/ CAST. (2011). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.0. Author. CAST. (2018). Universal Design for Learning Guidelines version 2.2. Retrieved from http:// udlguidelines.cast.org Catania, A. C. (2007). Learning (4th ed.). Sloan Publishing.

271

Compilation of References

CCEL. (2020). Center for Community Engaged Learning. Retrieved from https:// communityengagedlearning.msu.edu/ Center for Creative Leadership. (2020). Use active listening to coach others. https://www.ccl. org/articles/leading-effectively-articles/coaching-others-use-active-listening-skills/ Charner-Laird, M., Szczesiul, S., Kirkpatrick, C. L., Watson, D., & Gordon, P. (2016). From collegial support to critical dialogue: Including new teachers’ voices in collaborative work. Professional Educator, 40(2), 1-17. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1120331.pdf Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2016). The relationship between school-wide implementation of Positive Behavior Intervention and Supports and student discipline outcomes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 18(2), 89–99. doi:10.1177/1098300715590398 Chitiyo, J., & Brinda, W. (2018). Teacher preparedness in the use of co‐teaching in inclusive classrooms. Support for Learning, 33(1), 38–51. doi:10.1111/1467-9604.12190 Choi, S. B., Tran, T. B. H., & Kang, S. W. (2017). Inclusive Leadership and Employee WellBeing: The Mediating Role of Person-Job Fit. Journal of Happiness Studies, 8(6), 1877–1901. doi:10.100710902-016-9801-6 Cikili, Y., & Karaca, M. A. (2019). Examination of teacher candidates’ attitudes, emotions, and anxieties regarding inclusive education by different variables. Online Submission, 4(1), 115–130. Clark, H., & Avrith, T. (2017). The google infused classroom: A guidebook to making thinking visible and amplifying student voice. Elevate Books. Classtime blog. (n.d.). Turning your classroom into a collaborative learning community. https:// www.classtime.com/blog/classroom-collaborative-learning-community/ Clemons, M., & Hopkins, T. (2020). Facilitating success: Using self-regulated learning and servant leadership in the college classroom. Journal of Teaching and Learning With Technology, 9(1). Advance online publication. doi:10.14434/jotlt.v9i1.29176 Cole, M., & Cole, S. R. (2001). The development of children. Worth. Collaborative Learning Community (CLC). (n.d.). University of Louisville. https://louisville.edu/ ideastoaction/site/programs/communities/collaborativelearning

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Collaborative learning. (n.d.). Cornell University: Center for Teaching Innovation. https://teaching. cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/collaborative-learning Comfort, L. K. (1997). Models of change: A dialogue between theory and practice. The American Behavioral Scientist, 40(3), 259–263. doi:10.1177/0002764297040003003 Cook, B., Tenkersley, M., & Landrum, T. (2000). Teachers’ attitudes toward their included students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 115–135. doi:10.1177/001440290006700108

272

Compilation of References

Cooke, N. L., Heron, T. E., Heward, W. L., & Test, D. W. (1982). Integrating a Down’s syndrome child in a classwide peer tutoring system: A case report. Mental Retardation, 20, 22–25. PMID:6211588 Cook, L. (2004). Co-teaching: Principles, practices and pragmatics. Quarterly Special Education Meeting, New Mexico Public Education Department. Cook, L., & Friend, M. (2010). The state of collaboration on behalf of students with disabilities. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 1–8. doi:10.1080/10474410903535398 Cooper, J. O., Heron, T. E., & Heward, W. L. (2020). Applied behavior analysis (3rd ed.). Pearson. doi:10.26741/abaespana/2020.cooper3e Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. W. H. Freeman. Coster, W., Law, M., Bedell, G., Liljenquist, K., Kao, Y. C., Khetani, M., & Teplicky, R. (2013). School participation, supports and barriers of students with and without disabilities. Child: Care, Health and Development, 39(4), 535–543. doi:10.1111/cch.12046 PMID:23763254 Council for Exceptional Children. (2017). High leverage practices in special education. CEC. CEEDAR Center. Council of Chief State School Officers (2011, April). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue. Council of Chief State School Officers. Council on Higher Education. (1997). Higher Education Act 101. Government Printers. Courtney, M. B., Constantine, J., & Trosper, J. (2017). Best practices guidebook: Professional learning communities. Bluegrass Center for Teacher Quality, Inc. Crosby, C. (2012). Reimagining teacher education in the 21st century: Shifting and widening the lens of teacher training for mainstream classroom and TESOL teaching candidates of linguistically and culturally diverse learners. International Journal of Innovation in English Language Teaching, 1(2), 125–138. http://queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com. queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/scholarly-journals/reimaging-teacher-education-21-sup-st-century/ docview/1711193117/se-2?accountid=13379

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Cullinan, R. (2018, July 24). In collaborative work cultures, women carry more weight. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2018/07/in-collaborative-work-cultures-women-carry-more-ofthe-weight Da Fonte, M. A., & Barton-Arwood, S. M. (2017). Collaboration of general and special education teachers: Perspectives and strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 53(2), 99–106. doi:10.1177/1053451217693370 David, S. (2017, September 17). The power of team collaboration in the workplace. Huffington Post. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/zach-cutler/the-power-of-teamcollabo_b_5836742.html

273

Compilation of References

Davis, W. E. (1989). The regular education initiative debate: Its promises and problems. Exceptional Children, 55(5), 440–446. doi:10.1177/001440298905500507 Dazzeo, R., & Rao, K. (2020). Digital Frayer model: Supporting vocabulary acquisition with technology and UDL. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(1), 34–42. doi:10.1177/0040059920911951 de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2012). Students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities: A review of the literature. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 59(4), 379–392. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2012.723944 de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., Minnaert, A., & Post, W. (2014). Evaluating the effectiveness of an intervention program to influence attitudes of students towards peers with disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(3), 572–583. doi:10.100710803-013-1908-6 PMID:23982486 Dearman, C. C., & Alber, S. R. (2005, April). The changing face of education: Teachers cope with challenges through collaboration and reflective study. The Reading Teacher, 58(7), 634–640. doi:10.1598/RT.58.7.4 Dee, A. (2010). Preservice teacher application of differentiated instruction. Teacher Educator, 46(1), 53–70. doi:10.1080/08878730.2010.529987 Delgado Bernal, D. (2002). Critical race theory, LatCrit theory and critical raced-gendered epistemologies: Recognizing Students of Color as holders and creators of knowledge. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(1), 105–126. doi:10.1177/107780040200800107 Delgado, J. A. P., & Greer, R. D. (2009). The effects of peer monitoring training on the emergence of the capability to learn from observing instruction received by peers. The Psychological Record, 59(3), 407–434. doi:10.1007/BF03395672 Delgado, R. (1993). On telling stories in school: A reply to Farber and Sherry. Vanderbilt Law Review, 46, 665–676. DeMatthews, D. E. (2014). How to Improve Curriculum Leadership: Integrating Leadership Theory and Management Strategies, The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies. Issues and Ideas, 87(5), 192–196. doi:10.1080/00098655.2014.911141 Dent, E. B., & Goldberg, S. G. (1999). Challenging “resistance to change”. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 35(1), 25–41. doi:10.1177/0021886399351003

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Department of Education. (1997). Education White Paper 3 – A programme for the transformation of higher education. Government Printers: Pretoria. Department of Education. (1997). Quality education for all: Overcoming barriers to learning and development – Report of the National Commission on special needs in education and training (NCSNET) and National Committee on education support services (NCESS). Government Printers. Department of Education. (2001). National Plan for Higher Education. Government Printers.

274

Compilation of References

Dessemontet, R. S., Bless, G., & Morin, D. (2012). Effects of inclusion on the academic achievement and adaptive behaviour of children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 56(6), 579–587. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2011.01497.x PMID:22044586 Dewey, J. (1939). Experience and education. Macmillan. Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. The Free Press. (Original work published 1916) Dincer, S. (2018). Are preservice teachers really literate enough to integrate technology in their classroom practice? Determining the technology literacy level of preservice teachers. Education and Information Technologies, 23(6), 2699–2718. doi:10.100710639-018-9737-z Dineen, J. P., Clark, H. B., & Risley, T. R. (1977). Peer tutoring among elementary students: Educational Benefits to the tutor. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10(2), 231–238. doi:10.1901/jaba.1977.10-231 PMID:16795552 Dodd, A. W. (2000). Are higher standards and students’ needs compatible? Principal Leadership, 1(1), 28–32. Douvanis, G., & Hulsey, D. (2002). The least restrictive environment mandate: How has it been defined by the courts? The ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. DuFour, R. (2004). What is a professional learning community? Educational Leadership: Schools as Learning Communities, 61(8), 6–11. http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/ may04/vol61/num08/what-is-a-professional-learning-community.aspx DuFour, R. (2015). In praise of American educators. Solution Tree. DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2006). Learn by doing: A handbook for professional learning communities at work. Solution Tree. Dunlap, G., & Koegel, R. L. (1980). Motivating autistic children through stimulus variation. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 13(4), 619–627. doi:10.1901/jaba.1980.13-619 PMID:7204282 Eccleston, S. T. (2010). Successful collaboration: Four essential traits of effective special education specialists. Journal of the International Association of Special Education, 11(1), 40–47.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Echols, S. (2009). Transformational/Servant Leadership: A potential Synergism for An Inclusive Leadership Style. Journal of Religious Leadership, 8(2), 85–116. eduplanet21. (n.d.). Collaborative learning communities. https://eduplanet21.com/professionallearning/collaborative-learning-communities/ Egel, A. L. (1981). Reinforcer variation: Implications for motivating developmentally disabled children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14(3), 345–350. doi:10.1901/jaba.1981.14-345 PMID:7298543

275

Compilation of References

Egilson, S. T., & Traustadottir, R. (2009). Participation of students with physical disabilities in the school environment. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 63(3), 264–272. doi:10.5014/ajot.63.3.264 PMID:19522135 Eisenberg, E. M., Goodall, H. L. Jr, & Trethewey, A. (2010). Organizational communication: Balancing creativity and constraint (6th ed.). Bedford/St. Martin’s. Emmers, E., Baeyens, D., & Petry, K. (2020). Attitudes and self-efficacy of teachers towards inclusion in higher education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), 139–153. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1628337 Endres, S., & Weibler, J. (2020). Understanding (non)leadership phenomena in collaborative interorganizational networks and advancing shared leadership theory: An interpretive grounded theory study. Bus Res, 13(1), 275–309. doi:10.100740685-019-0086-6 Eriksson, L., Welander, J., & Granlund, M. (2007). Participation in everyday school activities for children with and without disabilities. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 19(5), 485–502. doi:10.100710882-007-9065-5 Evans, L. (2018, December 19). Why you should completely change the way you view collaboration. Fast Company. https://www.fastcompany.com/90279110/how-to-change-the-way-you-thinkabout-collaboration Ewoldt, K. B., & Morgan, J. J. (2017). Color-coded graphic organizers for teaching writing to students with learning disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 49(3), 175–184. doi:10.1177/0040059916681769 Fang, Y.-C., Chen, J.-Y., Wang, M.-J., & Chen, C.-Y. (2019). The Impact of Inclusive Leadership on Employees’ Innovative Behaviors: The Mediation of Psychological Capital. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1803. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01803 PMID:31447740 Fennick, E., & Liddy, D. (2001). Responsibilities and preparation for collaborative teaching: Co-teachers’ perspectives. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 229–240. doi:10.1177/088840640102400307

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Fisher, K. M., Willis, C. B., & Ransom, B. E. (2020). Parent knowledge of the definition of FAPE in light of the Endrew vs. Douglas County School Board decision. Journal of Special Education Apprenticeship, 9(1), 1-15. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1241863.pdf Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2001). Access to the core curriculum: Critical ingredients for student success. Remedial and Special Education, 22(3), 148–157. doi:10.1177/074193250102200303 Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Thousand, J. (2003). What do special educators need to know and be prepared to do for inclusive schooling to work? Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(1), 42–50. doi:10.1177/088840640302600105 Fisher, M., & Meyer, L. H. (2002). Development and social competence after two years for students enrolled in inclusive and self-contained educational programs. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 27(3), 165–174. doi:10.2511/rpsd.27.3.165 276

Compilation of References

Fitch, F. (2003). Inclusion, exclusion, and ideology: Special education students’ changing sense of self. The Urban Review, 35(3), 233–252. doi:10.1023/A:1025733719935 Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-development inquiry. The American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 Franca, V. M., Kerr, M. M., Reitz, A. L., & Lambert, D. (1990). Peer tutoring among behaviorally disordered students: Academic and social benefits to tutor and tutee. Education & Treatment of Children, 13(2), 109–128. Francisco, M. P. B., Hartman, M., & Wang, Y. (2020). Inclusion and special education. Education in Science, 10(238), 1–17. Francisco, M. P., Hartman, M., & Wang, Y. (2020). Inclusion and special education. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–17. doi:10.3390/educsci10090238 Frederickson, N., Dunsmuir, S., Lang, J., & Monsen, J. J. (2004). Mainstream‐special school inclusion partnerships: Pupil, parent and teacher perspectives. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 8(1), 37–57. doi:10.1080/1360311032000159456 Freeman, S. F., & Alkin, M. C. (2000). Academic and social attainments of children with mental retardation in general education and special education settings. Remedial and Special Education, 21(1), 3–26. doi:10.1177/074193250002100102 Freire, P. (1973). Pedagogy of the oppressed. The Seabury Press. French, N. K. (2003). Paraeducators in special education programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 36(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.17161/foec.v36i2.6869 Friend, M. (2014). Co-teaching strategies to improve student outcomes. National Professional Resources. www.NPRinc.com Friend, M. (2016). Welcome to co-teaching 2.0. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 16–22. Friend, M., & Barron, T. (2019). Collaborating with colleagues to increase students success. In J. McLeskey, L. Maheady, B. Billingsley, M. T. Brownell, & T. J. Lewis (Eds.), High leverage practices for inclusive classrooms (pp. 3–14). Routledge., doi:10.4324/9781315176093-2

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2016). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (8th ed.). Pearson. Friend, M., Cook, L., Hurley-Chamberlain, D., & Shamberger, C. (2010). Co-teaching: An illustration of the complexity of collaboration in special education. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 9–27. doi:10.1080/10474410903535380 Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2000). Inclusion versus full inclusion. Profiles & Perspectives. Retrieved June 14, 2020, from https://beloinandbrandl.com/wp-content/uploads/Forum_M2_Supplemental. pdf

277

Compilation of References

Fuchs, W. W. (2010). Examining teachers’ perceived barriers associated with inclusion. SRATE Journal, 19(1), 30-35. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (1994). Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60(4), 294–309. doi:10.1177/001440299406000402 Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1), 93–99. doi:10.1598/RRQ.41.1.4 Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., & Bishop, N. (1992). Instructional adaptation for students at risk. The Journal of Educational Research, 86(2), 70–84. doi:10.1080/00220671.1992.9941143 Galaterou, J., & Antoniou, A. S. (2017). Teachers’ Attitudes towards Inclusive Education: The Role of Job Stressors and Demographic Parameters. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 643–658. Gal, E., Schreur, N., & Engel-Yeger, B. (2010). Inclusion of children with disabilities: Teachers’ attitudes and requirements for environmental accommodations. International Journal of Special Education, 25(2), 89–99. Gallup, J., Perihan, C., Tatsuma, Y., & Ikuta, S. (2021). Creative Inclusive Functional Content Using Dot Codes: An Exploration of Multistep Recipes for Individuals with Autism in PostSecondary Setting. In Y. Kats & F. Stasolla (Eds.), Education and Technology Support for Children and Young Adults with ASD and Learning Disabilities (pp. 149–166). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7053-1.ch008 Gautreaux, G. G. (2005). The effects of monitoring training on the acquisition of an observational learning repertoire under peer tutoring conditions, generalization and collateral effects (Doctoral dissertation, Columbia University, 2005). Abstract from UMI Proquest Digital Dissertations. Dissertation Abstracts Item: AAT3174795. Gee, K., Gonzalez, M., & Cooper, C. (2020). Outcomes of inclusive versus separate placements: A matched pairs comparison study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45(4), 223–240. doi:10.1177/1540796920943469

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Gehrke, R. S., & Cocchiarella, M. (2013). Preservice special and general educators’ knowledge of inclusion. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(3), 204–216. doi:10.1177/0888406413495421 Georgiou, G. K., Papadopoulos, T. C., Zarouna, E., & Parrila, R. K. (2012). Are auditory and visual processing deficits related to developmental dyslexia? Dyslexia (Chichester, England), 18(2), 110–129. doi:10.1002/dys.1439 PMID:22419585 Ghedin, E., & Aquario, D. (2020). Collaborative teaching in mainstream schools: Research with general education and support teachers. International Journal of Whole Schools, 16(2), 1–34.

278

Compilation of References

Giangreco, M. F., Prelock, P. A., Reid, R. R., Dennis, R. E., & Edelman, S. W. (1999). Roles of related service personnel in inclusive schools. In R. A. Villa & J. S. Thousand (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education: Piecing the puzzle together (2nd ed., pp. 360–393). Paul H. Brookes. Glazzard, J. (2011). Perceptions of the barriers to effective inclusion in one primary school: Voices of teachers and teaching assistant. Support for Learning, 26(2), 56–63. doi:10.1111/j.14679604.2011.01478.x Goldring, R., Gray, L., & Bitterman, A. (2013). Characteristics of public and private elementary and secondary school teachers in the United States: Results from the 2011-12 Schools and Staffing Survey. First Look. NCES 2013-314. National Center for Education Statistics. González, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms. Erlbaum. Good, T. E., & Brophy, J. E. (2003). Looking in Classrooms (9th ed.). Allyn and Bacon. Gorry, J. (2011). Cultures of learning and learning culture: Socratic and Confucian approaches to teaching and learning. Learning and Teaching, 4(3), 4–18. doi:10.3167/latiss.2011.040302 Goudreau, J. (2012, October 8). The secret art of negotiation: Take your ego off the table. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jennagoudreau/2012/10/08/the-secret-art-of-negotiating-take-yourego-off-the-table/ Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2005). Writing better: Effective strategies for teaching students with learning disabilities. Paul H. Brooks. Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2016). A Path to Better Writing: Evidence-Based Practices in the Classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(4), 359–365. doi:10.1002/trtr.1432 Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (2003). Students with learning disabilities and the process of writing: A meta-analysis of SRSD studies. In H. L. Swanson, K. R. Harris, & S. Graham (Eds.), Handbook of learning disabilities (pp. 323–344). The Guilford Press. Gray, K., & Koncz, A. (2020, January 16). The top attributes employers want to see on resumes. National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE). https://www.naceweb.org/about-us/ press/2020/the-top-attributes-employers-want-to-see-on-resumes/

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Greene, J. M. (2019). Hofstede’s cultural dimensions theory. Salem Press Encyclopedia. Green, J. (2019). Cross-cultural confusions amongst diverse colleagues: What teachers’ narratives reveal about intergroup communication. Discourse (Abingdon), 40(3), 386–398. doi:10.1080/0 1596306.2017.1349737 Greer, R. D. (1991). Teaching practices to save America’s schools: The legacy of BF Skinner. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(2), 159–164. doi:10.1007/BF00957002

279

Compilation of References

Greer, R. D. (1997). The comprehensive application of behavior analysis to schooling (CABAS®). Behavior and Social Issues, 7(1), 59–63. doi:10.5210/bsi.v7i1.300 Greer, R. D. (2002). Designing teaching strategies: An applied behavior analysis systems approach. Academic Press. Greer, R. D., Corwin, A., & Buttigieg, S. (2011). The effects of the verbal developmental capability of Naming on how children can be taught. Acta de Investigación Psicológica, 1(1), 23–54. doi:10.22201/fpsi.20074719e.2011.1.214 Greer, R. D., Keohane, D. D., & Healy, O. (2002). Quality and comprehensive applications of behavior analysis to schooling. The Behavior Analyst Today, 3(2), 120–132. doi:10.1037/h0099977 Greer, R. D., Keohane, D., Meincke, K., Gautreaux, G., Pereira, J. A., Chavez-Brown, M., & Yuan, L. (2004). Key instructional components of effective peer tutoring for tutors, tutees, and peer observers. In D. J. Moran & R. W. Malott (Eds.), Evidence-based educational methods (pp. 295–333). Academic Press. doi:10.1016/B978-012506041-7/50018-8 Greer, R. D., Pohl, P., Du, L., & Moschella, J. L. (2017). The separate development of children’s listener and speaker behavior and the intercept as behavioral metamorphosis. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 7(13), 674–704. doi:10.4236/jbbs.2017.713045 Greer, R. D., & Ross, D. E. (2008). Verbal behavior analysis: Inducing and expanding new verbal capabilities in children with language delays. Allyn & Bacon. Greer, R. D., Singer-Dudek, J., & Gautreaux, G. (2006). Observational learning. International Journal of Psychology, 41(6), 486–499. doi:10.1080/00207590500492435 Greer, R. D., Stolfi, L., Chavez-Brown, M., & Rivera-Valdez, C. (2005). The emergence of the listener to speaker component of Naming in children as a function of multiple exemplar instruction. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 21(1), 123–134. doi:10.1007/BF03393014 PMID:22477318 Gregory, J. (2018). Not my responsibility: The impact of separate special education systems on educators’ attitudes toward inclusion. Educational Policy Analysis and Strategic Research, 13(1), 127–148. doi:10.29329/epasr.2018.137.8 Gridmark Inc. (n.d.). Invisible two-dimensional dot-code technology, Grid Onput. http://gridmark. co.jp/en/technologies

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Group Work and Collaborative Learning. (n.d.). University of Virginia: Teaching Continuity. https://teaching.cornell.edu/teaching-resources/engaging-students/collaborative-learning Guirdham, M., & Guirdham, O. (2017). Communicating across cultures at work (4th ed.). Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/978-1-137-52637-3 Guzman, N. (1997). Leadership for successful inclusive schools: A study of principal behaviours. Journal of Educational Administration, 35(5), 439–444. doi:10.1108/09578239710184583

280

Compilation of References

Hammill, D. D. (1990). A brief history of Learning Disabilities. In P. Myers & D. D. Hammill (Eds.), Learning Disabilities: Basic concepts, assessment practices and instructional strategies. Pro-Ed. Hammond, H., & Ingalls, L. (2003). Teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion: Survey results from elementary school teachers in three southwestern rural school district. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 22(2), 24–30. doi:10.1177/875687050302200204 Hansen, J. H., Carrington, S., Jensen, C. R., Molbæk, M., & Schmidt, M. C. S. (2020). The collaborative practice of inclusion and exclusion. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 6(1), 47–57. doi:10.1080/20020317.2020.1730112 Hardman, E. (2015). How pedagogy 2.0 can foster teacher preparation and community building in special education. Social Inclusion (Lisboa), 3(6), 42–55. doi:10.17645i.v3i6.415 Harter, S. (1993). Causes and consequences of low self-esteem in children and adolescents. In R. Baumeister (Ed.), Handbook of self-concept (pp. 1–37). Wiley. doi:10.1007/978-1-4684-8956-9_5 Hatzichristou, C., Lambropoulou, A., & Adamopoulou, E. (2013). Key Issues - Child Development and Adaptation. Mental Retardation. Retrieved October 18, 2020, from shorturl.at/bfsG9 Hatzilouka-Mavri, E., Hatzigianni-Yiagou, E., & Papadopoulos, T. (2003). Reading and Writing in First Grade of Elementary School: Theory and Praxis. Cyprus: Ministry of Education and Culture - Cyprus Pedagogical Institute. [in Greek] Heck, T. W., & Bacharach, N. (2016). A better model for student teaching. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 24–29. Henderson, D. (2018). Staff collaboration for student success: Implementation challenges of professional learning communities and response to intervention. Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 10(2), 39–44. Hernandez, D. A., Hueck, S., & Charley, C. (2016). General Education and Special Education Teachers’ Attitudes towards Inclusion. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 79-93.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Heyder, A., Südkamp, A., & Steinmayr, R. (2020). How are teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion related to the social-emotional school experiences of students with and without special educational needs? Learning and Individual Differences, 77, 77. doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101776 Higgins, J. W., Williams, R. L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (2001). The effects of a token economy employing instructional consequences for a third-grade student with learning disabilities: A data-based case study. Education & Treatment of Children, 24(1), 99–106. Hongbiao, Y & Ching-sing, Y. (2020). catering for learner diversity: issues and Trends. ECNJJ Review of Education, 1-3. Doi; doi:10.1177/2096531120927620

281

Compilation of References

Hong, S., Kwon, K., & Jeon, H.-J. (2014). Children’s attitudes towards peers with disabilities: Associations with personal and parental factors. Infant and Child Development, 23(2), 170–193. doi:10.1002/icd.1826 Horner, R. (2016, January 26). A brief history of PBIS with Rob Horner [Audio podcast]. www. tash.org Horrocks, J., White, G., & Roberts, L. (2008). Principals’ attitudes regarding inclusion of children with autism in Pennsylvania public schools. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(8), 1462–1473. doi:10.100710803-007-0522-x PMID:18256916 Horton, V. (2013). Going “All-in” for deep collaboration. Collaborative Librarianship, 5(2), 64-69. https://digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship/vol5/iss2/1 Houchens, G. W., Zhang, J., Davis, K., Niu, C., Chon, K. H., & Miller, S. (2017). The impact of positive behavior interventions and supports on teachers’ perceptions of teaching conditions and student achievement. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 19(3), 168–179. doi:10.1177/1098300717696938 Hovland, J. B. (2020). Inclusive comprehension strategy instruction: Reciprocal teaching and adolescents with intellectual disability. Teaching Exceptional Children, 52(6), 404–413. doi:10.1177/0040059920914334 Howey, P. (n.d.). What you need to know about IDEA 2004: IEPs for children with behavior problems. Retrieved from https://www.wrightslaw.com/howey/iep.special.factors.htm Hranchuk, K., Greer, R. D., & Longano, J. (2019). Instructional demonstrations are more efficient than consequences alone for children with naming. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 35(1), 1–20. doi:10.100740616-018-0095-0 PMID:31976218 Hsieh, J. Y., & Liou, K. T. (2018). Collaborative Leadership and Organizational Performance: Assessing the Structural Relation in a Public Service Agency. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 38(1), 83–109. doi:10.1177/0734371X15623619

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Hunt, P., Doering, K., Hirose-Hatae, A., Maier, J., & Goetz, L. (2001). Across-program collaboration to support students with and without disabilities in a general education classroom. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(4), 240–256. doi:10.2511/rpsd.26.4.240 Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., & Doering, K. (2003). Collaborative teaming to support students at risk and students with severe disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 315–332. doi:10.1177/001440290306900304 Hunt, P., Soto, G., Maier, J., Müller, E., & Goetz, L. (2002). Collaborative teaming to support students with augmentative and alternative communication needs in general education classrooms. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18(1), 20–35. doi:10.1080/aac.18.1.20.35

282

Compilation of References

Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F., Barmer, A., & Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020-144). U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces. ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2020144 Hutchins, G. (2011). Future-proofing needs collaboration, innovation, education, and inspiration. https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/blog/biomimicry-business-transformationcollaboration Ikuta, S. (2018). Multimedia-enabled dot codes as communication technologies. In M. KhosrowPour (Ed.), Encyclopedia of information science and technology (4th ed., pp. 6464–6475). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-2255-3.ch561. Ikuta, S., Endo, E., Nemoto, F., Kaiami, S., & Ezoe, T. (2013). School activities using handmade teaching materials with dot codes. In D. G. Barres, Z. C., Carrion, & R. L.-C. Delgado (Eds.), Technologies for inclusive education: Beyond traditional integration approaches (pp. 220-243). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-2530-3.ch011 Ikuta, S., Ishitobi, R., Nemoto, F., Urushihata, C., Yamaguchi, K., & Nakui, H. (2017). Handmade content and school activities for autistic children with expressive language disabilities. In Y. Kats (Ed.), Supporting the education of children with autism spectrum disorders (pp. 85–115). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-0816-8.ch006. Ikuta, S., Morton, D., Kasai, M., Nemoto, F., Ohtaka, M., & Horiuchi, M. (2015). School activities with new dot-code handling multimedia. In L. Lennex & K. Nettleton (Eds.), Cases on instructional technology in gifted and talented education (pp. 311–338). IGI Global. https:// doi.org/10.4018/978-1-4666-6489-0.ch015. Ikuta, S., Watanuki, M., & Abe, S. (2021b). Multimedia-enabled dot codes as communication aids. In M. Khosrow-Pour (Ed.), Handbook of research on modern educational technologies, applications, and management (pp. 331–345). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-79983476-2.ch020.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Ikuta, S., Yamashita, S., Higo, H., Tomiyama, J., Saotome, N., Sudo, S., Hoshi, S., Endo, T., Narushima, T., Suzuki, K., & Watanuki, M. (2019b). Original teaching materials and school activities with multimedia-enabled dot codes. In S. Ikuta (Ed.), Handmade teaching materials for students with disabilities (pp. 50–75). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-6240-5. ch003. Ikuta, S., Yoshida, A., Ishitobi, R., Kudo, M., Sekine, M., Yamashita, S., Edagawa, Y., Edagawa, T., & Abe, S. (2020b). Software handling multimedia-enabled dot codes and school activities for students with disabilities. In S. Ikuta (Ed.), Handbook of research on software for gifted and talented school activities in K-12 classrooms (pp. 217–242). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-17998-1400-9.ch010.

283

Compilation of References

Ikuta, S., & Hisatsune, Y. (2019a). Handcrafted customized content and school activities with newly developed technologies. In S. L. Gronseth & E. M. Dalton (Eds.), Universal access through inclusive instructional design: International perspectives on UDL (pp. 164–172). Routledge. Ikuta, S., Ouchi, C., Tomiyama, J., Katagiri, Y., Hoshi, S., Sakai, N., Kisaka, C., Hara, N., Nakamura, H., & Ozaki, K. (2021c). School Activities for Autistic Children Using Newly Developed Software and Tools. In Y. Kats & F. Stasolla (Eds.), Education and Technology Support for Children and Young Adults with ASD and Learning Disabilities (pp. 125–148). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-7053-1.ch007 Ikuta, S., Sakurai, E., Takayanagi, M., Suzuki, N., Horiuchi, M., Nakano, H., Tamai, Y., Sugibayashi, K., Yoshida, M., Kaneko, C., Nakazawa, M., Nakano, Y., Yamashita, S., Oshima, M., & Abe, S. (2021a). University Students: Schoolteachers Partnership With Newly Developed Technologies. In D. Farland-Smith (Ed.), Enhancing Learning Opportunities Through Student, Scientist, and Teacher Partnerships (pp. 133–157). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-4966-7.ch008 Ikuta, S., Urushihata, C., Saotome, N., & Abe, S. (2020a). School activities for disabled students using self-made contents with multimedia-enabled dot codes. In D. Schmidt-Crawford (Ed.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 1990–1999). https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/215981/ Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). Public Law, (108), 447. Isogai, K. (2017). Recent Developments in Japan’s Special Needs Education – Promoting an Inclusive Education System. NISE Bulletin, 16, 28–32. Jackson, L. B., Ryndak, D. L., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2008). The dynamic relationship between context, curriculum, and student learning: A case for inclusive education as a research-based practice. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 34(1), 175–195. doi:10.2511/ rpsd.33.4.175 Jimerson, S., Burns, M., & VanDerHayden, A. (2007). Response to intervention. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-49053-3 Johnson, G. O. (1962). Special education for the mentally handicapped—A paradox. Exceptional Children, 29(2), 62–69. doi:10.1177/001440296202900202

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Johnson, M., & Bailey, J. (1974). Cross-age tutoring: Fifth graders as arithmetic tutors for kindergarten children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 7(2), 223–232. doi:10.1901/ jaba.1974.7-223 PMID:4436170 Johnson, T. M., King-Sears, M. E., & Miller, A. D. (2020). High school co-teaching partners’ self-efficacy, personal compatibility, and active involvement in instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0731948720919811

284

Compilation of References

Jones, B. A., & Peterson-Ahmad, M. B. (2017). Preparing new special education teachers to facilitate collaboration in the individualized education program process through mini conferencing. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4), 697-707. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ1184062.pdf Jones, B. A., & Peterson-Ahmad, M. B. (2017). Preparing new special education teachers to facilitate collaboration in the individualized education program process through mini conferencing. International Journal of Special Education, 32(4). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1184062.pdf Jung, W. S. (2007, Fall). Preservice teacher training for successful inclusion. Education, 128(1), 106–113. Kagan, L., Kagan, M., & Kagan, S. (2012). Teambuilding: Cooperative learning structures. Kagan Publishing. Kakia, D., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2016). Dyscalculia and Advisory Educational Intervention. Journal of Regional Socio-Economic Issues, 6(2), 92-105. Kakouros, E., & Maniadaki, K. (2006). Child and adolescent psychopathology: A developmental approach. Typothito-Dardanos. [in Greek] Kambitis, I., Halioulia, E., & Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2016). Differentiated Teaching / Instruction & Counseling. Journal of Regional Socio-Economic Issues, 6(2), 32-45. Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994b). Classwide peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27(1), 49–61. doi:10.1901/jaba.1994.27-49 PMID:8188563 Kamps, D. M., Dugan, E. P., & Leonard, B. R. (1994a). Enhanced small group instruction using choral responding and student. American Journal of Mental Retardation, 99(1), 60–73. PMID:7946254 Kamps, D. M., Leonard, B. R., Vernon, S., Dugan, E. P., Delquadri, J. C., Gershon, B., Wade, L., & Folk, L. (1992). Teaching social skills to students with autism to increase peer interactions in an integrated first‐grade classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 281–288. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-281 PMID:1634423

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kamps, D., Locke, P., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Increasing academic skills of students with autism using fifth grade peers as tutors. Education & Treatment of Children, 12(1), 38–51. Kamps, D., Royer, J., Dugan, E., Kravits, T., Gonzalez-Lopez, A., Garcia, J., Carnazzo, K., Morrison, L., & Kane, L. G. (2002). Peer training to facilitate social interaction for elementary students with autism and their peers. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 173–187. doi:10.1177/001440290206800202 Kampwirth, T. J., & Powers, K. M. (2016). Collaborative consultation in the schools: Effective practices for learning and behavioral problems. Pearson.

285

Compilation of References

Kaplan, S. (2019). Advocating Differentiating Differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 42(1), 58–59. doi:10.1177/1076217518805785 Kaplan, S. N. (2006). Advocacy by discussion: Dialogues about differentiation. Gifted Child Today, 25(1), 35–38. doi:10.4219/gct-2006-193 Kaplan, S. N., Guzman, I., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). Using the parallel curriculum model in urban settings, grades K-8. Corwin Press. Karten, T. J., & Murawski, W. W. (2020). Co-teaching do’s, don’ts, and do betters. ASCD. Kauffman, J. M., & Hornby, G. (2020). Inclusive vision versus special education reality. Education Sciences, 10(9), 1–13. doi:10.3390/educsci10090258 Kavale, K. A., & Forness, S. R. (2000). History, rhetoric, and reality. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 279–296. doi:10.1177/074193250002100505 Kawano, K. (2016, November 1). GPlusMediaInc: SAVVY Tokyo: Special Needs Education in Japan. Medium. https://savvytokyo.com/special-needs-education-japan/ Keller, F. S. (1968). Good-bye, teacher…. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(1), 79–89. Kelly, K., Merry, J., & Gonzalez, M. (2018). Trust, collaboration and well-being: Lessons learned from Finland. SRATE Journal, 27(2), 34–29. Kelly, N., Wright, N., Dawes, L., Kerr, J., & Robertson, A. (2019). Co-design for curriculum planning: A model for professional development for high school teachers. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 44(7), 84–107. doi:10.14221/ajte.2019v44n7.6 King, L., & Allen, A. (2018). Beyond preservice special educators: Embedding assistive technology content throughout a teacher education program of study. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(4), 228–234. doi:10.1177/8756870518773474 Klingner, J. K., & Vaughn, S. (1999). Students’ perceptions of instruction in inclusion classrooms: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 23–37. Knapczyk, D. R., & Livingston, G. (1973). Self‐recording and student teacher supervision: Variables within a token economy structure. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6(3), 481–486. doi:10.1901/jaba.1973.6-481 PMID:16795431

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Knapp, M. L., & Vangelisti, A. L. (2009). Interpersonal communication and human relationships (6th ed.). Pearson. Koch, K. (2017). Stay in the box! embedded assistive technology improves access for students with disabilities. Education Sciences, 7(4), 82. doi:http://dx.doi.org.queens.ezproxy.cuny. edu/10.3390/educsci7040082 Kochhar, C. A., & West, L. L. (1996). Handbook for Successful Inclusion. Aspen Publishers.

286

Compilation of References

Koegel, L. K., Koegel, R. L., Hurley, C., & Frea, W. D. (1992). Improving social skills and disruptive behavior in children with autism through self‐management. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(2), 341–353. doi:10.1901/jaba.1992.25-341 PMID:1634427 Koegel, L. K., Singh, A. K., & Koegel, R. L. (2010). Improving motivation for academics in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(9), 1057–1066. doi:10.100710803-010-0962-6 PMID:20221791 Koegel, R. L., & Egel, A. L. (1979). Motivating autistic children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 88(4), 418–426. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.88.4.418 PMID:479464 Koenig, D. (2020, July 14). eHow: What is an inclusive setting? Medium. https://www.ehow. co.uk/facts_7487293_inclusive-setting.html Kokemuller, N. (n.d.). Is it important to be open-minded in the workplace? https://work.chron. com/important-open-minded-workplace-6124.html Kougioumtzis, G. A. (2014). Teacher Mentoring: Reflection as a Guiding Tool. In K. Kasimatis & M. Argiriou (Eds.), International and European Trends in Education: Their Impact on the Greek Education System. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference, Volume I (pp. 120126). Moschato-Lampiri Schools. Athens: ASPAITE – EEMAPE. [in Greek] Kougioumtzis, G. A., Verykiou, J., & Mallouchou, A. (2018). Bullying and Advocacy. In U. Thomas (Ed.), Advocacy in Academia and the Role of Teacher Preparation Programs (pp. 255–287). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-2906-4.ch015 Krahé, B., & Altwasser, C. (2006). Changing negative attitudes towards persons with physical disabilities: An experimental intervention. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 59–69. doi:10.1002/casp.849 Krischler, M., Powell, J. J., & Pit-Ten Cate, I. M. (2019). What is meant by inclusion? On the effects of different definitions on attitudes towards inclusion education. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 34(5), 632–648. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1580837 Kroustalakis, G. S. (2005). Children with Special Needs in the Family and School: Psychological Intervention. Academic Press. [in Greek]

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Kugelmaas, J. W. (2003). Inclusive leadership: leadership for inclusion. Full International Practitioner Enquiry Report, Spring 2003. National College for School Leadership. Kunc, N. (1992). The need to belong: Rediscovering Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. In R. A. Villa, J. S. Thousand, W. Stainback, & S. Stainback (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education: An administrative guide to creating heterogeneous schools (pp. 25-39). Paul H. Brookes. Kurniawati, F., De Boer, A. A., Minnaert, A. E. M. G., & Mangunsong, F. (2017). Evaluating the effect of a teacher training programme on the primary teachers’ attitudes, knowledge and teaching strategies regarding special educational needs. Educational Psychology, 37(3), 287–297. doi:10.1080/01443410.2016.1176125

287

Compilation of References

Kurth, J. A., & Keegan, L. (2014). Development and use of curricular adaptations for students receiving special education services. The Journal of Special Education, 48(3), 191–203. doi:10.1177/0022466912464782 Kurth, J. A., Morningstar, M. E., & Kozleski, E. B. (2014). The persistence of highly restrictive special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(3), 227–239. doi:10.1177/1540796914555580 Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers. Jossey-Bass Publishing Co. Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3), 465–491. doi:10.3102/00028312032003465 Ladson-Billings, G. (2009). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American children (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass. Ladson-Billings, G. (2014). Culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0: A.k.a the remix. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 74–84. doi:10.17763/haer.84.1.p2rj131485484751 Lamm, N., & Greer, R. D. (1991). A systematic replication and a comparative analysis of CABAS. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1(4), 427–444. doi:10.1007/BF00946776 Lanter, A., & Singer-Dudek, J. (2020). The effects of an observational conditioning-by-denial intervention on the establishment of three observational learning cusps. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 21(2), 231–254. doi:10.1080/15021149.2020.1724001 Learning Disabilities Association of America. (n.d.). Types of learning disabilities. https:// ldaamerica.org/types-of-learning-disabilities/ Lee, S. H., Amos, B. A., Gragoudas, S., Lee, Y., Shogren, K. A., Theoharis, R., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2006). Curriculum augmentation and adaptation strategies to promote access to the general curriculum for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 199–212.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Lee, S. H., Soukup, J. H., Little, T. D., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2009). Student and teacher variables contributing to access to the general education curriculum for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 43(1), 29–44. doi:10.1177/0022466907313449 Lee, S. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Soukup, J. H., & Palmer, S. B. (2010). Impact of curriculum modifications on access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76(2), 213–233. doi:10.1177/001440291007600205 Lee, S., Odom, S. L., & Loftin, R. (2007). Social engagement with peers and stereotypic behavior of children with autism. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9(2), 67–79. doi:10.1177/ 10983007070090020401

288

Compilation of References

Lehtomäki, E., Tuomi, M. T., & Matonya, M. (2014). Educational research from Tanzania 1998–2008 concerning persons with disabilities: What can we learn? International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 32–39. doi:10.1016/j.ijer.2013.10.005 Lent, R. C. (2012). Overcoming textbook fatigue: 21st-century tools to revitalize teaching and learning. ASCD. Letseka, M., & Pitsoe, V. (2014). The challenges and prospects of access to higher education at Unisa. Studies in Higher Education, 39(10), 1942–1954. doi:10.1080/03075079.2013.823933 Levene, J. (2016, September 5). Solving the problem with problem-solving meetings. Professional Development. https://www.extension.harvard.edu/professional-development/blog/solvingproblem-problem-solving-meetings Lewis, G. D., Liace, K. F., & Braun, P. A. (2019). All hands on deck in curriculum and instructional processes. World Journal of Education, 9(5), 83–99. doi:10.5430/wje.v9n5p83 Leyser, Y., & Kirk, R. (2004). Evaluating inclusion: An examination of parent views and factors influencing their perspectives. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 51(3), 271–285. doi:10.1080/1034912042000259233 Licht, B. G., & Kistner, J. A. (1986). Motivational problems of learning - disabled children: Individual 63 differences and their implications for treartment. In J. K. Torgesen & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Psychological and educational perspectives on learning disabilities (pp. 225–255). Academic Press. Lindsay, S., Proulx, M., Thomson, N., & Scott, H. (2013). Educators’ challenges of including children with autism spectrum disorder in mainstream classrooms. International Journal of Disability Development and Education, 60(4), 347–362. doi:10.1080/1034912X.2013.846470 Lipkin, P.H., Okamoto, J., & The Council on Children with Disabilities, and The Council on Schools. (n.d.). The individuals with disabilities act (IDEA) for children with special education needs. American Academy of Pediatrics, 136(6), 1650-1662. Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1994). Inclusive education and school restructuring. ERIC. Retrieved June 13, 2020, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED383128

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Lipsky, O. K., & Gartner, A. (1991). Restructuring for quality. In J. W. Lloyd, A. C. Repp, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), The Regular Education Initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 43–56). Sycamore. Littlejohn, S. (2002). Theories of human communication (7th ed.). Wadsworth/Thomas Learning. Lohrmann, S., & Bambara, L. M. (2006). Elementary education teachers’ beliefs about essential supports needed to successfully include students with developmental disabilities who engage in challenging behaviors. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31(2), 157–173. doi:10.1177/154079690603100208 Loreman, T. (2017). Pedagogy for Inclusive Education. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. 289

Compilation of References

Love, H. R., & Horn, E. (2021). Definition, context, quality: Current issues in research examining high-quality inclusive education. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 40(4), 204–216. doi:10.1177/0271121419846342 Lovett, M. W., Steinbach, K. A., & Frijters, J. C. (2000). Remediating the core deficits of developmental reading disability: A double-deficit perspective. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 33(4), 334–358. doi:10.1177/002221940003300406 PMID:15493096 Lyon, G. R. (1996). Learning Disabilities. In E. J. Mash & R. A. Barkley (Eds.), Child Psychopathology (pp. 390–435). Guilford Press. Madsen, C. H. Jr, Becker, W. C., & Thomas, D. R. (1968). Rules, praise, and ignoring: Elements of elementary classroom control. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 1(2), 139–150. doi:10.1901/ jaba.1968.1-139 PMID:16795170 Magnússon, G., Göransson, K., & Lindqvist, G. (2019). Contextualizing inclusive education in educational policy: The case of Sweden. Nordic Journal of Studies in Educational Policy, 5(2), 67–77. doi:10.1080/20020317.2019.1586512 Maheady, L., Sacca, M. K., & Harper, G. F. (1988). Classwide peer tutoring with mildly handicapped high school students. Exceptional Children, 55(1), 52–59. doi:10.1177/001440298805500106 PMID:3169102 Mahoney, J., & Hall, C. (2017). Using technology to differentiate and accommodate students with disabilities. E-Learning and Digital Media, 14(50), 291–303. doi:10.1177/2042753017751517 Manis, F. R., & Bailey, C. E. (2008). Exploring heterogeneity in developmental dyslexia: A longitudinal investigation. In G. Reid, A. J. Fawcett, L. S. Siegel, & F. Manis (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Dyslexia (pp. 149–173). Sage Publications. doi:10.4135/9780857020987.n8 Mann, G., & Gilmore, L. (2021). Barriers to positive parent-teacher partnerships: The views of parents and teachers in an inclusive education context. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–13. doi:10.1080/13603116.2021.1900426 Manning, C., Waldman, M. R., Lindsey, W. E., & Newberg, A. (2012). Personal inner values: A key to effective face-to-face business communication. Journal of Executive Education, 11(1), 37–65.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Margalit, M., & Shulman, S. (1986). Autonomy perceptions and anxiety expressions of learning disabled adolescents. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19(5), 291–293. doi:10.1177/002221948601900508 PMID:3711733 Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999). Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings: Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Exceptional Children, 65(3), 315–328. doi:10.1177/001440299906500303 Masten, A. S., & Reed, M.-G. J. (2002). Resilience in development. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 74–88). Oxford University Press.

290

Compilation of References

Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (2000). The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction. Merrill. Mather, N., Wendling, B. J., & Roberts, R. (2009). Writing assessment and instruction for students with learning disabilities. Jossey-Bass. Mattessich, P. W., & Johnson, K. M. (2018). Collaboration: What makes it work (3rd ed.). Wilder. Matzen, K., Ryndak, D., & Nakao, T. (2010). Middle school teams increasing access to general education for students with significant disabilities: Issues encountered and activities observed across contexts. Remedial and Special Education, 31(4), 287–304. doi:10.1177/0741932508327457 McBride-Chang, C., & Manis, F. R. (1996). Structural invariance in the associations of naming speed, phonological awareness, and verbal reasoning in good and poor readers: A test of the double deficit hypothesis. Reading and Writing, 8(4), 323–339. doi:10.1007/BF00395112 McGhie-Richmond, D., & de Bruin, C. (2015). Tablets, tweets, and talking text: The role of technology in inclusive pedagogy. In J. Deppeler, T. Loreman, R. Smith, & L. Florian (Eds.), Inclusive pedagogy across the curriculum: International perspectives on inclusive education (Vol. 7, pp. 211–234). Emerald Group Publishing. doi:10.1108/S1479-363620150000007017 McHatton, P. A., & Parker, A. (2013). Purposeful preparation: Longitudinally exploring inclusion attitudes of general and special education pre-Service teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 36(3), 186–203. doi:10.1177/0888406413491611 McIntosh, R., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Haager, D., & Lee, O. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60(3), 249–261. doi:10.1177/001440299406000306 McLeskey, J. (2011). Supporting improved practice for special education teachers. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1). McLeskey, J., Landers, E., Williamson, P., & Hoppey, D. (2012). Are we moving toward educating students with disabilities in less restrictive settings? The Journal of Special Education, 46(3), 131–140. doi:10.1177/0022466910376670 McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. L. (2006). Comprehensive school reform and inclusive schools. Theory into Practice, 45(3), 269–278. doi:10.120715430421tip4503_9

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

McNamara, D. S. (Ed.). (2012). Reading comprehension strategies: Theory, interventions, and technologies. Psychology Press. Meaby, V. (2018). Establishing professional learning communities to support the promotion of equality and celebration of diversity: Reflections from a north-east community learning teacher. Teaching in Lifelong Learning, 8(2). Advance online publication. doi:10.5920/till.538 Melby-Lervåg, M., Lyster, S. A., & Hulme, C. (2012). Phonological skills and their role in learning to read: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 138(2), 322–352. doi:10.1037/ a0026744 PMID:22250824 291

Compilation of References

Michels, M., Manzi, A., & Mele, J. (2003). Cooperative learning & science: High school activities Grades 8-12. Kagan Publishing. Miguel, C. (2016). Common and intraverbal bidirectional naming. Analysis of Verbal Behavior, 32(2), 125–138. doi:10.100740616-016-0066-2 PMID:30800621 Mihajlovic, C. (2020). Special educators’ perceptions of their role in inclusive education: A case study in Finland. Journal of Pedagogical Research, 4(2), 83–97. doi:10.33902/JPR.2020060179 Miller, A. (2020, January 3). eduTopia: Creating effective professional learning communities: If managed well, these teams can help teachers innovate in the classroom and improve student outcomes. Medium. https://www.edutopia.org/article/creating-effective-professional-learningcommunities Miller, M., Garriott, P., & Mershon, D. (2005). Special education students’ placement preferences as shown in special education journals. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 1(9), Article 7. Miller, B., Taylor, K., & Ryder, R. (2019). Introduction to special topic: Serving children with disabilities within multitiered systems of support. AERA Open, 5(2), 1–6. doi:10.1177/2332858419853796 PMID:31431902 Miller, M., Ridgway, N., & Ridgway, A. (2019). Don’t ditch that tech: Differentiated instruction in a digital world. Dave Burgess Consulting, Inc. Milo, J. S., Mace, F. C., & Nevin, J. A. (2010). The effects of constant versus varied reinforcers on preference and resistance to change. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 93(3), 385–394. doi:10.1901/jeab.2010.93-385 PMID:21119852 Milteniene, L., & Venclovaite, I. (2012). Teacher collaboration in the context of inclusive education. Special Education, 2, 111–123. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sport, Science, and Technology, Japan. (2020). Gakko kihon chosa 2020 [Report on the school basic survey in 2020 academic year]. https://www.mext. go.jp/b_menu/toukei/chousa01/kihon/kekka/k_detail/1419591_00003.htm Minott, M. (2019). Reflective teaching, inclusive teaching and the teacher’s tasks in the inclusive classroom: A literary investigation. British Journal of Special Education, 46(2), 226–238. doi:10.1111/1467-8578.12260

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Moats, L., & Tolman, C. (n.d.). Types of reading disability: Reading pockets. https://www. readingrockets.org/article/types-reading-disability Mock, D. R., & Kauffman, J. M. (2002). Preparing teachers for full inclusion: Is it possible? Teacher Educator, 37(3), 202–215. doi:10.1080/08878730209555294 Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & Gonzalez, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141. doi:10.1080/00405849209543534

292

Compilation of References

Monsen, J. J., Ewing, D. L., & Kwoka, M. (2014). Teachers’ attitudes towards inclusion, perceived adequacy of support and classroom learning environment. Learning Environments Research, 17(1), 113–126. doi:10.100710984-013-9144-8 Mora-Ruano, J.G., Gebhardt, M., & Wittmann, E. (2018). Teacher collaboration in German schools: Do gender and school type influence the frequency of collaboration among teachers? Frontiers in Education, 3. doi:10.3389/feduc.2018.00055 Morgan, J. L. (2016). Reshaping the role of a special educator into a collaborative learning specialist. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 12(1), 40-60. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1095368.pdf Morina, A. (2017). Inclusive education in higher education: Challenges and opportunities. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 32(1), 3–17. doi:10.1080/08856257.2016.1254964 Moriña, A., & Perera, V. H. (2020). Inclusive Higher Education in Spain: Students With Disabilities Speak Out. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 19(3), 215–231. doi:10.1177/1538192718777360 Morningstar, M. E., Lombardi, A., Fowler, C. H., & Test, D. W. (2017). A preliminary college and career readiness model for secondary students with disabilities. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 40, 79–91. doi:10.1177/2165143415589926 Morningstar, M., Lombardi, A., & Test, D. (2018). Including college and career readiness within a multitiered systems of support framework. AERA Open, 4(1), 1–11. doi:10.1177/2332858418761880 Morton, T., & Kagan, S. (1998). Cooperative learning & Social studies towards excellence & equity Grades 6-12. Kagan Publishing. Mu, K., Siegel, E. B., & Allinder, R. M. (2000). Peer interactions and sociometric status of high school students with moderate or severe disabilities in general education classrooms. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25(3), 142–152. doi:10.2511/rpsd.25.3.142 Mumby, D., & Kuhn, T. (2018). Organizational communication: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). Sage. Mundschenk, N., Fuchs, W., & Simonson, S. (2017). Statewide change in teacher preparation: An inside job. New Educator, 13(4), 392–407. doi:10.1080/1547688X.2016.1237694

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Murawski, W. W. (2009). Collaborative teaching in secondary schools: Making the co teaching marriage work! Corwin Press. https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781452219370 Murawski, W. W., & Bernhardt, P. (2016). An administrator’s guide to co-teaching. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 30–34. Murawski, W. W., & Dieker, L. (2008). 50 ways to keep your co-teacher: Strategies for before, during, and after co-teaching. Council for Exceptional Children, 40(4), 40–48. doi:10.1177/004005990804000405

293

Compilation of References

Murawski, W. W., & Hughes, C. E. (2021). Special educators in inclusive settings: Take steps for self-advocacy! Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(3), 184–193. doi:10.1177/0040059920982263 Myers, C. B., & Meyers, L. K. (1995). The professional educator: A new introduction to teaching and schools. Wadsworth. Myers, J. P., & Rivero, K. (2019). Preparing globally competent preservice teachers: The development of content knowledge, disciplinary skills, and instructional design. Teaching and Teacher Education, 77, 214–225. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2018.10.008 Narayan, J. S., Heward, W. L., Gardner, R. III, Courson, F. H., & Omness, C. K. (1990). Using response cards to increase student participation in an elementary classroom. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 23(4), 483–490. doi:10.1901/jaba.1990.23-483 PMID:16795735 National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future. (2010). STEM teachers in professional learning communities: A knowledge synthesis. https://www2.wested.org/www-static/online_pubs/ resource1097.pdf National Institute of Mental Health. (2018, March). Autism spectrum disorder. https://www.nimh. nih.gov/health/topics/autism-spectrum-disorders-asd/index.shtml National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). What are reading disorders? https://www.nichd.nih. gov/health/topics/reading/conditioninfo/disorders Neill, C., Corder, D., Wikitera, K. A., & Cox, S. (2017). Embracing the muddle: Learning from the experiences from interdisciplinary teaching and learning collaboration. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 14(2), 136–154. Neitzel, J., & Busick, M. (2009). Overview of self-management. National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, The University of North Carolina. Nieto, S. (1996). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education (2nd ed.). Longman.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Noltemeyer, A., Palmer, K., James, A. G., & Petrasek, M. (2019). Disciplinary and achievement outcomes associated with school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports implementation level. School Psychology Review, 48(1), 81–87. doi:10.17105/SPR-2017-0131. V48-1 Ntombela, S. (2020). Teaching and learning support for students with disabilities: Issues and perspectives in open distance e-learning. Turkish Online Journal of Distance Education, 21(3), 18–26. doi:10.17718/tojde.761919 Ntombela, S., & Mahlangu, V. P. (2019). The Inclusion and Support of Students with Disabilities in the South African Higher Education System: Supporting Students with Disabilities. In R. Jeffries (Ed.), Diversity, Equity, and Inclusivity in Contemporary Higher Education (pp. 195–210). IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-5724-1.ch012

294

Compilation of References

O’Connor, E. A., Yasik, A. E., & Horner, S. L. (2016). Teachers’ knowledge of special education laws: What do they know? Insight into Learning Disabilities, 13(1), 7-18. https://files.eric.ed.gov/ fulltext/EJ1103671.pdf Obiakor, F. E., Harris, M., Mutua, K., Rotatori, A., & Algozzine, B. (2012). Making inclusion work in general education classrooms. Education & Treatment of Children, 35(3), 477–490. doi:10.1353/etc.2012.0020 Oliver, R. M., Wehby, J. H., & Nelson, J. R. (2015). Helping teachers maintain classroom management practices using a self-monitoring checklist. Teaching and Teacher Education, 51, 113–120. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2015.06.007 Olmedo, I. M. (1997). Voices of our past: Using oral history to explore funds of knowledge within a Puerto Rican family. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 28(4), 550–573. doi:10.1525/ aeq.1997.28.4.550 Ormrod, J. E. (2008). Educational Psychology (7th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc. Owen, S. (2016). Professional learning communities: Building skills, reinvigorating the passion, nurturing teacher wellbeing and “flourishing” within significantly innovative school contexts. Educational Review, 68(4), 403–419. doi:10.1080/00131911.2015.1119101 Padeliadu, S. (2011). Learning Disabilities and Educational Practice: What and Why. Pedio. [in Greek] Padeliadu, S., & Botsas, G. (2007). Learning Difficulties: Basic concepts and characteristics. Graphima. [in Greek] Paige, D. D. (2011). That sounded good! Using whole-class choral reading to improve fluency. The Reading Teacher, 64(6), 435–438. doi:10.1598/RT.64.6.5 Papadopoulos, T. C. (2001). Phonological and cognitive correlates of word-reading acquisition under two different instructional approaches. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 16(4), 549–567. doi:10.1007/BF03173197

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Papadopoulos, T. C., Georgiou, G. K., & Kendeou, P. (2009). Investigating the Double-Deficit Hypothesis in Greek: Findings from a longitudinal study. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 42(6), 528–547. doi:10.1177/0022219409338745 PMID:19723979 Papadopoulos, T. C., Kendeou, P., & Spanoudis, G. (2012). Investigating the factor structure and measurement invariance of phonological abilities in a sufficiently transparent language. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(2), 321–336. doi:10.1037/a0026446 Paris, D. (2012). Culturally sustaining pedagogy: A needed change in stance, terminology, and practice. Educational Researcher, 41(3), 93–97. doi:10.3102/0013189X12441244 Parkay, F. W., Hass, G., & Anctil, E. J. (2010). Goals and values. In Curriculum Leadership: Readings for Developing Quality Educational Programs (9th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.

295

Compilation of References

Pas, E. T., Johnson, S. R., Debnam, K. J., Hulleman, C. S., & Bradshaw, C. P. (2019). Examining the relative utility of PBIS implementation fidelity scores in relation to student outcomes. Remedial and Special Education, 40(1), 6–15. doi:10.1177/0741932518805192 Paseka, A., & Schwab, S. (2020). Parents’ attitudes towards inclusive education and their perceptions of inclusive teaching practices and resources. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 35(2), 254–272. doi:10.1080/08856257.2019.1665232 Patterson, J., Marshall, C., & Bowling, D. (2000). Are principals prepared to manage special education dilemmas? NASSP Bulletin, 84(613), 9–20. doi:10.1177/019263650008461303 Patterson, J., & Protheroe, N. (2001). Essentials for principals: School leader’s guide to special education. National Association of Elementary School Principals. Pavone, M., Bellacicco, R., & Cinotti, A. (2019). The inclusion of students with disabilities in higher education 25 years since the Salamanca Statement: Overview and highlights. Italian Journal of Special Education for Inclusion, 7(2), 124-140. Peck, C. A., Staub, D., Gallucci, C., & Schwartz, I. (2004). Parent perception of the impacts of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29(2), 135–143. doi:10.2511/rpsd.29.2.135 Pelt, R. M. (2020). Teachers’ Attitudes Toward the Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in the General Education Classroom in a Rural School District (PhD thesis). Virginia Commonwealth University. Pepler, D., & Graig, W. (1995). A peek behind the fence: Naturalistic observations of aggressive children with remote audiovisual recording. Developmental Psychology, 31(4), 548–553. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.31.4.548 Perfetti, C. A., & Hart, L. (2001). The lexical basis of comprehension skill. In D. S. Gorfein (Ed.), Decade of behavior. On the consequences of meaning selection: Perspectives on resolving lexical ambiguity (pp. 67–86). American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10459-004 Pestun, M. S. V., Roama-Alves, R. J., & Ciasca, S. M. (2019). Neuropsychological and Educational Profile of Children with Dyscalculia and Dyslexia: A Comparative Study. Psico-USF, 24(4), 645–659. doi:10.1590/1413-82712019240404

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Petrasek, M., James, A., Noltemeyer, A., Green, J., & Palmer, K. (2021). Enhancing motivation and engagement within a PBIS framework. Improving Schools, 1–15. Pickett, A. L., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2003). The employment and preparation of paraeducators. The State of the Art. Pintrich, P. (2002). The role of metacognitive knowledge in learning, teaching, and assessing. Theory into Practice, 41(4), 219–226. doi:10.120715430421tip4104_3 Pivik, J., McComas, J., & Laflamme, M. (2002). Barriers and facilitators to inclusive education. Exceptional Children, 69(1), 97–107. doi:10.1177/001440290206900107 296

Compilation of References

Polat, F. (2011). Inclusion in education: A step towards social justice. International Journal of Educational Development, 31(1), 50–58. doi:10.1016/j.ijedudev.2010.06.009 Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R. C., Smith, T. E., & Buck, G. H. (1997). Mental retardation and learning disabilities: Conceptual and applied issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(3), 297–308. doi:10.1177/002221949703000305 PMID:9146096 Polychronis, F. (2011). Special Learning Difficulties-Dyslexia. Pedio. [in Greek] Portelli, J. P., & Koneeny, P. (2018). Inclusive education: Beyond popular discourses. The International Journal of Emotional Education, 10(1), 133–144. Price-Dennis, D., Holmes, K. A., & Smith, E. (2015). Exploring digital literacy practices in an inclusive classroom. The Reading Teacher, 69(2), 195–205. doi:10.1002/trtr.1398 Printez, A., & Polychronis, F. (2016). Coping with Writing Difficulties: A Psychoeducational Approach. Pedagogical Discourse, 1, 153–174. Protopapas, A., & Scaloubakas, C. (2008). Evaluating reading proficiency for identif ying reading difficulties. Psychology, 15, 267–289. Pugach, M. C., & Winn, J. A. (2011). Research on co-teaching and teaming: An untapped resource for induction. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(1), 36–46. Ramus, F., Pidgeon, E., & Frith, U. (2003). The relationship between motor control and phonology in dyslexic children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 44(5), 712–722. doi:10.1111/1469-7610.00157 PMID:12831115 Randel, A. E., Galvin, B. M., Shore, L. M., Ehrhart, K. H., Chung, B. G., Dean, M. A., & Kedharnath, U. (2018). Inclusive leadership: Realizing positive outcomes through belongingness and being valued for uniqueness. Human Resource Management Review, 28(2), 190–203. doi:10.1016/j.hrmr.2017.07.002 Rasinski, T. (2014). Fluency Matters. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 3–12.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Rasinski, T., Rupley, W. H., Paige, D. D., & Nichols, W. D. (2016). Alternative text types to improve reading fluency for competent to struggling readers. International Journal of Instruction, 9(1), 163–178. doi:10.12973/iji.2016.9113a Reese, L., Richards-Tutor, C., Hansuvadha, N., Pavri, S., & Xu, S. (2018). Teachers for inclusive, diverse urban settings. Issues in Teacher Education, 27(1), 17–27. http://queens.ezproxy.cuny. edu/login?url=https://www-proquest-com.queens.ezproxy.cuny.edu/scholarly-journals/teachersinclusive-diverse-urban-settings/docview/2049663215/se-2?accountid=13379 Reid, R. C., Lienemann, T. O., & Hagaman, J. L. (2013). Strategy Instruction for Students with Learning Disabilities. Guilford Press.

297

Compilation of References

Reina, R., Hutzler, Y., Iniguez-Santiago, M. C., & Moreno-Murcia, J. A. (2019). Student attitudes toward inclusion in physical education: The impact of ability beliefs, gender, and previous experiences. Adapted Physical Activity Quarterly; APAQ, 36(1), 132–149. doi:10.1123/ apaq.2017-0146 PMID:30554524 Renzulli, J. (1978). What Makes Giftedness? Reexamining a Definition. Phi Delta Kappan, 60(3), 180–261. Renzulli, J. S. (1976). The Enrichment Triad Model: A guide for developing defensible programs for gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly, 20(3), 303–326. doi:10.1177/001698627602000327 Renzulli, J. S. (2005). Apply gifted pedagogy to total talent development for all students. Theory into Practice, 44(2), 80–89. doi:10.120715430421tip4402_2 Renzulli, J. S. (2011). What makes giftedness? Reexamining a definition: giftedness needs to be redefined to include three elements: above-average intelligence, high levels of task commitment, and high levels of creativity. Phi Delta Kappan, 92(8), 81–82. doi:10.1177/003172171109200821 Republic of South Africa. (1997). Act 101: Higher Education Act. Government Gazette, 19 December 1997. Republic of South Africa. (2016). White paper on the rights of persons with disabilities. Gazette No. 39792. Pretoria: Government Printers. Rheingold, H. (2005). The new power of collaboration [Video]. TED. https://www.ted.com/talks/ howard_rheingold_on_collaboration Rhoad-Drogalis, A., & Justice, L. M. (2020). Is the proportion of children with disabilities in inclusive preschool programs associated with children’s achievement? Journal of Early Intervention, 42(1), 83–96. doi:10.1177/1053815119873100 Ring, E., & Travers, J. (2005). Barriers to inclusion: A case study of a pupil with severe learning difficulties in Ireland. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 20(1), 41–56. doi:10.1080/0885625042000319070 Rinio, D. (2018). Focus on collaboration: How understanding the nature of trust can help address the standards. Knowledge Quest, 46(3), 44–48.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Rock, M. L., & Thead, B. K. (2009). Promote student success during independent seatwork. Intervention in School and Clinic, 44(3), 179–184. doi:10.1177/1053451208326055 Rose, J. (2009). Identifying and teaching children and young people with dyslexia and literacy difficulties: an independent report. University of London - Digital Education Repository Archive (DERA). Rose, C. A., Monda-Amaya, L. E., & Espelage, D. L. (2011). Bullying perpetration and victimization in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 32(2), 114–130. doi:10.1177/0741932510361247

298

Compilation of References

Ross‐Hill, R. (2009). Teacher attitude towards inclusion practices and special needs students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188–198. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2009.01135.x Rothstein, M. B., & Gautreaux, G. G. (2007). The effects of a peer-yoked contingency on observational learning and the collateral emergence of naming. Journal of Early and Intensive Behavior Intervention: JEIBI, 4(2), 453–470. doi:10.1037/h0100384 Rugg, H. (1921). Needed changes in the committee procedure of reconstructing the social studies. The Elementary School Journal, 21(9), 688–702. doi:10.1086/455035 Salend, S. J. (2001). Creating inclusive classrooms: Effective and reflective practices (4th ed.). Merrill. Salmi, J., & D’Addio, A. (2021). Policies for achieving inclusive education in higher education. Policy Reviews in Education, 5(1), 47–72. doi:10.1080/23322969.2020.1835529 Saloviita, T. (2020). Teacher attitudes towards the inclusion of students with support needs. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 20(1), 64–73. doi:10.1111/1471-3802.12466 Santoli, S. P., Sachs, J., Romey, E. A., & McClurg, S. (2008). A successful formula for middle school inclusion: Collaboration, time, and administrative support. RMLE Online: Research in Middle Level Education, 32(2), 1–13. doi:10.1080/19404476.2008.11462055 Saphier, J., Haley-Speca, M. A., & Gower, R. (2008). The Skillful Teacher: Building your Teaching Skills. Research for Better Teaching. Schien, S. (2017). Organizational culture and leadership (5th ed.). Wiley. Schon, D. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on the educational practice. Teachers College Press. Schunk, D. H., & Miller, S. D. (2002). Self-efficacy and adolescents’ motivation. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Academic motivation of adolescents (pp. 29–52). IAP. Schwab, J. (1969). The Practical: A language for curriculum. The School Review, 78(1), 1–23. doi:10.1086/442881

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007, Summer). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392–416. doi:10.1177/001440290707300401 Senge, P. M. (2006). The fifth discipline: The art & practice of the learning organization (4th ed.). Doubleday, Random House. Shalev, R. S., Manor, O., Kerem, B., Ayali, M., Badichi, N., Friedlander, Y., & Gross-Tsur, V. (2001). Developmental dyscalculia is a familial learning disability. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 34(1), 59–65. doi:10.1177/002221940103400105 PMID:15497272

299

Compilation of References

Sheets, R. (1999). Relating competence in an urban classroom to ethnic identity development. In R. Sheets (Ed.), Racial and ethnic identity in school practices: Aspects of human development. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Sheppard, J. (2019). Collaboration as a means to support inclusion. BU Journal of Graduate Studies in Education, 11(2), 16–20. Shin, M., Lee, H., & McKenna, J. W. (2016). Special education and general education preservice teachers’ co-teaching experiences: A comparative synthesis of qualitative research. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 20(1), 107–191. doi:10.1080/13603116.2015.1074732 Shook, S. C., LaBrie, M., Vallies, J., McLaughlin, T. F., & Williams, R. L. (1990). The effects of a token economy on first grade students inappropriate social behavior. Reading Improvement, 27(2), 96–102. Shores, R. E. (1987). Overview of research on social interaction: A historical and personal perspective. Behavioral Disorders, 12(4), 233–241. doi:10.1177/019874298701200408 Sideridis, G. D. (2005). Goal orientations, academic achievement, and depression: Evidence in favor of revised goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(3), 366–375. doi:10.1037/00220663.97.3.366 Silveira-Zaldivar, T., & Curtis, H. (2019). “I’m not trained for this!” and other barriers to evidence-based social skills interventions for elementary students with high functioning autism in inclusion. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(1), 53-66. https:// eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1232739 Simeonsson, R. J., Carlson, D., Huntington, G. S., McMillen, J. S., & Brent, J. L. (2001). Students with disabilities: A national survey of participation in school activities. Disability and Rehabilitation, 23(2), 49–63. doi:10.1080/096382801750058134 PMID:11214716 Simpson, R. L., & Mundschenk, N. A. (2010). Working with parents and families of exceptional children and youth (4th ed.). ProEd.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Singer-Dudek, J., Choi, J., & Lyons, L. (2013). The effects of an observational intervention on the emergence of two types of observational learning. European Journal of Behavior Analysis, 14(2), 329–347. doi:10.1080/15021149.2013.11434465 Singer-Dudek, J., Speckman, J., & Nuzzolo, R. (2010). A comparative analysis of the CABAS® model of education at the Fred S. Keller School: A twenty-year review. The Behavior Analyst Today, 11(4), 253–265. doi:10.1037/h0100705 Siperstein, G. N., Parker, R. C., Bardon, J. N., & Widaman, K. F. (2007). A National Study of Youth Attitudes toward the Inclusion of Students with Intellectual Disabilities. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 435–455. doi:10.1177/001440290707300403 Sirkko, R., Takala, M., & Wickman, K. (2018). Co-teaching in northern rural Finnish schools. Education in the North, 25(1-2), 217–237.

300

Compilation of References

Skinner, B. F. (1974). About Behaviorism. Vintage. Skrtic, T. M. (1987). An organizational analysis of special educational reform. Counterpoint, 8, 15-19. Sleeter, C. E., & Grant, C. A. (1999). Making choices for multicultural education: Five approaches to race, class, and gender (3rd ed.). Wiley. Smith, B. L., & MacGregor J. T. (n.d.). What is collaborative learning? https://evergreen.edu/ sites/default/files/facultydevelopment/docs/WhatisCollaborativeLearning.pdf Snell, M. E., & Janney, R. E. (2000). Teachers’ problem-solving about children with moderate and severe disabilities in elementary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 66(4), 472–490. doi:10.1177/001440290006600403 Snyder, K. J., & Anderson, R. H. (1986). Managing productive schools: Towards an ecology. Academic Press. Snyder, L., Garriott, P., & Aylor, M. W. (2001). Inclusion confusion: Putting the pieces together. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24(3), 198–207. doi:10.1177/088840640102400304 Snyder, R. F. (1999, Fall). Inclusion: A qualitative study of inservice general education teachers’ attitudes and concerns. Education, 120(1), 173–180. Sofologi, M., Efstratopoulou, M., Kamari, A., Bonti, E., & Katsiana, A. (2020). Different strategies for assessing reading comprehension in adults. From alpha to omega. European Journal of Special Education Research, 7(4), 38–53. doi:10.5281/zenodo.3762660 Solone, C. J., Thornton, B. E., Chiappe, J. C., Jenny, C., Perez, C., Rearick, M. K., & Falvey, M. A. (2020). Creating collaborative schools in the United States: A review of best practices. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 12(3), 283–292. doi:10.26822/ iejee.2020358222 Solórzano, D. (1997). Images and words that wound: Critical race theory, racial stereotyping and teacher education. Teacher Education Quarterly, 24, 5–19.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Solórzano, D. (1998). Critical race theory, racial and gender microaggressions, and the experiences of Chicana and Chicano Scholars. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education : QSE, 11(1), 121–136. doi:10.1080/095183998236926 Soudien, C. (2020). Complexities of difference and their significance for managing i inequality in learning: Lessons from the COVID-19 crisis. Prospects, 49(1), 59–67. doi:10.100711125020-09486-x PMID:32836428 Soudien, C. (2020). Systemic shock: How Covid-19 exposes our learning challenges in education. Southern African Review of Education, 26(1), 6–19.

301

Compilation of References

Soukup, J. H., Wehmeyer, M. L., Bashinski, S. M., & Bovaird, J. A. (2007). Classroom variables and access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 101–120. doi:10.1177/001440290707400106 Sousa, D. A. (2001). How the special needs brain learns. Corwin Press. Spandidakis, I. (2004). Problems with the production of school-age children. Ellinika Grammata. [in Greek] Spandidakis, I. (2008). Writing Problems of School-aged Children. Ellinika Grammata. [in Greek] Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1992). Schools as inclusive communities. In Controversial issues confronting special education: Divergent perspectives (pp. 29–43). Allyn & Bacon. Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1991). Rationale for integration and restructuring: A synopsis. In J. W. Lloyd, A. C. Repp, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), The regular education initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models (pp. 225–239). Sycamore. Stasinos, D. (2020). Special Inclusive Education 2027. Papazisi. [in Greek] Stefanidis, A., King-Sears, M. E., & Brawand, A. (2019). Benefits for coteachers of students with disabilities: Do contextual factors matter? Psychology in the Schools, 56(4), 539–553. doi:10.1002/pits.22207 Sternberg, R. J., & Zhang, L. F. (2000). Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles. Routledge. Stites, M. L., Rakes, C. R., Noggle, A. K., & Shah, S. (2018). Preservice teacher perceptions of preparedness to teach in inclusive settings as an indicator of teacher preparation program effectiveness. Discourse and Communication for Sustainable Education, 9(2), 21–39. doi:10.2478/ dcse-2018-0012 Stoloff, S., Boulanger, M., Lavallee, E., & Glaude-Roy, J. (2020). Teachers’ indicators used to describe professional well-being. Journal of Education and Learning, 9(1), 16–29. doi:10.5539/ jel.v9n1p16

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2002). The evolution of discipline practices: School-wide positive behavior supports. Child & Family Behavior Therapy, 24(1-2), 23–50. doi:10.1300/J019v24n01_03 Sugai, G., & Horner, R. H. (2006). A promising approach for expanding and sustaining SchoolWide Positive Behavior Support. School Psychology Review, 35(2), 245–259. doi:10.1080/027 96015.2006.12087989 Swain, J. C., & McLaughlin, T. F. (1998). The effects of bonus contingencies in a classwide token program on math accuracy with middle‐school students with behavioral disorders. Behavioral Interventions, 13(1), 11–19. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1099-078X(199802)13:13.0.CO;2-1

302

Compilation of References

Tallman, T. (2020). How teachers experience collaboration. Journal of Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0022057420908063 Tarbox, R. S., Ghezzi, P. M., & Wilson, G. (2006). The effects of token reinforcement on attending in a young child with autism. Behavioral Interventions, 21(3), 155–164. doi:10.1002/bin.213 Taub, D. A., McCord, J. A., & Ryndak, D. L. (2017). Opportunities to learn for students with extensive support needs: A context of research-supported practices for all in general education classes. The Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127–137. doi:10.1177/0022466917696263 Taylor, R. L., Richards, S. B., Goldstein, P. A., & Schilit, J. (1997). Teacher perceptions of inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(3), 50–54. doi:10.1177/004005999702900309 Temple, J. B., & Ylitalo, J. (2009). Promoting Inclusive (and Dialogic) Leadership in Higher Education Institutions. Tertiary Education and Management, 15(3), 277–289. doi:10.1080/13583880903073024 Thousand, J., & Villa, R. A. (2000). Inclusion: Welcoming, valuing, and supporting the diverse learning needs of all students in shared general education environments. Special Services in the Schools, 15(1-2), 73–108. doi:10.1300/J008v15n01_05 Tichenor, M., & Tichenor, J. (2019). Collaboration in the elementary school: What do teachers think? Journal of Curriculum and Teaching, 8(2), 54–61. doi:10.5430/jct.v8n2p54 Tobbell, J., Burton, R., Gaynor, A., Golding, B., Greenhough, K., Rhodes, C., & White, S. (2020). Inclusion in higher education: An exploration of the subjective experiences of students. Journal of Further and Higher Education. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/0309877X.2020.1753180 Tomlinson, C.A. (2009). The rationale and guiding principles for an evolving conception of curriculum. In The Parallel Curriculum (2nd ed.). Corwin Press. Tomlinson, C. A. (2016). Teaching in tandem: A reflection. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 90–91. Tomlinson, C. A. (2017). How to differentiate instruction in academically diverse classrooms. ASCD.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Tomlinson, C. A., Brighton, C., Hertberg, H., Callahan, C. M., Moon, T. R., Brimijoin, K., Conover, L. A., & Reynolds, T. (2003). Differentiating instruction in response to student readiness, interest and learning profile in academically diverse classrooms: A review of the literature. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 27(2/3), 119–145. doi:10.1177/016235320302700203 Trapani, C., & Gettinger, M. (1989). Effects of social skills training and cross-age tutoring on academic achievement and social behaviors of boys with learning disabilities. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 22(4), 1–9. Treleaven, K. (2017). Five ways to teach students respectful disagreement. We Are Teachers. https://www.weareteachers.com/teach-students-respectful-disagreement/

303

Compilation of References

Tremblay, P. (2013). Comparative outcomes of two instructional models for students with learning disabilities: Inclusion with co-teaching and solo-taught special education. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 13(4), 251–258. doi:10.1111/j.1471-3802.2012.01270.x Tsibidaki, A. (2007). Child with Disabilities, Family, and School: An Interaction Relationship. Route. [in Greek] Tucker, C. (2016). Team teaching from a distance. Educational Leadership, 73(4), 86–87. Turner, K., & Theilking, M. (2019). Teacher wellbeing: Its effects on teaching practice and student learning. Issues in Educational Research, 29(3), 938–960. http://www.iier. org.au/iier29/turner2.pdf Twyman, J. S. (1998). The Fred S. Keller School. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31(4), 695–701. doi:10.1901/jaba.1998.31-695 Tyler, R. W. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. The University of Chicago Press. Tzivinikou, S. (2015). Collaboration between general and special education teachers: Developing co-teaching skills in heterogeneous classes. Problems of Education in the 21st Century, 64, 108-119. Tzivinikou, S. (2019). Evaluate, Plan, Teach: Effective Interventions in Reading kai Writing for Student with Learning and Other Difficulties. Readnet. [in Greek] U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). The Digest of Education Statistics, 2018 (NCES 2020-009). Table, 204, 60. Author. U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Advancing diversity and inclusion in higher education: Key data highlights focusing on race and ethnicity and promising practices. https://www2.ed.gov/ rschstat/research/pubs/advancing-diversity-inclusion.pdf U.S. Department of Education. (2020). Students with Disabilities. Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved June 13, 2020, from https://nces.ed.gov/ programs/coe/indicator_cgg.asp#f3 United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). (1994). The Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action in Special Needs Education. UNESCO.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

United Nations Human Rights. (2014). The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Training Guide Professional Training Series No. 19. United Nations. United Nations Human Rights-Office of the High Commission. (2020). Human rights of persons with disabilities. https://www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Disability/Pages/DisabilityIndex.aspx VALAMIS. (n.d.). What is collaborative learning? https://www.valamis.com/hub/collaborativelearning Varni, J. W., Lovaas, O. I., Koegel, R. L., & Everett, N. L. (1979). An analysis of observational learning in autistic and normal children. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 7(1), 31–43. doi:10.1007/BF00924508 PMID:438430 304

Compilation of References

Vaughn, S., Bos, C., & Schumm, J. S. (2018). Teaching students who are exceptional, diverse, and at risk in the general education classroom (7th ed.). Pearson Education. Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Kouzekanani, K. (1993). What do students with learning disabilities think when their general education teachers make adaptations? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26(8), 545–555. doi:10.1177/002221949302600808 PMID:8245700 Vignes, C., Godeau, E., Sentenac, M., Coley, N., Navarro, F., Grandjean, H., & Arnaud, C. (2009). Determinants of students’ attitudes towards peers with disabilities. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 51(6), 473–479. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03283.x PMID:19416319 Villa, R. A., & Thousand, J. S. (2016). The inclusive education checklist: A self-assessment of best practices. Dude Publishing. Voltz, D. L., Brazil, N., & Ford, A. (2001). What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide for moving forward. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37(1), 23–30. doi:10.1177/105345120103700105 Vostal, M., LaVenio, K. N., & Horner, C. G. (2019). Making the shift to a co-teaching model of instruction: Considering relational trust as a precursor to collaboration. Journal of Cases in Educational Leadership, 22(1), 83–94. doi:10.1177/1555458918796876 Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language (E. Hanf-mann & G. Vakar, Trans.). MIT Press. doi:10.1037/11193-000 Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: the Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press. Waitoller, F. R., & Kozleski, E. B. (2013). Working in boundary practices: Identity development and learning in partnerships for inclusive education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 31, 25–45. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2012.11.006 Waitoller, F. R., & Thorius, K. A. A. (2016). Cross-pollinating culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning: Towards inclusive pedagogy that accounts for dis/ability. Harvard Educational Review, 86(3), 366–389. doi:10.17763/1943-5045-86.3.366

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Walker, J. D., Johnson, K. M., & Randolph, K. M. (2021). Teacher self-advocacy for the shared responsibility of classroom and behavior management. Teaching Exceptional Children, 53(3), 216–225. doi:10.1177/0040059920980481 Wallace, T., Anderson, A. R., Bartholomay, T., & Hupp, S. (2002). An ecobehavioral examination of high school classrooms that include students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 68(3), 345–359. doi:10.1177/001440290206800304 WebMD. (2018). What are the types of autism spectrum disorders? https://www.webmd.com/ brain/autism/autism-spectrum-disorders#1

305

Compilation of References

Weiner, J., Harris, P. J., & Shiner, C. (1990). Achievement and social-behavioural correlates of peer status in learning disabled children. Learning Disability Quarterly, 13(2), 114–127. doi:10.2307/1510655 Welch, F. C., Lindsay, S., & Halfacre, J. (2001). Quality principals: Questions to consider. Principal Leadership. High School Edition, 1(6), 56–59. Werts, M. G., Caldwell, N. K., & Wolery, M. (1996). Peer modeling of response chains: Observational learning by students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29(1), 53–66. doi:10.1901/jaba.1996.29-53 PMID:8881344 Whalen, S., Swain, S., Fedele-McLeod, M., & Thacher, M. (2019). Professional learning communities in prisons. Journal of Research and Practice for Adult Literacy, Secondary, and Basic Education, 94–98. Williamson, P., Hoppey, D., McLeskey, J., Bergmann, E., & Moore, H. (2020). Trends in LRE placement rates over the past 25 years. The Journal of Special Education, 53(4), 236–244. doi:10.1177/0022466919855052 Williamson, P., McLeskey, J., Hoppey, D., & Rentz, T. (2006). Educating students with mental retardation in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 347–361. doi:10.1177/001440290607200306 Wimmer, H. (1996). The nonword reading deficit in developmental dyslexia: Evidence from children learning to read German. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 61(1), 80–90. doi:10.1006/jecp.1996.0004 PMID:8812031 Wolff, B. (2018, August 14). The future of work is creative collaboration. Forbes. https://www.forbes.com/sites/benjaminwolff/2018/08/14/the-future-of-work-is-creativecollaboration/#74c464c03228 Wolgast, A., & Fischer, N. (2017). You are not alone: Colleague support and goal oriented cooperation as resources to reduce teachers’ stress. Social Psychology of Education, 20(1), 97–114. doi:10.100711218-017-9366-1 Wood, M. (1998). Whose job is it anyway? Educational roles in inclusion. Exceptional Children, 64(2), 181–195. doi:10.1177/001440299806400203

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Yoon, I. H. (2020). Haunted trauma narratives of inclusion, race, and disability in a school community. Educational Studies, 55(4), 420–435. doi:10.1080/00131946.2019.1629926 Zagona, A. L., Kurth, J. A., & MacFarland, S. Z. (2017). Teachers’ views of their preparation for inclusive education and collaboration. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(3), 163–178. doi:10.1177/0888406417692969 Ziegler, J. C., & Goswami, U. (2005). Reading Acquisition, Developmental Dyslexia, and Skilled Reading Across Languages: A Psycholinguistic Grain Size Theory. Psychological Bulletin, 131(1), 3–29. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.1.3 PMID:15631549

306

307

About the Contributors

Dena AuCoin holds a doctorate in Curriculum & Teaching and has over 20 years of experience in early childhood education through high school and into higher education. She is passionate about the field of education and tries to remain relevant through involvement in her community and professional organizations, such as the National Association for the Education of Young Children. She loves the ‘light bulb’ moments of research and is currently working on research projects surrounding collaboration, response to intervention in early childhood, faculty wellness in online education, and faculty mentoring and in higher education. ***

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Shinya Abe is one of the on-staff employees at Gridmark, Inc., Japan that originally developed Grid Onput dot code. He graduated in Department of Digital Media, Faculty of Computer and Information Sciences, Hosei University in 2012. He first had a job with Digital Amuse Inc. that was merged into Gridmark Inc. He is engaging with creating new software that can handle original Grid Onput dot codes File Linker and GM Authoring Tool that can create a standalone application to reproduce multimedia like movies with a sound pen G-Speak and overlap Grid Onput dot codes on users’ designed document, respectively. He hopes the software he developed helps the students tell their feelings and wills and desires to classmates, teachers, and parents. He and his company have been collaborating with Professor Shigeru Ikuta for more than ten years. Brian Berger holds a doctorate in special education and is an instructional designer for Purdue University Global, an adjunct professor for multiple universities, is a former special education classroom teacher of elementary and high school students, and a former Director of Special Education.

About the Contributors

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Alpana Bhattacharya is an Associate Professor of Educational Psychology in the Secondary Education and Youth Services department at Queens College, the City University of New York (CUNY) and the Ph.D. Program in Educational Psychology at the Graduate Center, CUNY. Her research interest includes literacy acquisition, language development, reading and writing processes, metacognitive strategy instruction, specific learning disabilities, culturally and linguistically diverse learners, and teacher preparation. Her research contributions include journal articles, book chapters, and conference presentations in the area of learning disabilities, literacy education, and teacher preparation. As an active faculty at Queens College, CUNY and Graduate Center, CUNY, she teaches undergraduate, graduate, and doctoral courses in Educational Psychology including Cognition, Technology, and Instruction for Diverse Learners; Classroom Management; Educational Psychology: Foundations and Contemporary Issues; and Social-Emotional and Cultural Factors in Development and Education. She also supervises doctoral dissertations in the area of literacy acquisition and language development from early childhood through adulthood. Eleni Bonti is a tenured Assistant Professor, specializing in the area of Specific Learning Difficulties (SLD), at the 1stPsychiatric Clinic of the Medical School of The Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (“Papageorgiou” General Hospital of Thessaloniki). She studied at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (School of Education (1st Degree) & School of Psychology (PhD) and at the Institute of Education, the University of London (Adv. Diploma & Master of Arts). Her research and clinical interests include diagnostic and intervention procedures for children, adolescents and adults with learning difficulties, early diagnosis of Specific Learning difficulties (SLD) and intervention methods during preschool age, language and motor difficulties – issues of comorbidity with SLD, neurodevelopmental disorders and delinquency, etc. She is an educator at the Medical School (Aristotle University of Thessaloniki), the author of an academic book on learning difficulties and has published several articles in both Greek and international journals. She has attended multiple (international and Greek) conferences with oral presentations and posters with several subjects in the areas of her academic interests. She is also the director of the State certified out-patient Clinic of Learning Disabilities, (1st Psychiatry Clinic, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, ‘Papageorgiou’ General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece). She has been working at a clinical level since 1996, in the areas of diagnosis and intervention for children, adolescents and adults with learning difficulties. Finally, she undertakes seminars for training teachers and other professionals (as well as parents) in the areas of diagnosis and intervention techniques for students with learning difficulties.

308

About the Contributors

Angela Chen received her Ph.D. in Applied Behavior Analysis from Teachers College, Columbia University in 2019. She has taught students with disabilities in public and private schools, as well as in-home settings. She is currently working as a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. Argyro Fella, PhD, is a Lecturer in Special Education at the University of Nicosia. Her scholarly activity focuses οn the study of reading development and reading difficulties, with emphasis on the use of eye-tracking and EEG methodologies in the framework of neurocognitive disorders. Recently, she has started research work and writing in the area of behavioral disorders and identifying ways for supporting classroom teachers on creating a safe, positive and predictable learning environment. Dr. Fella publishes her work in scientific journals and routinely presents at national and international conferences.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Lara Gentilini completed her Ph.D. in Teaching as Applied Behavior Analysis at Teachers College, Columbia University. She is committed to research development focused on establishing conditioned reinforcement for various academic stimuli, and the resulting effects on academic repertoires of students in the classroom setting. She is currently working as a Head Start teacher in Ferguson, MO. She is also an adjunct professor in the Graduate School of Education at Lindenwood University. Carol Hall, a University of Phoenix (UOPX) associate faculty member, served as College of Doctoral Studies EdD Lead Area Chair, K-12 Education for 10 years. She has taught EdD courses, been an EdD Subject Matter Expert, facilitated doctoral residencies, and served on the Campus Academic Council and dissertation committees. Carol joined UOPX in 2003. Carol’s professional experience includes over 35 years teaching and administering in public, private, parochial, and international schools. She has presented at international conferences, written articles on distance education, and collaborated with others to write articles and book chapters on special education topics. Carol’s degrees include a Doctor of Education in Educational Administration from Baylor University, a Master of Education in Early Childhood Education from Texas Woman’s University, and a Bachelor of Science in Elementary Education from Centenary College of Louisiana. Carol has possessed Superintendent, Professional School Administrator Mid-Management Certification, and teaching certifications in several states. Shigeru Ikuta is now a Senior Scholar at Institute of Human Culture Studies, Otsuma Women’s University, Japan. He is an education technologist, teacher educator in Science, and special educator with a focus on student learning and development on the basis of communication aids. He completed his graduate work and earned a 309

About the Contributors

doctorate in science at Tohoku University in Sendai, Japan. He had been working as a Professor of Computation Chemistry at Tokyo Metropolitan University for twentynine years. He moved to University of Tsukuba and has started collaborative works with schoolteachers, affiliated with the University. He has been conducting many school activities in cooperation with the schoolteachers all over the world for more than 15 years using original handmade teaching materials with dot codes, eBooks with Media Overlays, and Augmented Reality in supporting the students’ learning both at the special needs and general schools. He is honored to be an Emeritus Professor of Otsuma Women’s University and Tokyo Metropolitan University. Lindsey Jarvie is a curriculum content editor and adjunct instructor of communication with Purdue Global. Lindsey serves as a co-lead for a department professional learning community focusing on faculty engagement and research efforts. She holds a bachelor’s degree in communication and a master’s degree in integrated global communications. Lindsey’s continued research efforts include social media communication and advocacy, strategic collaboration, and organizational communication and change management. In addition to work in higher education, Lindsey also works in the nonprofit sector serving sex trafficking victims.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Isidora Kaliotsou is a graduate of the Pedagogical School of the University of Crete, and, also, holds a Master in Educational Psychology (University Neapolis Pafos). She continued her work and studies at the National Kapodistrian University, in order to develop her capacity as a teacher, trained in the field of Special Education and attending seminars on Therapeutic Game, relating to Special Education and specifically autism. She is currently working at a school and accompanying a child with autism -a crucial educational experience. Georgios A. Kougioumtzis is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (Greece) and Visiting Professor at Neapolis University Pafos (Cyprus). He holds an L.B. in Modern Greek and Classics (Ancient Greek and Latin) from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, a Th.B. in Social Theology from the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, an M.Ed. in Education Sciences from the Hellenic Open University, and a Ph.D. in Teacher Mentoring (namely Pedagogics, Teaching Methodology, and Counseling) from the Department of Philosophy, Pedagogy, and Psychology - National and Kapodistrian University of Athens. Furthermore, he holds a Postgraduate Annual Specialization in Educational Technology - ICT from the Piraeus University of Applied Sciences, a Postgraduate Annual Specialization in Learning Difficulties / Dyslexia / Special Needs, from the Department of Special Education - University of Thessaly, a Postgraduate Annual Specialization in Teaching Methodology, and 310

About the Contributors

Pedagogical Usage of ICT from an Inter-University Cooperation: Department of Philosophy, Pedagogy, and Psychology - National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Digital Systems - University of Piraeus, and Department of General Pedagogy - School of Pedagogical and Technological Education, and a Postgraduate Annual Specialization in Mentoring, Coaching, and Counseling, from the University of the Aegean. Dr. G. A. Kougioumtzis’s research activities cover the scientific fields of Teaching Methodology and Pedagogical Use of ICT, Counseling Psychology, and Educational Psychology. Christiana Koundourou is a lecturer in Special Needs, in the School of Social Sciences, at Neapolis University in Pafos. She holds an Undergraduate Degree in Special Educational Needs from the University of Essex (2006) in Great Britain, a Postgraduate Degree in Professional Development in Special Needs from the University of Nottingham (2007) in Great Britain, and holds a Doctoral Degree in Education/Special Educational Needs from the University of Birmingham (20072012) in Great Britain. She has been working as a Special Educational Needs Teacher at a Private School in Pafos for the period 2011-2014. During the period 2013-2018 she was a Visiting Lecturer at the University of Nicosia in both Undergraduate and Postgraduate programs, in the Department of Education, in the field of Special Needs. During the period 2013-2015 she was also a Lecturer at the University of Neapolis. She has been a Scientific Associate at Neapolis University for three (3) years (2015-2018), and since 2018 she has been a Lecturer at the same University. She has seven (7) years of experience working privately as a Special Needs Teacher.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Vimbi P. Mahlangu holds a B.A.Ed. (Vista University); B.Ed.; MEd; & Ph.D. degrees from the University of Pretoria. He is an Associate Professor at the University of South Africa, Department of Educational Leadership & Management. He is responsible for teaching and research. He presented papers at national and international conferences. He is a recipient of Dean’s Award for Excellence in Teaching in the Faculty of Education (2011) at the University of Pretoria. He has published extensively in accredited journals and contributed a book and book chapters. Jamie Mahoney is an Associate Professor in the Adolescent, Career, and Special Education Department at Murray State University. She teaches Special Education courses for dual certification Learning Behavior Disorder/ Elementary or Middle School & LBD/MSD program undergraduate students and graduate students in the Alt. Cert, Master LBD, and Moderate Severe Disabilities programs. Dr. Mahoney also teaches for the College of Education for the University of Phoenix. She has taught for UOP since 2004. She has taught students with various disabilities in the areas of math, reading, and language arts for over 20 years in the elementary public 311

About the Contributors

school setting. She is certified in the areas of special education, general education, reading endorsed, assistive technology certified, dyslexia Orton Gillingham certified and educational leadership certified. Her research interests include preparing preservice and in-service teachers to effectively teach students of all abilities using differentiated instruction methods, response to intervention and progress monitoring, increasing student engagement using technology, collaboration and co-teaching methods, and assessment methodologies. Jessica Manzone serves as an Adjunct Assistant Professor and Investigator on several U.S. Department of Education grants in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. Jessica has been a classroom teacher, instructional coach, and curriculum developer. Sithabile Ntombela is a director in the College of Education, at the University of South Africa.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Julia Nyberg is a Professor at Purdue University Global in the Department of Education and Communication. Dr. Nyberg’s research focuses on curriculum and instructional design for diverse gifted and advanced students. Dr. Nyberg speaks at state and national conferences and provides demonstration lessons for school districts related to her expertise in curriculum design and differentiated instruction. Keiko Ozaki graduated from Training Program Majors for Future Special Education Teachers (Physically Handicapped), Faculty of Education, University of Teacher Education Fukuoka, Japan in 1989. After graduation, she has been working as a teacher at several schools for special needs in Fukuoka Prefecture. In 2002, she earned a master’s degree at Master’s Program in the Department of Special Support Education, Graduate School of Education, Hyogo University of Teacher Education. In 2014, she organized a research group of Information Communication Technology (ICT) to plan an enlightening program for schoolteachers. With several research groups together, she collaborated to organize Don TAC in 2016; she is now involved in both the planning of teacher training programs and administration of its organization. She always considers how to create self-made teaching materials for iPad and a sound pen and how to conduct school activities which can promote students with disabilities to tell their needs and desires to others by using those original contents. Georgia Papantoniou is an Associate Professor of Cognitive Psychology at the University of Ioannina. She is the author and co-author of 80 articles, published in international and Greek scientific journals and books, as well as 150 papers in international and Greek conferences. Dr. Papantoniou is Director of the Psychology 312

About the Contributors

Lab of the Department of Early Childhood Education, Head of the Department of Psychology at the University of Ioannina, and member of the Lab of Neurodegenerative Diseases of the Center for Interdisciplinary Research and Innovation of AUTh in Greece. Her research interests include self-regulation, psychological assessment, and various aspects of lifelong cognitive development, especially those related to intelligence.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Maria Sofologi is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at the Department of Early Childhood and Education at the University of Ioannina in Greece. She delivers the courses “Cognitive Psychology”, and “Developmental Psychology”. She also delivers the course “Language Processing” at the Hellenic Open University of Greece in the Master of Science Programme entitled” Special Education: Problems with oral and written language”. Furthermore, she delivers the courses “Language Development” and “Learning Difficulties” at the University of Neapolis, Pafos in Cyprus, School of Social Sciences and Humanities. She is also a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Ioannina in Greece. She holds a PhD in Educational Psychology from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. She also holds a Master of Science degree in Cognitive Psychology from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. During her master degree years she trained and practiced in different assessment cognitive tools in order to evaluate all cognitive functions like memory, attention, language, executive functions both in adults and children. She is the key speaker in many European and Hellenic conferences concerning educational psychology, special education in children and adults, as well. Her academic work includes a series of many scientific publications, books and book chapters concerning Special Education, Educational Psychology and Cognitive impairments in children and adults as well. Reiko Sone graduated from Special Needs Education Teacher Training Course, University of Teacher Education Fukuoka in March 2018. Since April in 2018, she works as a teacher at Dazaifu Schools for Special Needs, Fukuoka Prefecture. She is now in her forth year as a teacher. she is very interested in applied behavior analysis that she had studied at her university age, and she would like to study it more deeply. She is looking for a research group where she can participate in a workshop and a training course on applied behavior analysis. In the future, she hopes that she continues to implement education using ICT and 21st century technologies based on the concept of applied behavior analysis. Yu Takagaki graduated from special needs education at Osaka Otani University, and engaged in education of children with cerebral palsy, muscular dystrophy, and severe multiple disabilities for 4 years at Fukuyama School for Special Needs, Hiroshima Prefecture. She moved to FukuyamaKita School for Special Needs in 313

About the Contributors

2020 and is now providing education for children with intellectual disabilities. In order to draw out the ability of children to put their ideas and express themselves, she makes efforts to create original teaching materials for the children and to devise guidance plans in her daily school-life.

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Jason Waldow is a Full Time Adjunct Instructor of Communication with Purdue University Global. He also serves as a Course Lead, instructor mentor and is currently serving on the Faculty Curriculum Committee. Jason holds a B.A. in Communication and an M.L. in Organizational Communication. In addition to teaching, he also works in the non-profit sector for Big Brother and Big Sister of WA and Hawaii.

314

315

Index

A Accommodation 7, 76 accountability 60, 101, 110, 113, 117, 138-140, 146-147, 154, 218, 221-222, 226, 234-235 Assistive Technology 7, 43, 85, 92-93, 99, 184-185

C Challenges to inclusion 1, 4, 6, 12, 23, 25-26, 29, 35 Collaborative Learning Community 181, 183, 186, 190, 206-208, 213 co-teaching 15, 32, 81, 94, 100-102, 104114, 123, 125-126 Culture of Collaboration 216, 219, 229, 232, 236 Curriculum unit 88, 92, 96 Cybernetic 57, 60, 76

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

D decision-making, 137, 223 Diferentiated Instruction 47, 54, 56, 7678, 80, 84, 86, 88, 90-91, 93, 96, 99, 101, 125 disabilities 1-17, 23-27, 29-35, 41-45, 48, 50, 52-54, 56-58, 77-78, 80-84, 88, 90-96, 99-100, 102-103, 106-108, 113-116, 118-123, 125, 133, 135, 137, 152, 161, 165, 169, 172-173, 175, 181-183, 186, 190, 199, 207-208, 213-214, 241

Diverse Learners 16, 81, 83-84, 99, 102 Dot-Code Reader 181, 187-188, 206, 213-214 Dyslexia 168, 182

E Educational psychology 77-79, 83-84, 87, 91, 95-96 Equity 27-28, 32, 34, 136, 163, 225, 241, 243-245, 247-248 Experiential Learning 216-217, 220

F File Linker 189, 206, 213-214 Frequent Communication 132-137, 144145, 155

G General Education 1-5, 7-15, 40-47, 50-51, 54, 56-57, 59, 61, 77-78, 80-81, 83-84, 88, 90-96, 99-101, 107-109, 111-114, 120-121, 125, 132-134, 137, 151-152, 221, 240 Globalization 217, 220, 223 GM Authoring Tool 189, 206-207, 213-214 Gridmark Content Viewer (GCV) 189, 213

H High Leverage Practices 113-114, 126 higher education 23-27, 29-34, 183, 220

Index

I

S

Inclusive Access 240-241, 246, 248, 253, 255 Inclusive Education 7, 13, 25, 27, 30, 32-34, 77-81, 83-85, 87-90, 93-94, 99, 101, 133, 138, 140, 163, 258 Inclusive Settings 42, 46, 52-53, 55-57, 80, 94-95, 132, 151-152, 183, 186, 190, 207 Intervention 17, 44-46, 53-55, 78-81, 84, 90, 93, 96, 102, 107, 110, 125-126, 161-162, 171-172, 174-175

Observational Learning 43-45, 52, 59, 76

Scholarly Traits 240, 245, 248-249, 251, 257-260, 262 School Activity 184, 190, 202, 214 Self-made Teaching Materials 183-186, 200, 207-208, 214 Self-Management 50-51, 54-55, 59, 76 Shared Planning 15, 17, 105-106, 132-135, 137, 139-140, 142-144, 151-152, 154-155 Shared Vision 132-133, 136-138, 145-146, 149, 151, 154-155, 218-219, 221-222, 224-225, 235 Social Skills 41, 43, 46, 53-54, 82, 117, 135, 140 Sound Linker 187, 189-190, 206-207, 214 Speaking-Pen 181, 184-185, 187-194, 197200, 202-206, 208, 214 Special Education 1-5, 7-15, 17-18, 42, 46, 56-57, 60, 77-78, 80-81, 92, 100-102, 106-109, 111-115, 120-121, 125-126, 134-136, 174, 186, 220-221 Specifc Learning Difculties 162-166, 168, 171-172 Students with disabilities 1-16, 23-27, 2935, 41-44, 56-57, 78, 80-84, 88, 90-96, 99-103, 106-108, 113-116, 118-120, 122, 125, 137, 181, 183, 186, 190, 207-208, 241 Supplemental Support 84-85, 90-91, 99 Systems Theory 218

P

T

J Joint Trust 132-134, 137, 147-148, 155

K Kagan 100, 109, 115-119

M Multimedia-Enabled Dot Code 183, 208, 213 Mutual Respect 2, 109, 132-134, 136-137, 146-147, 155, 226, 233

O

Copyright © 2021. IGI Global. All rights reserved.

Peer Tutoring 44-45, 52-53 Positive Reinforcement 48-49, 51-52 Preservice Teacher Candidates 77-80, 8385, 87-96, 99

R Richard DuFour 219

316

Talent Development 222, 240, 244-246, 249, 253-254, 257-260, 262 Teacher Preparation 11, 77-82, 84, 87-88, 90, 92-96, 99, 151 Technology applications 88-89, 92