Inclusive Ed Lit

17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Back to previous page
document 1 of 18
Innovations in Classroom Technology for Students with

Disabilities
Boyle, Joseph R; Kennedy, Michael J.
Intervention in School and Clinic; Austin Vol. 55, Iss. 2, (Nov 2019): 67-70.
DOI:10.1177/1053451219837716
Abstract
Students with high-incidence disabilities (e.g., learning disabilities, emotional behavior disorders, and autism
spectrum disorders) often receive most of their education in general education classrooms. Once in these
classrooms, students with disabilities are expected to learn from the general education curriculum. For students
with disabilities participating in general education and inclusion classrooms, technology offers an opportunity for
them to be active participants in classroom activities and to make meaningful progress in the general education
curriculum. The articles presented in this special issue illustrate how technology can help students with
disabilities to become active participants in general education classrooms. The technologies described in the
articles were developed as research-to-practice pieces so that practitioners can integrate the technology into
their classrooms. This issue focuses on two themes: (a) technology to support student learning in inclusive or
general education classrooms and (b) technology to promote student engagement and enhance performance
feedback of teachers.
Details
Subject Emotional-Behavioural problems;

Feedback;
Inclusive education;
Classrooms;
Curricula;
Learning disabled students;
Technological change;
Innovations;
Learning disabilities;
Teachers;
Mainstreaming;
Educational technology;
https://search.proquest.com/printviewfile?accountid=47253 Page 1 of 72
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Behaviour disordered students;

Disabled students;
Technology;
Emotionally disturbed students;
General education;
Learning;
Autism
Identifier / keyword technology; intervention; academic;

general and special education; collaboration;
access to general education; curriculum; strategies;
instruction
Title Innovations in Classroom Technology for Students with

Disabilities
Author Boyle, Joseph R 1 ; Kennedy, Michael J 2
1
Department of Teaching & Learning, Temple University,
Philadelphia, PA, USA
2
Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special
Education, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
Publication title Intervention in School and Clinic; Austin
Volume 55
Issue 2
Pages 67-70
Publication year 2019
Publication date Nov 2019
Publisher SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.
Place of publication Austin
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Country of publication United States, Austin
Publication subject Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation, Psychology
ISSN 10534512
Source type Scholarly Journals
Language of publication English
Document type Journal Article
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1053451219837716
ProQuest document ID 2305754548
Document URL https://search.proquest.com/docview/2305754548?

accountid=47253
Copyright © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2019
Last updated 2019-10-16
Database ProQuest Central
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 2 of 18
Do Regular Schools in Spain Respond to the Educational Needs of

Students with Down Syndrome?
Fernández Batanero, José María; Benítez Jaén, Ana María; Marta Montenegro Rueda; Inmaculada García
Martínez.
Journal of Child and Family Studies; New York (Sep 2019): 1-9. DOI:10.1007/s10826-019-01587-2
Abstract
Objectives
The family of the students with Down syndrome, just as in the case of any other child, is the main party
responsible for their education, and the main socializing agent, as the family is in permanent contact with the
student and knows about the characteristics of the child more than anyone. The aim of this study is to provide
information on the educational response that regular Spanish schools offer to the students with Down Syndrome
through the parent’s and the teacher’s perceptions.
Methods
Therefore, 218 questionnaires were provided to parents of children with Down syndrome, and 22 in-depth
interviews to education professionals (regular teachers of students with Down syndrome).
Results
The results indicated that the parents positively perceived the educational response offered by the schools to
their children, however, although the schools shared the principles of inclusion, they differed on the manner that
it was implemented, pointing to the lack of material and human resources. They also considered that the
teacher’s training was appropriate.
Conclusions
In conclusion, that the families of students with Down syndrome had positive perceptions towards inclusive
education of their children. However, although they shared the principles of inclusion, they disagree on the
manner in which these were being implemented.
Details
Subject Questionnaires;
Families & family life;
Students;
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Down syndrome;
Educational needs;
Human resources;
Education;
Perceptions;
Teachers;
Children
Identifier / keyword Relationship; Inclusion; Down syndrome;

Parent Teacher Cooperation
Title Do Regular Schools in Spain Respond to the Educational

Needs of Students with Down Syndrome?
Author Fernández Batanero, José María 1 ;

2
Benítez Jaén, Ana María ; Marta Montenegro Rueda 1 ;
Inmaculada García Martínez 3
1
Department of Teaching and Educational Organization,
Faculty of Education Sciences, University of Seville, Seville,
Spain
2
Down Syndrome of Seville Association, Seville, Spain
3
Department of Didactic and School Organization, Faculty
of Education Sciences, University of Granada, Granada,
Spain
Publication title Journal of Child and Family Studies; New York
Pages 1-9
Publication date Sep 2019
Publisher Springer Nature B.V.
Place of publication New York
Country of publication Netherlands, New York
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publication subject Children And Youth - About, Psychology
ISSN 10621024
Publication history
Online publication date 2019-09-21
Milestone dates 2019-09-11 (Registration)
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10826-019-01587-2

accountid=47253
Copyright Journal of Child and Family Studies is a copyright of

Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 3 of 18
Understanding of inclusive education practices among parents in

Ghana
Amponteng, Michael; Opoku, Maxwell Peprah; Elvis Agyei‐Okyere; Afriyie, Sally Adwoa; Tawiah, Richard.
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford Vol. 19, Iss. 3, (Jul 2019): 207-219.
DOI:10.1111/1471-3802.12443
Abstract
The significant contribution of parents towards education of children has been well explored in the literature. In
effort towards practicing inclusive education, parents have been urged to work closely with teachers in order to
sustain inclusive practices. In Ghana, the Inclusive Education Policy document has reiterated the need for
diverse stakeholders, including parents, to be involved in implementation of inclusive education. However, not
much has been done to assess the perceptions of parents regarding inclusive education practices in schools. We
adapted Parent Attitude Towards Inclusive Education survey questionnaire to examine attitude, knowledge and
social norm influencing inclusive practices among parents. We used Ajzen's theory of planned behaviour (TPB) as
framework to assess the perceptions of 411 parents, selected from two regions in Ghana. We calculated means,
t‐test, analysis of variance, correlation and regression to understand variables which will impact on perception of
parents. Although there was relationship between the three TPB variables of attitudes, knowledge and social
norms, parents indicated low knowledge about inclusive practices. Also, there was no significant difference
between parents of children with disabilities and those with typical developing children. Limitations,
recommendation for future study and educating parents about inclusive practices are discussed extensively.
Details
Subject Parents & parenting;

Questionnaires;
Social norms;
Parent attitudes;
Parenthood education;
Planned behaviour theory;
Education policy;
Disabled children;
Perceptions;
Teachers
Location Ghana
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Identifier / keyword Parents; inclusive education; Ghana; attitudes; knowledge;

social norms
Title Understanding of inclusive education practices among

parents in Ghana
Author Amponteng, Michael 1 ; Opoku, Maxwell Peprah 2 ;

1 2
Elvis Agyei‐Okyere ; Afriyie, Sally Adwoa ;
Tawiah, Richard 3
1
Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology,
Ghana
2
University of Tasmania, Australia
3
Griffith University, Australia
Publication title Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford
Volume 19
Issue 3
Pages 207-219
Publication date Jul 2019
Section Original Articles
Publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Place of publication Oxford
Country of publication United Kingdom, Oxford
Publication subject Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publication history
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12443

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright © 2019 NASEN
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 4 of 18
Korean elementary school teachers’ implementation of

mathematics instruction for students struggling to learn
mathematics in inclusive settings
Shin, Mikyung; Ok, Min Wook; Eun Young Kang; Bryant, Diane P.
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford Vol. 19, Iss. 2, (Apr 2019): 145-157.
DOI:10.1111/1471-3802.12437
Abstract
In this study, the researchers used a researcher‐developed online survey to examine the beliefs of elementary
school general and special education teachers regarding inclusion and their implementation of mathematics
instructional practices. Participants were 55 general and 38 special education teachers. The data analysis was
performed using frequency analyses, crosstabs statistics (Fisher's exact test) and independent t‐tests. Results
indicated that both general and special education teachers recognised the importance of and need for inclusive
education. Further, the most frequently used instructional groupings were a whole class and an individualised
grouping for general and special education teachers respectively. The two groups’ responses about the use of
instructional materials and practices varied considerably. Finally, both groups reported a relatively high level of
confidence in mathematics topics in general. Limitations, recommendations for future research and instructional
practices are discussed.
Details
Subject Inclusive education;

Special education;
Mathematics;
Special education teachers;
Elementary schools;
Teachers
Identifier / keyword General education teacher; inclusive education;

mathematics instruction; special education teacher; survey
Title Korean elementary school teachers’ implementation of

mathematics instruction for students struggling to learn
mathematics in inclusive settings
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Author Shin, Mikyung 1 ; Ok, Min Wook 2 ; Eun Young Kang 3 ;

Bryant, Diane P 4
1
Jeonju University, Korea
2
University of Hawaii at Manoa, USA
3
Yongin University, Korea
4
University of Texas at Austin, USA
Volume 19
Issue 2
Pages 145-157
Publication date Apr 2019
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publication history

accountid=47253
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 5 of 18
Time for inclusion?

Thomas, Matthew Krehl Edward; Whitburn, Benjamin Jay.
British Journal of Sociology of Education; Oxford Vol. 40, Iss. 2, (Mar 2019): 159-173.
DOI:10.1080/01425692.2018.1512848
Abstract
This article examines the constraints of modern temporality which are antithetical to the careful consideration
that working with diverse learners requires for the development of inclusive, democratic education. We take up
the conceptual construct of time to explore how it mediates systemic practices that impact policy positions of
inclusion in initial teacher education and schooling. Our analysis demonstrates that temporality shapes the
possibilities of inclusive practice within which a dominant agenda of compliance frames classroom complexities -
both in schooling and higher education environments - into fragmented and preconceived responses to
challenging situations. Education systems position educators in risk discourses concentrated on compliance and
performance, in part through an emphasis that is placed on the diagnosis of learner differences and subsequent
compartmentalised responses. Through schisms in modern time, we demonstrate the ways in which inclusion,
like other educational demands, may be supported through a diffraction in time rather than subjugated to it.
Details

Professional training;
Higher education;
Medical diagnosis;
Discourses;
Temporal aspects;
Time;
Teachers;
Compliance;
Educational systems;
Classrooms;
Academic achievement;
Education;
Schisms;
Teacher education
Identifier / keyword temporality; inclusive education; pedagogy;

initial teacher education; compulsory schooling
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Title Time for inclusion?
Author Thomas, Matthew Krehl Edward 1 ; Whitburn, Benjamin Jay
1
School of Education, Faculty of Arts and Education Deakin
University Burwood Australia
Publication title British Journal of Sociology of Education; Oxford
Volume 40
Issue 2
Pages 159-173
Publication date Mar 2019
Publisher Taylor & Francis Ltd.
Publication subject Sociology, Education
ISSN 01425692
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2018.1512848
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright © 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis

Group
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 6 of 18
Special Education in Kenya

Kiru, Elisheba W.Intervention in School and Clinic; Austin Vol. 54, Iss. 3, (Jan 2019): 181-188.
DOI:10.1177/1053451218767919
Abstract
Access to basic education for all students is an essential goal for many countries around the world. Also, as
worldwide calls for providing inclusive education continue to intensify, access to basic education for many
students with disabilities in Kenya remains a pervasive challenge. Large class sizes, inadequate funding, limited
teacher training, cultural perceptions, and lack of disability awareness exacerbate this challenge. In 2009, the
Kenyan government put forth a national Special Needs Education policy framework that provides comprehensive
strategies and policies to improve services for people with disabilities. Creating advocacy and awareness,
revamping the curriculum, incorporating technology, providing teacher training, and improving data collection
are some of the recommendations included in the policy framework to enhance special education services and
facilitate inclusive practices.
Details

Disabled students;
Disabled people;
Teacher education;
Perceptions;
Advocacy;
Teachers;
Special education;
Education policy;
Technology;
Disability;
Curricula;
Cultural factors
Location Kenya
Identifier / keyword disabilities; inclusion; Kenya; policy; special education
Title Special Education in Kenya
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Author Kiru, Elisheba W
Volume 54
Issue 3
Pages 181-188
Publication date Jan 2019
ISSN 10534512
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
accountid=47253
Copyright © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2018
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 7 of 18
Recommended practices to organize and deliver school-based

services for children with disabilities: A scoping review
Anaby, Dana R; Campbell, Wenonah N; Missiuna, Cheryl; Shaw, Steven R; Bennett, Sheila; et al.
Child Care, Health and Development; Oxford Vol. 45, Iss. 1, (Jan 2019): 15-27. DOI:10.1111/cch.12621
Abstract
Background
Inclusive educational environments can have a positive effect on the general health and well‐being of children
with disabilities. However, their level of academic success and participation remains limited. Considering scarce
resources and high needs, identifying efficient methods for providing interdisciplinary services is critical. This
scoping review, therefore, aims to (a) synthesize current evidence about principles for organizing and delivering
interdisciplinary school‐based support services for students with disabilities and (b) ascertain useful strategies
for implementation of principles in the school setting.
Methods
Scholarly and grey literature in rehabilitation and education were reviewed collaboratively with school‐based
stakeholders. A search of five databases identified 13,141 references and resulted in 56 relevant articles
published from 1998 to 2017. Information (e.g., principles to organize services and strategies for
implementation) was extracted, and thematic analysis was used to summarize findings.
Results
Within the documents retained, 65% were scientific and 35% were grey. Services primarily targeted students
with behavioral issues, followed by those with cognitive and learning disabilities with a focus on improving
social–emotional functioning and academic performance. Thematic analysis revealed 10 common principles to
guide service organization (e.g., collaborative interventions and support for teachers) and seven implementation
strategies (e.g., training and coordination) for employing these principles.
Conclusions
Findings can guide rehabilitation professionals, educators, and policy makers in restructuring well‐coordinated
collaborative services involving training and capacity‐building of school‐based service providers. Such knowledge
can contribute to the improved provision of care and, consequently, promote children's school participation and
inclusion.
Details
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

Databases;
Collaboration;
Academic achievement;
Disabled children;
Interdisciplinary aspects;
Teachers;
Rehabilitation;
Service provision;
School based;
Support services;
Cognitive behaviour therapy;
Capacity building approach;
Interdisciplinary approach;
Coordination;
Emotional well being;
Policy making
Identifier / keyword child disability; chronic (health) condition; complex needs;

coordinated services; multidisciplinary
Title Recommended practices to organize and deliver school‐

based services for children with disabilities: A scoping
review
Author Anaby, Dana R 1 ; Campbell, Wenonah N 2 ;

Missiuna, Cheryl 2 ; Shaw, Steven R 3 ; Bennett, Sheila 4 ;
Khan, Sitara 1 ; Tremblay, Stephanie 1 ;
Jean‐Claude Kalubi‐Lukusa 5 ; Camden, Chantal 6
1
School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, McGill
University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
2
School of Rehabilitation Science, McMaster University,
Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
3
Department of Educational and Counselling Psychology,
McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
4
Faculty of Education, Brock University, St. Catharines,
Ontario, Canada
5
Faculty of Education, Université de Sherbrooke,
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
6
School of Rehabilitation, Université de Sherbrooke,
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada
Publication title Child Care, Health and Development; Oxford
Volume 45
Issue 1
Pages 15-27
Section RESEARCH ARTICLES
Publication subject Medical Sciences--Pediatrics
ISSN 03051862
Publication history
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Milestone dates 2018-03-12 (Received); 2018-08-31 (Revised); 2018-09-04

(Accepted)
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cch.12621

accountid=47253
Copyright © 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 8 of 18
Enhancing social interaction of pupils with intellectual disabilities

with their general education peers: the outcomes of an intervention
programme
Vasileiadis, Ilias; Maro Doikou‐Avlidou.
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford Vol. 18, Iss. 4, (Oct 2018): 267-277.
DOI:10.1111/1471-3802.12410
Abstract
The goal of the study was to investigate the outcomes of an intervention programme regarding social interaction
of four pupils with intellectual disabilities with their typically developing peers. The programme aimed at
enhancing social inclusion of pupils with intellectual disabilities and consisted in (1) the implementation of
structured activities designed to promote emotion regulation and appropriate expression, self‐confidence and
cooperation, and (2) participation of the target pupils in social activities in the neighbourhood, with the active
involvement of school staff members. Data were collected by means of observations, teachers’ reflective journals
and semi‐structured interviews with the school staff members and the pupils themselves. Findings revealed
significant increases in target pupils’ social interactions with their peers inside and outside the school setting, as
well as positive changes in general education pupils’ attitudes, both during and upon the completion of the
programme. Factors which contributed to the above‐mentioned changes are discussed in relation to the
implications of the study.
Details

Neighbourhoods;
Social interaction;
Social activities;
Change agents;
Teachers;
Emotional regulation;
School based;
Intellectual disabilities;
General education;
Structured interviews;
Cooperation;
Social integration;
Students;
Intervention
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Identifier / keyword Intellectual disability; social interaction; social inclusion;

intervention programme
Title Enhancing social interaction of pupils with intellectual

disabilities with their general education peers: the outcomes
of an intervention programme
Author Vasileiadis, Ilias 1 ; Maro Doikou‐Avlidou 2
1
University of Thessaly
2
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki
Volume 18
Issue 4
Pages 267-277
Publication date Oct 2018
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publication history

accountid=47253
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 9 of 18
Attitudes of special education teachers towards using technology in

inclusive classrooms: a mixed-methods study
Ahmed Hassan Hemdan Mohamed.
Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford Vol. 18, Iss. 4, (Oct 2018): 278-288.
DOI:10.1111/1471-3802.12411
Abstract
The purpose of this mixed‐methods study was to explore special education teachers’ attitudes towards using
technology in inclusive classrooms in Oman. The sample consisted of 428 special education teachers working in
Omani public schools (250 teachers of students with learning disabilities (LD), 90 teachers of students with
intellectual disability and 88 teachers of students with hearing impairment). Participants responded to the
attitudes towards computers questionnaire. For the qualitative section of this study, three semi‐structured group
interviews were conducted with a group of special education teachers: 15 teachers of students with hearing
impairment, 15 teachers of students with intellectual disabilities and 15 teachers of students with LD). Also, the
teachers responded to a survey of educational technology which encompassed seven questions about computer
technology. Results of the study indicated that the special education teachers’ attitudes towards using computers
were generally positive. The most notable positive attitudes were in the following subscales: special education
considerations, staff development considerations, computers use in society, and computers and quality of
instruction issues. The analysis of variance results showed that experience and type of disability did not have a
significant effect on teachers’ attitudes towards technology.
Details

Students;
Computers;
Positive thought;
Attitudes;
Hearing impairment;
Staff development;
Teachers;
Questionnaires;
Hearing;
Special education;
Educational technology;
Special education teachers;
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Technology;
Classrooms;
Disability;
Public schools
Identifier / keyword Attitudes; technology; inclusive education;

intellectual disability; hard of hearing; learning disabilities
Title Attitudes of special education teachers towards using

technology in inclusive classrooms: a mixed‐methods study
Author Ahmed Hassan Hemdan Mohamed 1
1
Sultan Qaboos University, College of Education; Assiut
University, College of Education
Volume 18
Issue 4
Pages 278-288
Publication date Oct 2018
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publication history

accountid=47253
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 10 of 18
OPEN ACCESS
Alternative teaching practices for inclusive education

Celia Corchuelo Fernández; Carmen María Aránzazu Cejudo Cortés.
SHS Web of Conferences; Les Ulis Vol. 37, Les Ulis: EDP Sciences. (2017)
DOI:10.1051/shsconf/20173701005
Abstract
The research that we carried out in this article tries to demonstrate how the good practices that the teachers of
the Second Chance Schools have in their centers (significant learning, propinquity and support) are effective
pedagogical tools to reduce rates of school failure and dropout and, in other cases, to eliminate those two
hurdles that the education system has and which is exacerbated in certain social contexts. Basically, this
research is articulated in a theoretical framework, a research process or methodological framework, results from
that research and the establishment of conclusions.
Details
Identifier / keyword Inclusive education; alternative teaching; teachers
Title Alternative teaching practices for inclusive education
Author Celia Corchuelo Fernández;

Carmen María Aránzazu Cejudo Cortés
Publication title SHS Web of Conferences; Les Ulis
Volume 37
Publication date 2017
Publisher EDP Sciences
Place of publication Les Ulis
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Country of publication France, Les Ulis
Publication subject Social Sciences: Comprehensive Works
ISSN 24165182
Source type Conference Papers & Proceedings
Publication history
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20173701005

accountid=47253
Copyright © 2017. This work is licensed under

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the
“License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and
conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the
terms of the License.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 11 of 18
Examining Quality in Two Preschool Settings: Publicly Funded

Early Childhood Education and Inclusive Early Childhood
Education Classrooms
Pelatti, Christina Yeager; Dynia, Jaclyn M; Logan, Jessica A; R; Justice, Laura M; Kaderavek, Joan.
Child & Youth Care Forum; New York Vol. 45, Iss. 6, (Dec 2016): 829-849. DOI:10.1007/s10566-016-
9359-9
Abstract
Background
Although classroom quality is an important consideration, few recent research studies have examined the
process and structural quality in publicly funded early childhood education (ECE) and inclusive ECE classrooms.
This study provides an important contribution to the literature by comparing two conceptualizations of quality in
classrooms serving children from low-income households and those with disabilities.
Objectives
(1) To characterize and to determine differences with regard to process and structural quality in publicly funded
ECE and inclusive ECE classrooms, and (2) to examine whether and to what extent the process quality varied
when controlling for structural quality and classroom income/race variables.
Method
One hundred and sixty four classrooms (85 ECE, 79 inclusive) that were enrolled in two large-scale intervention
studies examining a book-reading program were included in the present study. The Classroom Assessment
Scoring System (CLASS; Pianta et al. in Classroom assessment scoring system, Paul H. Brookes, Baltimore,
2008 ) and three detailed questionnaires were used to quantify process and structural quality, respectively.
Results
Results revealed quantitative differences in process quality, specifically in the emotional support dimension of
negative climate as well as all dimensions of instructional support, between the two settings. In addition,
teachers' education was a significant predictor of process quality, and publicly funded ECE classrooms scored
over two points higher on the instructional support domain of the CLASS when controlling for other structural
quality measures and income and race.
Conclusions
Our findings have implications for best practice guidelines and policies, particularly for classroom environments
serving children with disabilities, which are discussed.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Details
Subject Early childhood education;

Households;
Disabled children;
Classrooms;
Emotional support;
Classroom environment;
Poor children;
Teachers;
Childhood;
Questionnaires;
Race;
Low income people;
Best practice;
Income;
Scores;
Children;
Schools;
Low income groups;
Preschool education;
Classroom management;
Disabled students;
Public schools;
Quality of education
Location Baltimore Maryland; United States--US; Ohio
Company / organization Name: Towson University

NAICS: 611310;
Name: Department of Education

NAICS: 923110;
Name: National Center for Education Statistics

NAICS: 923110;
Name: Ohio State University

NAICS: 611310
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Classification 6143: child & family welfare
Identifier / keyword Inclusive early childhood education;

Early childhood education; Classroom quality
Title Examining Quality in Two Preschool Settings: Publicly

Funded Early Childhood Education and Inclusive Early
Childhood Education Classrooms
Author Pelatti, Christina Yeager 1 ; Dynia, Jaclyn M 2 ;

Logan, Jessica A; R 2 ; Justice, Laura M 3 ; Kaderavek, Joan 4
1
Crane Center for Early Education Research and Policy, The
Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA; Department of
Audiology, Speech-Language Pathology, and Deaf Studies,
Towson University, Towson, MD, USA; Department of
Audiology, Speech-Language Pathology, and Deaf Studies,
Towson University, Towson, MD, USA
2
Crane Center for Early Education Research and Policy, The
Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA
3
Crane Center for Early Childhood Research and Policy, and
The Schoenbaum Family Center, College of Education and
Human Ecology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH,
USA
4
Department of Early Childhood, Physical, and Special
Education, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, USA
Publication title Child & Youth Care Forum; New York
Volume 45
Issue 6
Pages 829-849
Publication date Dec 2016
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Publisher Springer Nature B.V.
Place of publication New York
Country of publication Netherlands, New York
Publication subject Children And Youth - About, Psychology
ISSN 1053-1890
Document feature References
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10566-016-9359-9

accountid=47253
Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 12 of 18
The South African national school curriculum: Implications for

collaboration between teachers and speech-language therapists
working in schools
Anna-Marie Wium; Louw, Brenda.
South African Journal of Childhood Education (SAJCE); Little Rock Vol. 5, Iss. 1, (2015).
DOI:10.4102/sajce.v5i1.348
Abstract
This critical review addresses the implications of the Curriculum and Assessment Plan Statement (CAPS) for
collaboration between teachers and speech-language therapists (SLTs) in schools. A historical perspective on
changes in the roles and responsibilities of SLTs is provided, reflecting a shift from supporting the child to
supporting the teacher. Based on the role of SLTs and audiologists in schools, an innovative approach to the
support of teachers is conceptualized. The curriculum content and methods support learners who experience
challenges and barriers to learning in main stream classrooms. The implementation of the curriculum
necessitates close collaboration between teachers and SLTs in order to ensure the best possible outcomes for all
learners. This collaboration is reviewed by identifying the benefits of, and barriers to, the process, as well as
crucial areas of collaboration. Inclusive education is mandated by White Paper 6, and collaborative support of
teachers by SLTs is presented from the learners’ perspective within the context of the curriculum. An example of
teacher support through the response to intervention (RTI) approach is described.
Details
Subject Collaboration;
Schools;
Core curriculum;
Teachers;
Speech therapists;
Learning
Location South Africa
Identifier / keyword South African school curriculum; collaboration;

inclusive education; teachers; speech-language therapists
Title The South African national school curriculum: Implications
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
for collaboration between teachers and speech-language

therapists working in schools
Author Anna-Marie Wium; Louw, Brenda
Publication title South African Journal of Childhood Education (SAJCE); Little

Rock
Volume 5
Issue 1
Publication date 2015
Publisher AOSIS (Pty) Ltd
Place of publication Little Rock
Country of publication South Africa, Little Rock
Publication subject Education
ISSN 22237674
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.4102/sajce.v5i1.348
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright AOSIS (Pty) Ltd 2015
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 13 of 18
'Away with the fairies?' Disability within primary-age children's

literature
Beckett, Angharad; Ellison, Nick; Barrett, Sam; Shah, Sonali.
Disability & Society; Abingdon Vol. 25, Iss. 3, (May 2010): 373-386. DOI:10.1080/09687591003701355
Abstract
This article outlines the findings of a new study that explores the portrayal of disability within a sample of the
primary-age children's literature most readily available to UK schools. The kind of literature to which children are
exposed is likely to influence their general perceptions of social life. How disability is handled by authors is
therefore important from the standpoint of disability equality. Findings suggest that whilst there are some good
examples of inclusive literature 'out there', discriminatory language and/or negative stereotypes about disability
continue to be present in a range of more contemporary children's books. Clearly, more still needs to be done to
ensure that schools and teachers are provided with information relating to the best examples of inclusion
literature and efforts must continue to be made to inform authors, publishers and illustrators about how to
approach the issue of disability.
Details
Subject Childrens literature;

Children & youth;
Schools;
Stereotypes;
Equality;
Teachers;
Social perception;
Children;
Disorders;
Disabled people;
Disability
Identifier / keyword disability; disablism; prejudice; attitudes;

inclusive education; children's literature; inclusion literature
Title 'Away with the fairies?' Disability within primary-age

children's literature
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Author Beckett, Angharad 1 ; Ellison, Nick 1 ; Barrett, Sam 1 ;

Shah, Sonali 1
1
School of Sociology and Social Policy University of Leeds
Leeds UK
Publication title Disability & Society; Abingdon
Volume 25
Issue 3
Pages 373-386
Publication date May 2010
Place of publication Abingdon
Country of publication United Kingdom, Abingdon
Publication subject Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation,

Handicapped--Physically Impaired
ISSN 09687599
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 14 of 18
Engaging with teachers' knowledge: promoting inclusion in

Zambian schools
Miles, Susie.Disability & Society; Abingdon Vol. 24, Iss. 5, (Aug 2009): 611-624.
DOI:10.1080/09687590903010990
Abstract
Current efforts to ensure that every child completes a full cycle of primary education are hampered by chronic
poverty and prolonged conflict in the South. It is estimated that 75 million children of primary age are out of
school and that one-third are disabled. This paper contrasts the exclusionary impact of the global digital and
communication divide with the international rhetoric of Education for All. Access to information has increased in
our brave new world, but inequitably. In this paper insights are explored from a study carried out by the
Enabling Education Network in schools in Northern Zambia, in which reflective writing played a role in generating
locally relevant teachers' knowledge. Although there was only minimal evidence of the benefits of the digital
revolution, the Zambian teachers successfully developed a problem-based approach to including disabled
children in education as part of their commitment to child rights.
Details
Subject Education;
Poverty;
Special education;
Communication;
Elementary education;
Teachers;
Children;
Elementary schools;
Rhetoric;
Teaching methods;
Disabled people
Identifier / keyword inclusive education; Education for All; teachers; Zambia
Title Engaging with teachers' knowledge: promoting inclusion in

Zambian schools
Author Miles, Susie 1
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
1
School of Education University of Manchester UK
Publication title Disability & Society; Abingdon
Volume 24
Issue 5
Source details 'Brave New World?' Disability and the 21st Century:
Challenges and Solutions
Pages 611-624
Publication date Aug 2009
Place of publication Abingdon
Country of publication United Kingdom, Abingdon

Handicapped--Physically Impaired
ISSN 09687599
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 15 of 18
Collaboration to Promote Social Competence for Students With

Mild Disabilities in the General Classroom: A Structure for
Providing Social Support
Meadan, Hedda; Monda-Amaya, Lisa.
Intervention in School and Clinic; Austin Vol. 43, Iss. 3, (Jan 2008): 158-167.
DOI:10.1177/1053451207311617
Abstract
When students are struggling to be successful in the general classroom, collaborative efforts should
include planning for academic and social needs. Students with disabilities may display significant
social difficulties such as establishing friendships or feelings of isolation and loneliness. Because
peer relationships in childhood play a significant role in later-life adjustment, teachers need to
create environments that support and promote social competence and acceptance. This article
discusses issues around social competence for students with mild disabilities and provides a social
support structure as a basis for collaborating with general education teachers to create socially
inclusive learning environments and build social competence.
Details
Subject Social support;

Learning;
Collaboration;
Isolation;
Social competence;
Friendships;
Childhood;
Peer relationships;
Teachers;
Loneliness;
Head Start project;
Disabled students;
Classrooms;
General education
Identifier / keyword social skills; social competence; collaboration;
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
inclusion for students with mild disabilities
Title Collaboration to Promote Social Competence for Students

With Mild Disabilities in the General Classroom: A Structure
for Providing Social Support
Author Meadan, Hedda 1 ; Monda-Amaya, Lisa 2
1
Department of Special Education at Illinois State
University, hmeadan@ilstu.edu
2
Department of Special Education at the University of
Illinois at Urbana- Champaign
Volume 43
Issue 3
Pages 158-167
ISSN 10534512
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Jan 2008
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 16 of 18
Inclusion in Australia: What Teachers Say They Need and What

School Psychologists Can Offer
Anderson, Colin J K; Klassen, Robert M; Georgiou, George K.
School Psychology International; London Vol. 28, Iss. 2, (May 2007): 131-147.
DOI:10.1177/0143034307078086
Abstract
This article examines the inclusion-related beliefs and perceived needs of primary teachers in Australia, and
proposes ways that school psychologists can help meet these needs. Forced-choice and open-ended survey
questions provided quantitative and qualitative data from 162 primary school teachers who were in the midst of
implementing an inclusive education program in a large urban/suburban education district in Western Australia.
Survey questions focused on beliefs about inclusion, confidence about implementing inclusive practices and
attitudes about current and necessary support structures. The majority of teachers perceive benefits (85
percent) as well as drawbacks (95 percent) to teaching in inclusive classrooms. Only 10 percent of teachers
noted school psychologists as part of structures that successfully support inclusive practices and only 4 percent
of teachers requested additional school psychology time as a support structure needed to boost confidence to
teach more inclusively. Qualitative data showed that teachers want more training in specific disabilities as well as
additional aide time. We conclude that school psychologists need to be more proactive and involved in providing
training, disseminating research, developing behaviour and learning plans and advocating for teachers.
Details

Learning;
School psychology;
Psychologists;
Classrooms;
Teaching;
School psychologists;
Behavioural training;
Teachers;
Polls & surveys
Location Western Australia Australia
Identifier / keyword Australia; inclusion; primary schools; school psychologists;

special needs; teachers; teacher training
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Title Inclusion in Australia: What Teachers Say They Need and

What School Psychologists Can Offer
Author Anderson, Colin J K 1 ; Klassen, Robert M 2 ;

Georgiou, George K 2
1
South Gloucestershire Psychology Service, UK
2
University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Publication title School Psychology International; London
Volume 28
Issue 2
Pages 131-147
Publication date May 2007
Publisher Sage Publications Ltd.
Place of publication London
Country of publication United Kingdom, London
Publication subject Education--Teaching Methods And Curriculum, Psychology
ISSN 01430343
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright Sage Publications Ltd. May 2007
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 17 of 18
Collaborative speech and language services for students with

learning disabilities
Elksnin, Linda K.Journal of Learning Disabilities; Austin Vol. 30, Iss. 4, (Jul/Aug 1997): 414-26.
DOI:10.1177/002221949703000408
Abstract
Fueled by educational reforms such as the Regular Education Initiative, the inclusion movement, and Goals
2000, speech and language pathologists (SLPs) have explored the use of collaborative consultation in providing
integrated service delivery. The implications of classroom-based services are discussed, along with models that
have been adopted by SLPs, learning disabilities specialists (LDSs), and classroom teachers. The characteristics
of students served, and the areas of speech and language (i.e., language, articulation, fluency, voice) targeted in
the classroom, are reviewed. Ways in which SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers can collaborate, including
collaborative assessment; Individualized Education Program development; teaching listening, speaking, reading,
and writing skills; and teaching students the language of the classroom, are described.
Full text
Headnote
Abstract
Headnote
Fueled by educational reforms such as the Regular Education Initiative, the inclusion movement, and Goals
2000, speech and language pathologists (SLPs) have explored the use of collaborative consultation in providing
integrated service delivery. The implications of classroom-based services are discussed, along with models that
have been adopted by SLPs, learning disabilities specialists (LDSs), and classroom teachers. The characteristics
of students served, and the areas of speech and language (i.e., language, articulation, fluency, voice) targeted in
the classroom, are reviewed. Ways in which SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers can collaborate, including
collaborative assessment; Individualized Education Program development; teaching listening, speaking, reading,
and writing skills; and teaching students the language of the classroom, are described.
The merits of collaborative consultation have been discussed at length by professionals representing the
disciplines of special education and school psychology (e.g., Branden-Miller & Elias,1991; Dettmer, Thurston, &
Dyck, 1993; Elksnin & Elksnin, 1989; Gutkin, 1990; Huefner, 1988; Morsink, Thomas, & Correa, 1991; Nevin,
Thousand, PaolucciWhitcomb, & Villa,1990; Zins, Curtis, Graden, & Ponti, 1988). Speech and language
pathologists (SLPs) also have explored the use of collaborative consultation in providing speech and language
services in the classroom. Changes in speech and language service delivery have significant implications for
teachers of students with learning disabilities (LD), as many of these students evidence speech and language
difficulties (Gerber, 1993; Reed, 1994; Wallach & Butler, 1994).
Like special education, speech and language pathology emerged from a medical model that stressed the need to
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
diagnose the language or learning problem and develop a treatment plan. The impact of this model on service
delivery has been discussed at length by Hoskins (1990a) and Simon and Myrold-Gunyuz (1990). During the late
1970s, SLPs acknowledged that language is more easily learned in the natural rather than the clinical setting
(Nelson, 1990). This acknowledgment has set the stage for the SLP to move from a separatist role as expert to a
participatory, collaborative role (Gerber, 1987). Just as learning disabilities specialists (LDSs) began to question
traditional service delivery models with the emergence of the Regular Education Initiative (Will, 1986) and the
inclusion movement (Smith, Polloway, Patton, & Dowdy, 1995), SLPs also have explored classroom-based rather
than pull-out programs.
There is considerable discussion today about reforming education through the passage of policies supporting
change at the local level. Many states have adopted outcomes-based education, which emphasizes more
functional, age-appropriate, curriculum-based learning. General education school reform initiatives, such as
America 2000 (1991) and Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994 (P.L. 103-227), continue to influence a
paradigm shift from provision of assessment and intervention in isolation to provision of these services "in
context" (Wallach & Butler, 1994). This shift requires a high level of collaboration among SLPs, LDSs, classroom
teachers, parents, and other professionals. Goals 2000 promotes collaboration through its emphasis on literacy
and lifelong learning. A National Education Student Achievement goal requires that all students demonstrate
ability to reason, solve problems, apply knowledge, write, and communicate. When literacy includes all aspects
of languagelistening, speaking, reading, writing, and spelling (Silliman & Wilkinson, 1994)-SLPs, LDSs, and
classroom teachers must work together. Gerber (1993) characterized these collaborative arrangements as
moving from trainer-controlled intervention to child-controlled intervention that emphasizes teaching language in
the natural setting.
In 1991, the American SpeechLanguage-Hearing Association (ASHA) published an article outlining the
advantages of collaborative speech and language services. More recently, ASHA (1993) issued a position
statement recommending collaborative consultation as an appropriate service delivery model for some caseload
students.
Currently, 80% of students identified as having LD are served for all or part of the school day in general classes
(U.S. Department of Education, 1994). Consequently, collaborative speech and language services must involve
the SLD, the LDS, and the classroom teacher. When collaboration among all professionals occurs, speech and
language services complement reform efforts to improve curriculum and assessment for students with LD by
making programming more relevant to demands in and out of the classroom. A review of the literature follows,
focusing on collaborative speech and language services in order to explain current practices, as well as to make
recommendations for future efforts.
Collaborative Consultation
Collaborative consultation was defined by Idol, Paolucci-Whitcomb, and Nevin (1986) as "an interactive process
that enables people with diverse expertise to generate creative solutions to mutually defined problems" (p. 1).
The key words of this definition are interactive process, diverse expertise, and mutually defined problems. After
conducting a survey of SLPs in public schools, Elksnin, Capilouto, and Bright (1993) and Elksnin and Capilouto
(1994) reported that SLPs most frequently identified knowledge about language development as their perceived
area of expertise. They perceived the ability to manage large groups of students and knowledge about the
curriculum as classroom teachers' areas of expertise. When conducting staff development with SLPs, LDSs, and
classroom teachers, the author has found that identifying areas of expertise establishes the groundwork for
discussion of collaborative consultation as a partnership of co-equals.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
It is also helpful to consider collaboration as existing on a continuum. Marvin (1990) recognized co-activity as
the lowest level of collaboration. Collaboration at this level resembles children's parallel play, with the LDS,
classroom teacher, and SLP engaging in separate instructional activities, with little sharing of ideas. For example,
co-activity occurs when the SLP focuses on speech and language skills independent of the academic curriculum
while the LDS or classroom teacher delivers curricular content without attempting to integrate speech and
language goals. According to Marvin, cooperation involves jointly establishing general goals rather than specific
goals for individual students. At this level, the LDS, classroom teacher, and SLP may cooperatively generate
ideas regarding how speech and language skills (e.g., production of correct sounds, understanding of spatial
vocabulary, use of referent pronouns, etc.) or academic skills (e.g., literal comprehension, solving of word
problems, outlining a chapter, etc.) can be more effectively taught.
Marvin (1990) characterized coordination as a form of group cohesion in which the LDS, classroom teacher, and
SLP share opinions and instructional strategies relating to specific students. However, role release still does not
occur at this level. For example, the LDS, classroom teacher, and SLP might develop a lesson plan together
designed to reinforce a student's use of a speech or language skill, but the SLP would retain responsibility for
developing speech and language Individualized Education Program (IEP) objectives, and the LDS and classroom
teacher for identifying academic objectives that would be taught in the classroom. At the highest level,
collaboration, the LDS, classroom teacher, and SLP engage in informal networking and develop a high degree of
trust in one another. Responsibility for students is shared by all individuals. The LDS and classroom teacher feel
as responsible for a student's speech and language performance as the SLP; conversely, the SLP has a vested
interest in enabling students to master academic objectives.
The SLP, classroom teacher, and LDS may operate at points within the continuum based on their different levels
of professional development, established goals for collaboration, and individual students' needs. In addition, it is
unrealistic to expect teams of SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers to operate at the highest level as they first
enter into collaborative relationships.
Integrated Speech and Language Services
Definition
Collaborative consultation is a process that can be used by the LDS, classroom teacher, and SLP to clarify role
expectations, identify problems, and develop meaningful interventions. Integrated speech and language services
are speech and language services, provided in a natural setting, that facilitate communicative competence and
promote success (Elksnin et al., 1993). The natural setting may be the school, the home, or the employment
setting. Services may be provided by the SLP, or directly by the LDS, classroom teacher, parent, or job coach
with the support and collaboration of the SLP. Communicative competence is broadly defined as including the
areas of listening, speaking, reading, and writing.
An integrated service delivery model ensures that classroom listening, speaking, reading, and writing activities
provide opportunities for learning language skills; speaking also provides a context for developing fluency, voice,
and articulation skills (Goodin & Mehollin, 1990). If the SLP works in the schools rather than in a clinical or
rehabilitation setting, his or her task becomes one of facilitating students' communicative competence, which, in
turn, promotes academic success in the classroom (Farber, Denenberg, Klyman, & Lachman, 1992; Hoskins,
1990a).
Some leaders in the speech and language field have suggested that the SLP becomes more "relevant" when he
or she considers speech and language within the context of the classroom (Hoskins, 1990a; Nelson, 1989, 1990;
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Simon, 1980, 1987; Simon & Myrold-Gunyuz, 1990; Wadle, 1991). Rather than perceiving the SLP as providing
therapy for small numbers of students in pull-out programs, classroom teachers begin to regard the SLP as the
school's resident language expert.
Integrated speech and language services can be provided in a variety of ways. Friend (1992) described seven
models of integrated service delivery (see Appendix A). One teach, one observe involves observation by the SLP,
LDS, or classroom teacher while another assumes primary instructional responsibility. The one teach, one "drift"
model involves the SLP, LDS, or classroom teacher assuming primary instructional responsibility while another
helps students with their work, monitors their behavior, and engages in other nonteaching tasks. With station
teaching, the SLP and the classroom teacher (or LDS) divide instructional content into two parts, such as
vocabulary and concepts, and the class into two groups. The groups receive instruction in both content areas,
one from each teacher. During parallel teaching, the LDS (or classroom teacher) and the SLP divide the class and
teach groups the same instructional content at the same time. Using the remedial teaching model, the SLP, LDS,
or classroom teacher instructs students who have mastered previously introduced material, while another works
with students requiring remedial instruction. During supplemental teaching, the SLP, LDS, or classroom teacher
presents a lesson using a traditional presentation format, whereas the other teacher adapts the lesson for
students who have difficulty mastering the material. Team teaching involves the SLP and LDS (or classroom
teacher) teaching a lesson together to the entire group.
The approach used by the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher is influenced by their degree of comfort with each
other, their skills, and their students' needs, as well as by administrative demands. For collaboration to lead to
integrated speech and language services, it must be voluntary, and decision making, accountability, and
resources must be shared.
Examples
Brief descriptions of integrated speech and language programs that have been implemented in the schools are
provided in Appendix B. Although many of the programs were not designed specifically for children with LD, they
can be adapted for that purpose. In addition to a brief description of each program, Appendix B reports the age
or grade level for which the program was designed, and the speech and language area (i.e., language,
articulation, fluency, voice) emphasized. The appendix also indicates if the program was used in conjunction with
pull-out services.
As can be seen in Appendix B, integrated speech and language services were used predominantly with
elementary-age students, and to a slightly lesser degree with preschoolers. Although Gruenewald and Pollak
(1984), Larson and McKinley (1987), Simon (1984), and Simon and MyroldGunyuz (1990) have discussed the
importance of integrated services for adolescents, few studies have reported the use of integrated speech and
language services with this age group. Of the articles reviewed and reported in Appendix B, only one reported
use of this approach with adolescents, although several authors reported district-wide adoption of integrated
service delivery (Fujiki & Brinton, 1984; Montgomery, 1992; MooreBrown, 1992). These results are consistent
with the author's survey of speech-language pathologists (Elksnin & Capilouto, 1994), in which fewer than 35%
of SLPs reported using these approaches with middle and high school students.
Overwhelmingly, individuals providing integrated speech and language services have focused on language.
Appendix B reports the areas of speech and language targeted by integrated service delivery. In cases where "L
(all)" appears in the third column, emphasis was given to language, although some skills in the areas of
articulation, fluency, and voice were addressed by the SLP and the teacher in the classroom. With the exception
of Cooper (1991) and Cooper and Cooper (1991), who used integrated services to focus on dysfluency, all
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
authors emphasized the use of integrated models in the area of language. Again, these results are fairly
consistent with survey data indicating that 100% of SLPs adopting integrated service delivery models used these
approaches when providing language and articulation services, but only 17% and 6% used them when providing
fluency and voice services, respectively (Elksnin & Capilouto, 1994).
As in special education, little research has been conducted to document the efficacy of integrated service
delivery approaches over more traditional approaches, such as pull-out. Data to support the efficacy of each
intervention approach are unavailable, with the exception of two cases. Farber et al. (1992) reported pre- and
posttest data for students participating in a program that used team teaching, itinerant support, and consultative
services. They reported improved mean scores on the Language Processing Test (Richard & Hanner, 1985) and
the Clinical Evaluation of Language Fundamentals-Revised (Semel, Wiig, & Secord, 1987). No attempt was made
to compare the participants' performance with that of a control group. Wilcox, Kouri, and Caswell (1991)
compared classroom versus individual interventions in promoting initial lexical acquisition for preschoolers with
language delays and reported that the classroom-based intervention led to greater generalization of lexical
targets to the home environment.
Integrated programs can be used in conjunction with traditional pull-out models (see Appendix B). For example,
Christensen and Luckett (1990) reported that they worked on a skill during a 20- to 30-minute weekly pullout
session and then stressed the skill during weekly 30-minute whole language lessons in the classroom. Ferguson
(1992) monitored speech students in the classroom, served them in multiple pull-out sessions during the week,
and taught language students exclusively in the classroom. Borsch and Oaks (1992) taught specific speech and
language skills during pull-out sessions, and general communication skills such as listening, speaking, and
thinking in the classroom. A combination approach may be particularly appropriate when serving children with
LD who evidence severe speech and language problems. In fact, ASHA (1993) suggested that pull-out programs
are essential when students are learning new skills.
Advantages
Although data supporting the efficacy of integrated models over more traditional service delivery models are
needed, there appear to be several advantages to the former. The lack of carryover of skills is a frequent
criticism of traditional pull-out programs (Elksnin & Capilouto, 1994; Miller, 1989). One of the most frequently
cited advantages of integrated services is increased generalization of speech and language skills to the natural
setting (Gerber, 1993). In addition to fostering skills generalization, integrated services enable the SLP, LDS, and
classroom teacher to identify speech and language skills that are critical for academic success (Gerber, 1993;
Hoskins, 1990a, 1990b; Marvin, 1987; Simon, 1987; Simon & MyroldGunyuz, 1990). They also may prevent
future problems from occurring, because students whose speech and language deficits are too mild to qualify
them for traditional services can still receive instruction from the SLP in collaboration with the LDS and
classroom teacher (Marvin, 1987). Integrated service delivery also enables the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher
to develop students' social communication skills in the classroom; the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher can work
together to provide students with more opportunities to use language in the classroom (ASHA, 1991). Finally,
there is some evidence to suggest that this form of service delivery is more cost-effective, as more students
learn speech and language skills more quickly (Marvin, 1987).
Opportunities to Collaborate
Although many LDSs, SLPs, and classroom teachers may not currently be involved in integrated service delivery,
there are many opportunities for them to collaborate, which may promote more fully integrated speech and
language services. Descriptions of several opportunities that capitalize on natural alliances among the SLP, LDS,
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
and classroom teacher are included in the sections that follow.
Collaborative Assessment
Collaborative assessment requires the active involvement of the LDS, the classroom teacher, and the SLP.
Whereas the SLP still assesses students to determine if they qualify for services and to develop interventions,
the skills needed to succeed in the classroom influence the development and implementation of interventions
when a collaborative model is adopted (Nelson, 1994). The advantages of collaborative assessment include (a)
opportunities for several professionals representing multiple disciplines to assess many tasks and skills, (b) a
focus on communication in the classroom rather than in the clinical setting, and (c) increased authenticity of
assessment.
Hoskins (1990a) suggested that the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher ask these questions:
What language skills does it take to perform the task?
What may make it difficult for this student to perform?
What modifications may allow this student to be successful? (p. 32 )
Rather than relying on standardized test data, the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher must use curriculum-based
language assessment (Nelson, 1989). Nelson (1990) conducted curriculum-based language assessment by
considering the following:
1. What communicative skills and strategies does the student need to be able to participate in the curriculum?
2. What processes and strategies does the student currently exhibit when communicating within important
curricular contexts?
3. What new skills, strategies, or compensatory techniques might this child acquire with intervention to be able
to participate in learning the curriculum better?
4. How might curricular expectations be modified, without disrupting general classroom flow, so that this student
gets more opportunity to participate successfully? (pp. 21-22)
Curriculum-based language assessment can be conducted through classroom observation and examination of
permanent products, such as worksheets and journals, and by asking the child to "think out loud" so that his or
her metalinguistic abilities can be assessed. Nelson (1994) regarded this form of assessment as a means of
keeping students in the general education curriculum:
Keeping students in the regular curriculum is not the same as giving them more of the same, and it does not
mean making their regular education teachers totally responsible for teaching them. Rather, it requires the
commitment of both regular and special educators (including speech-language pathologists) to engage in the
ongoing process of analyzing the language and communication expectations of the regular curriculum
deliberately, to identify points of match and mismatch between the curriculum and the abilities of the target
student, and to design intervention strategies that support students' attempts to make sense of what is going
on, to communicate competently, and to learn. (p. 105)
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
ASHA (1991) recommended using discourse sampling, contextual analysis, and ethnographic approaches, in
addition to curriculum-based language assessment. Discourse sampling involves analysis of communication
(e.g., social, instructional); narrative (e.g., story grammars, qualities, types); or expository (e.g., description,
illustration, sequence, argument and persuasion, functional) behaviors. The SLP, LDS, classroom teacher, and
others can make video- and audiotapes of children's discourse, which can then be analyzed to determine
communication abilities. Contextual analysis describes the environment in which communication occurs.
Collaboration among the SLP, LDS, classroom teacher, and parents will result in information about how the
student with LD uses language in a variety of situations or settings. An ethnographic approach to assessment
focuses on how children's language relates to their cultural membership. This approach views the classroom as
one kind of culture. Children from culturally and linguistically diverse populations may evidence differing levels of
communicative competence at home or in the community than they do at school.
Developing IEPs
Because many students with LD also have speech and language problems, they may receive services from the
SLP and the LDS. Often, services provided by these professionals are articulated in two separate IEPs. At the
most basic level, the SLP, LDS, classroom teacher, and parent can collaboratively develop the speech and
language IEP. For those students receiving LD services, collaboration may facilitate development of an integrated
IEP, in which speech and language goals become part of the academic IEP goals, and vice versa. As the LDS,
classroom teacher, and SLP explore the possibility of integrated speech and language services, much of the
groundwork is laid during collaborative IEP development.
Teaching Listening and Speaking Skills
Students with language-learning disabilities constitute 40% to 60% of students with LD (Mercer, 1991).
Language problems can manifest themselves as an imperfect ability to either listen or speak. Integrated service
delivery may involve classroom-based assessment of these receptive and expressive language skills and the
collaborative development of appropriate interventions.
Elementary and secondary classroom teachers have identified certain receptive and expressive language skills as
essential for school success (Simon, 1984). These skills can form the basis for collaborative planning and
integrated service delivery. The essential receptive skills include the ability to (a) understand word meanings,
relationships, and inflections; (b) validate the accuracy of a speaker's information by comparing it with
previously learned or presented information; (c) process complex sentence constructions containing technical
vocabulary; (d) process oral information when it is presented at a reasonable rate; and (e) process oral
information despite minor distractions in the classroom, such as movement and low noise levels.
There are several strategies the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher can use to improve the listening ability of
students with LD (Florida Department of Education, 1995). Often, the metamemory skills of students with LD are
poor and they must be directly taught to identify easy and difficult listening situations, or to decide if they need
to sit close to a speaker and away from distractions. Students also can be taught to overtly or covertly
paraphrase directions, ask specific questions about directions, and prompt the teacher if they do not understand.
Poorly developed listening skills often affect the students' conversational skills; the SLP, LDS, and classroom
teacher can teach them to observe the speaker's nonverbal cues and to take conversational turns.
Teachers perceive the following expressive language skills as essential: the ability to (a) use appropriate
language in a variety of contexts; (b) think and talk about language (i.e., metalinguistic awareness); (c) adjust
one's language to meet the listener's needs; (d) organize a message cognitively prior to its verbal presentation;
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
and (e) speak at a comfortable rate.
Students with LD often exhibit problems in the areas of semantics, morphology, syntax, and phonology (S. H.
Long & S. T. Long, 1994). In addition, they often have difficulty with the functional, or pragmatic, use of
language. Indicators of pragmatic difficulties include difficulty in managing conversational topics, communicating
clearly to the listener, modifying language use in different contexts, and repairing conversations when they break
down (S. H. Long & S. T. Long, 1994). Some speaking skills the SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher can promote
among students with LD include (a) using different conversational styles with different groups (e.g., adults,
same-age peers, younger peers, employers); (b) using conversation rather than physical aggression to meet
needs and desires; (c) entering and exiting conversations appropriately; (d) asking clarifying questions; (e)
using vocabulary appropriate to a specific curriculum, and (f) giving and accepting criticism.
Teaching Reading and Writing Skills
The inextricable connection between oral language competence and reading and written language is widely
recognized (Horowitz & Samuels, 1987; Hoskins,1990b; Olson, Torrance, & Hildyard, 1985). Hoskins pointed out
that "reading can be seen as listening or engaging in a conversation with an author; writing on the other hand,
can be described as interaction with a nonpresent audience" (p. 50). Many of the oral language problems
encountered by students with LD affect their reading and writing abilities (Mercer, 1991). Reading and writing, as
compared to listening and speaking, require additional linguistic skills. In the case of writing, students are
required to use more diverse vocabulary and more complete sentence structure. However, they can learn the
foundation skills for reading and writing by developing their conversational skills. For example, Hoskins (1987)
developed a program to promote conversational interaction (e.g., introducing a topic, maintaining a topic,
extending a topic, changing a topic, etc.) among adolescents with learning disabilities. After the students
mastered oral language foundation skills, they were ready to begin to learn to write.
Other collaborative strategies (developed by the Florida Department of Education, 1995) that the SLP, LDS, and
classroom teacher can use to increase the reading and writing skills of students with LD include teaching
students to use visual imagery to become better language comprehenders, suggesting activities parents can use
to promote the reading-language link, helping students tell stories, and emphasizing use of print by having
students read signs and packages. Written language strategies might include providing students with graphic
organizers to help them develop an organized essay, teaching students to rehearse and organize ideas orally
before they write them down, and giving students feedback about the logic and form of oral and written
sentences (Florida Department of Education, 1995).
Teaching Students the Language of the Classroom
Many students with LD are "clueless" when it comes to recognizing the general language demands of the
classroom. The SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher can help students by teaching them language strategies for
different school curricula and by having them identify school scripts, or routines.
Helping Students Meet Curricular Language Demands. Nelson (1989, 1990) identified six school curricula. The
official curriculum is the curriculum endorsed by the state or local education agency; the curriculum dictated by
textbooks adopted by the state or district is the de facto curriculum. However, the cultural curriculum, school
culture curriculum, hidden curriculum, and the underground curriculum place different linguistic demands upon
students. The cultural curriculum provides the student with a context for understanding the official curriculum.
Children whose parents transmit messages such as "School is valuable," or "School is your job" through their
interest and involvement in the school are more likely to be successful academically. Explicit and implicit rules
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
that govern behavior and communication during formal classroom interactions form the school culture
curriculum. The explicit rules include those a teacher posts on the bulletin board in the classroom; an implicit
rule might be the way in which a teacher wants a student to request assistance. Nelson (1990) described the
hidden curriculum as "conveyed largely through such mechanisms as tone of voice, nonverbal messages about
personal value, the attention paid to a child's contributions in formal and informal discussions, and opportunities
that children have to participate in the varied activities of school" (p. 20). What must be kept in mind is that
these rules may be "hidden" from both the student and the teacher-that is, neither the student nor the teacher
is overtly aware of the rules that govern classroom behavior. The sixth type of curriculum, the underground
curriculum, was described by Cazden (1988) as the official talk of the peer culture. This talk may differ radically
from that of the school culture curriculum. The "Upstairs/Downstairs" analogy has been used to describe this
dichotomy. Just as the "upstairs" aristocrats communicated differently from the "downstairs" servants in the
longrunning BBC series, the teacher models the official curriculum while peer interactions reflect an entirely
different culture.
The LDS, SLP, and classroom teacher can use Nelson's (1990) curriculumbased language assessment guidelines
to identify any disparity between the communication skills and strategies needed to participate in each
curriculum and the skills a student possesses. For example, the SLP, LDS and classroom teacher may determine
that a group of students in the classroom use peer culture language during school culture curricular activities.
The SLP and LDS could then develop an assessment plan to determine if the students recognize the linguistic
demands of each curriculum yet choose not to make the needed communicative adjustment, or if they fail to
understand that linguistic demands are different in different contexts. An intervention plan could then be
collaboratively developed and might result in the teaching of social communication skills to whole or small
groups in the classroom.
Helping Students Develop School Scripts. Scripts are outlines of what to do in certain situations. Johnston
(1982) described scripts as an "individual's expectations about particular sorts of event sequences" (pp.
147148). For example, a script for what to do when you go to the grocery store can be used in a variety of
different stores. School scripts at the secondary level include changing classes, leaving prepared to complete
homework at the end of the day, asking a teacher for information about an upcoming test, and so forth. Younger
students use scripts for lunch, recess, and participating in reading group. Students who develop scripts are able
to concentrate on new information presented in class, rather than spending time and energy trying to follow the
routine. They are also in the position to assess what they do not know in order to obtain relevant information.
Furthermore, they are regarded favorably by the teacher because they do what they are supposed to do
(Craighead, 1990). Unfortunately, many students with LD are unable to recognize and/or develop school scripts
and need direct instruction in order to understand and follow classroom routines. The LDS, SLP, and classroom
teacher can identify classroom routines and develop questions designed to assess the student's knowledge of
those routines. They can then help students learn important routines using the following steps:
1. Outline the routine with the child.
2. Brainstorm variations on the routine.
3. Specify the cues for activating the script.
4. Role-play the script.
5. Cue the child in the natural environment.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
6. Provide strategies for coping with weaknesses. (Craighead, 1990, p. 114)
Reviewing, Modifying, and Augmenting the Curriculum
Analyzing the Curriculum. The inability of many students with LD to successfully navigate the general education
curriculum is well recognized and often precipitates the initial referral for special education evaluation and
placement. Boyce and Larson (1983) developed a format for analyzing the curriculum, Curriculum Analysis-
Language of Instruction (CALI), which can help the LDS, SLP, and classroom teacher provide structure during
collaboration. The format can be used to analyze the teacher's language as well as the language used in a
content area textbook. The SLP, LDS, and classroom teacher begin by listing identifying information, such as
title, copyright, authors, readability, and discuss whether topics are presented independently of each other. They
next assess the student's familiarity with the text and his or her ability to (a) locate particular features, such as
the table of contents, index, glossary, appendix, bibliography, unit/ chapter objectives, review questions/
practice exercises, and (b) use features such as graphic aids and typography for key words. The student's
comprehension of the textbook is assessed by asking him or her to identify the main idea and relevant details of
a threepage passage. The content of the passage is then presented as a lecture, and the student's ability to
identify the main idea and supporting details is again assessed. The student's ability to obtain information from
an actual rather than contrived lecture is measured, as well as his or her metacomprehension of tests and other
forms of evaluation. Finally, through observation, the student's ability to communicate in the classroom is
determined via the following criteria:
1. Ability to follow a sequence of directions (3 or more) given in a classroom.
2. Ability to comprehend main ideas presented during lectures.
3. Ability to comprehend the vocabulary of the course.
4. Ability to participate in classroom discussion and make verbal contributions to the class.
5. Ability to use questions to find specific additional information or to clarify previous information.
6. Ability to produce statements and questions that are intelligible, organized, and appropriate to the situation.
7. Ability to carry on a conversation with other students and/or instructor.
8. Ability to engage in problem solving/ thinking/reasoning required in the course.
9. Voice characteristics appropriate to one's sex and age.
10. Fluency in using the language; freedom from excessive verbal mazes, repetitions, and/or struggling to find
the right word (i.e., word retrieval problem). (Boyce & Larson, 1983, p. 131)
Augmenting the Curriculum. One reason for why students with LD often are unsuccessful in the general
education curriculum is that they have a poor understanding of its language demands. Gruenewald and Pollak
(1990) examined the language content and concepts within the context of the curriculum. Language concepts
and operations that influence the instructional task include such Piagetian operations as classification,
conservation, and seriation, and such concepts as time, space, and causality. For example, classification includes
vocabulary words relating to perceptual classification (e.g., color, size, shape); functional classification (e.g.,
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
words indicating relationship or use); and categorical classification (e.g., words indicating class name, such as
kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genera, and species in biology).
Academic content areas requiring classification skills (Gruenewald & Pollak, 1990) include mathematics (e.g.,
story problems, formation of sets, math operations); social studies (e.g., outlining, historical concepts,
geography); language arts (e.g., decoding through grouping of letters and syllables, comprehension involving
main idea and identifying whole/part relationships, synonyms, antonyms, humor, idioms); and science (e.g.,
classification of living and nonliving things). Gruenewald and Pollak's model can be used by the SLP, LDS, and
classroom teacher to (a) identify the language concepts and operations of an academic task that may affect a
student's performance, (b) recognize a student's language deficits, and then (c) develop hypotheses to explain
the student's poor academic performance.
Conclusions
Many students with LD evidence difficulties in the area of language. This fact, coupled with the emphasis on
literacy and communicative competence by national school reform movements such as Goals 2000, suggests
that we must reevaluate our speech and language service delivery options. Although students with LD with
significant speech and language problems may require traditional pull-out services, many students benefit from
speech and language services in the classroom. Integrated services can also complement pull-out services for
students with more severe disabilities. Collaboration among SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers is essential if
we are to develop effective integrated speech and language services for students with LD.
The level of collaboration among SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers depends on the participants' levels of
knowledge and skills, as well as appropriate administrative support. Training at the inservice and preservice
levels is critical. Although some special education programs require coursework in consultation, few SLPs or
classroom teachers receive training in consultation at the preservice level. In addition, the inclusion of
consultation in LD teacher education programs is a relatively recent phenomenon, which indicates a need for
inservice training for LDSs, SLPs, and classroom teachers. The results of a survey of practicing SLPs (Elksnin &
Capilouto, 1994; Elksnin et al., 1993) indicated that they preferred to obtain information about collaborative
consultation and integrated service delivery through inservice workshops and conference sessions, rather than
by reading professional journals or completing formal coursework. Staff development activities that provide
SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers with the opportunity to collaborate during inservice training have been
found to be very effective (Elksnin & Capilouto, 1994).
Once SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers acquire collaboration knowledge and skills, professionals must identify
opportunities to work together. Activities reviewed in this article that promote collaboration and that may lead to
integrated speech and language services are collaborative assessment, IEP development, teaching listening and
speaking skills, teaching reading and writing skills, and teaching students the language of the classroom.
In addition to trained SLPs, LDSs, and classroom teachers, administrative support is essential if collaborative
speech and language services are to be effective. The building administrator's support can be solicited by
emphasizing the compatibility between collaborative services goals and those goals included in school plans that
reflect current educational reform initiatives. Administrators can promote the success of the collaborative model
through appropriate scheduling. "Clustering," or placing large numbers of students with learning disabilities who
have speech and language problems in a grade-level or content area classroom, will facilitate collaboration and
scheduling.
Montgomery's (1992) description of the services provided by her school district illustrates the variety of speech
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
and language service delivery models that can result from collaboration among SLPs, LDSs, and classroom
teachers:
In some schools, the collaborative model is used 30% of the time for carryover with articulation, fluency, and
voice cases. In other schools, we use a collaborative model to serve almost all of the students with language
deficits in their classrooms (50-60% of the clinician's treatment time). In one preschool for children with severe
handicaps, all speech services (100%) were provided side by side with the teacher. In one middle school, 80% of
the services were provided in the classroom this year, while in two other middle schools, the classroom grade
level curriculum was used extensively for treatment. (p. 364)
Collaboration should result in improved speech and language services for students with LD. SLPs, LDSs, and
classroom teachers must ensure that a continuum of service delivery models exists for meeting the needs of all
students with LD who have speech and language difficulties. Integrative speech and language services represent
an alternative that may meet the needs of these students.
References
REFERENCES
Achilles, J., Yates, R. R., & Freese, J. M. (1991). Perspectives

from the field: Collaborative consultation in the speech and
language program of the Dallas Independent School District.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,
22,154155.
References
America 2000: An education strategy. (1991). Washington,
APPENDIX A DC: U.S.Government Printing Office.
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (1991). A

model for collaborative service delivery for students with
language-learning disorders in the public schools. ASHA,
33(Suppl. 5), 44-50. American Speech-Language-Hearing
Association. (1993). Guidelines for caseload size and speech-
language service delivery in the schools. ASHA, 35(Suppl. 10),
33-39.
References
Borsch, J. C., & Oaks, R. (1992). Implementing collaborative
consultation: Effective collaboration at Central Elementary
School. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the
Schools, 23, 367-368. Boyce, N. L., & Larson, V. L. (1983).
APPENDIX A Adolescents' communication: Development and disorders. Eau
Claire, WI: Thinking Ink. Brandel, D. (1992). Implementing
collaborative consultation: Full steam ahead with no prior
experience! Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
Schools, 23, 369-370.
References
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Branden-Miller, L. R., & Elias, M. J. (1991). Catalyzing the

primary prevention revolution in the schools: The role of
school psychologists. Journal of Educational and Psychological
Consultation, 2, 73-88. Buttrill, J., Nizawa, J., Biemer, C.,
Takahashi, C., & Hearn, S. (1989). Serving the language
learning disabled adolescent: A strategies-based model.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 20,
185-204.
APPENDIX B Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of

teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Christensen, S. S., & Luckett, C. H. (1990). Getting into the

classroom and making it work! Language, Speech, and
Hearing Services in the Schools, 21, 110-113. Cooper, C. S.
(1991). Using collaborative consultative service delivery
models for fluency intervention and carryover. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 22, 152-153.
Cooper, E. B., & Cooper, C. S. (1991). A fluency disorders

prevention program for preschoolers and children in the pri
References
mary grades. American Journal of Speech and Language
Pathology, 1, 26-31. Craighead, N. A. (1990). Mutual
empowerment through collaboration: A new script for an old
problem. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in school
speechlanguage pathology (pp. 109-116). San Antonio, TX:
Psychological Corp. Dettmer, P., Thurston, L. P., & Dyck, N.
(1993). Consultation, collaboration, and teamwork for
students with special needs. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Dodge, E. P., & Mallard, A. R. (1992). Social skills training

using a collaborative service delivery model. Language,
APPENDIX B
Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 23, 130-135.
Elksnin, L. K., & Capilouto, G. J. (1994). Speech-language

pathologists' perceptions of integrated service delivery in
school settings. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in
the Schools, 25, 258267.
References
Elksnin, L. K., Capilouto, G. J., & Bright, J. (1993, April).
Collaborative speech and language services. Paper presented
at the annual meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children,
San Antonio, TX. Elksnin, L. K., & Elksnin, N. (1989).
APPENDIX B Collaborative consultation: Improving parentteacher
communication. Academic Therapy, 24, 261-269.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Farber, J., Denenberg, M. E., Klyman, S., & Lachman, P.

(1992). Language resource room level of service: An urban school district approach to integrative treatment.
Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 293-299.
Ferguson, M. L. (1992). Implementing collaborative consultation: The transition to collaborative teaching.

Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 371372.
References
Florida Department of Education. (1995). C.L.A.S.S. A.C.T.: Collaborative language and speech services-
Alternative classroom treatment. Tallahassee: Author. Friend, M. (1992, October). Visionary leadership for
today's schools. Paper presented at the meeting of the International Council for Learning Disabilities, Kansas
City, KS.
Fujiki, M., & Brinton, B. (1984). Supplementing language therapy: Working with the classroom teacher.
Language, Speech and Hearing Services in Schools, 15, 98109.
Gerber, A. (1987). Collaboration between SLPs and educators: A continuing education process. Journal of
Childhood Communication Disorders, 11(1),107-123.
References
Gerber, A. (1993). Language-related learning disabilities: Their nature and treatment. Baltimore: Brookes.
Goals 2000: Educate America Act. (1994). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Goodin, G. L., & Mehollin, K. (1990). Developing a collaborative speech-language intervention program in the
schools. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in school speech-language pathology (pp. 89-99). San Antonio,
TX: Psychological Corp. Gruenewald, L. J., & Pollak, S. A. (1984). Language interaction in teaching and learnin .
Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
References
Gruenewald, L. J., & Pollak, S. A. (1990). Language interaction in curriculum and instruction (2nd ed.). Austin,
TX: PRO-ED. Gutkin, T. B. (1990). Consultative speechlanguage services in the schools: A view through the
looking glass of school psychology. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in school speech-language pathology
(pp. 57-65). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Hoffman, L. P. (1990). The development of literacy in a school-based program. Topics in Language Disorders,
10(2), 81-92. Horowitz, R., & Samuels, J. S. (1987). Comprehending oral and written language. San Diego:
Academic Press.
Hoskins, B. (1987). Conversations: Language intervention for adolescents. Allen, TX: DLM/Teaching Resources.
References
Hoskins, B. (1990a). Collaborative consultation: Designing the role of the speechlanguage pathologist in a new
educational context. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in school speech-language pathology (pp. 29-36). San
Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corp.
Hoskins, B. (1990b). Language and literacy: Participating in the conversation. Topics in Language Disorders,
10(2), 46-62. Huefner, D. S. (1988). The consulting teacher model. Exceptional Children, 54, 403-414.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Idol, L., Paolucci-Whitcomb, P., & Nevin, A. (1986). Collaborative consultation. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
Johnston, J. R. (1982). Narratives: A new look at communication problems in older language-disordered

children. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 13, 144-155.
Larson, V. L., & McKinley, N. L. (1987). Communication assessment and intervention strategies for adolescents.
Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Ink.
Long, S. H., & Long, S. T. (1994). Language and children with learning disabilities.
References
In V. A. Reed (Ed.), An introduction to children with language disorders (2nd ed., pp. 192-229). New York:
Merrill. Magnotta, O. H. (1991). Looking beyond tradition. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools,
22,150-151. Marvin, C. (1987). Consultation services: Changing roles for SLPs. Journal of Childhood
Communication Disorders, 11,1-16. Marvin, C. (1990). Problems in schoolbased-language consultation and
collaboration services: Defining the terms and improving the process. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in
school speechlanguage pathology (pp. 37-47). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp. Mercer, C. D. (1991).
Students with learning
disabilities. New York: Merrill. Miller, L. (1989). Classroom-based language intervention. Language, Speech, and
Hearin, Services in Schools, 20,153-170.
References
Montgomery, J. K. (1992). Implementing collaborative consultation: Perspectives from the field. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 363-364. Moore-Brown, B. J. (1992). Moving in the direction of
change: Thoughts for administrators and speech-language pathologists. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 22, 148-149. Morsink, C. V., Thomas, C. C., & Correa, V. I. (1991). Interactive teaming:
Consultation and collaboration in special programs. New York: Merrill.
Nelson, N. W. (1981). An eclectic model of language intervention for disorders of listening, speaking, reading
and writing. Topics in Language Disorders, 1(1), 1-24. Nelson, N. W. (1989). Curriculum-based language
assessment and intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 20, 170-184.
References
Nelson, N. W. (1990). Only relevant practices can be best. In W. A. Secord (Ed.), Best practices in speech-
language pathology (pp. 15-27). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Nelson, N. W. (1994). Curriculum-based language assessment and intervention across the grades. In G. P.
Wallach & K. G. Butler (Eds.), Language learning disabilities in school-age children and adolescents: Some
principles and applications (pp. 104132). New York: Merrill-Macmillan. Nevin, A., Thousand, J.,
PaolucciWhitcomb, & Villa, R. (1990). Collaborative consultation: Empowering public school personnel to provide
heterogeneous schooling for all-or, who rang that bell? Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1,
41-68.
References
Norris, J. A. (1989). Providing language remediation in the classroom: An integrated language-to-reading
intervention method. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in the Schools, 20, 205-218. Olson, D. R.,
Torrance, N., & Hildyard, A. (1985). Literacy, language, and learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
References
Reed, V. A. (1994). An introduction to children with language disorders (2nd ed.). New York: Merrill-Macmillan.
Richard, G., & Hanner, M. A. (1985). Language processing test. Moline, IL: Lingui Systems.
Roller, E., Rodriguez, T., Warner, J., & Lindahl, P. (1992). Implementing collaborative consultation: Integration of
selfcontained children with severe speechlanguage needs into the regular education classroom. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 23, 365-366. Semel, E., Wiig, E. H., & Secord, W. (1987). Clinical
evaluation of language fundamentals-Revised. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
Silliman, E. R., & Wilkinson, L. C. (1994). Discourse scaffolds for classroom intervention. In G. P. Wallach & K. G.
Butler
References
(Eds.), Language learning disabilities in school-age children and adolescents: Some principles and applications
(pp. 27-52). New York: Merrill-Macmillan. Simon, C. S. (1980). Communicative competence: A functional-
pragmatic program. Tucson, AZ: Communication Skill Builders.
References
Simon, C. S. (1984). Functional-pragmatic evaluation of communication skills in school-aged children. Language,
Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 15, 83-97. Simon, C. S. (1987). Out of the broom closet and into the
classroom: The emerging SLP. Journal of Childhood Communication Disorders, 11, 41-66.
Simon, C. S., & Myrold-Gunyuz, P. (1990). Into the classroom: The SLP in the collaborative role. Tucson, AZ:
Communication Skill Builders.
Smith, T. E. C., Polloway, E. A., Patton, J. R., & Dowdy, C. A. (1995). Teaching children with special needs in
inclusive settings. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Sixteenth annual report to
Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
References
Wadle, S. L. (1991). Why speech-language clinicians should be in the classroom. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools, 22, 277.
Wallach, G. P., & Butler, K. G. (1994). Language learning disabilities in school-age children and adolescents:
Some principles and applications. New York: MerrillMacmillan.
Westby, C. E. (1985). Learning to talktalking to learn: Oral-literate language differences. In C. S. Simon (Ed.),
Communication skills and classroom success: Therapy methodologies for language-learning disabled students.
San Diego: College Hill Press.
References
Wilcox, M. J., Kouri, T. A., & Caswell, S. B. (1991). Early language intervention: A comparison of classroom and
individual treatment. American Journal of Speech and Language Pathology, 1, 49-62. Will, M. (1986). Educating
students with learning problems-A shared responsibility. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 279149) Zins, J. E., Curtis, M. J., Graden, J. L., & Ponti, C. R. (1988).
Helping students succeed in the regular classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
AuthorAffiliation
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Linda K. Elksnin, PhD, is a professor, Citadel Development Foundation Fellow, and coordinator of special
education at The Citadel. Her research interests include social skills assessment and instruction, collaboration
among parents and professionals, and the career and vocational education of adolescents with disabilities.
Address: Linda K. Elksnin, Department of Education, 171 Moultrie St., The Citadel, Charleston, SC 29409.
AuthorAffiliation
AUTHOR'S NOTE
I wish to gratefully acknowledge the support of The Citadel Development Foundation in preparation of this
article.
Copyright PRO-ED Journals Jul/Aug 1997
Details
Subject Teaching;
Students;
Service delivery;
Educational programmes;
Collaboration;
Fluency;
Cooperative learning;
Listening;
Education policy;
Articulation;
Teachers;
Speech/Language pathologists;
Speech;
Individualized education programmes;
Consultation;
Specialists;
Individualized;
Classrooms;
Learning
MeSH Delivery of Health Care, Integrated,

Education, Special -- organization & administration,
Humans, Program Development, Schools,
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Cooperative Behavior (major), Language Therapy (major),

Learning Disorders -- therapy (major), Patient Care Team
(major), Speech Therapy (major)
Location United States--US; New York
Company / organization Name: Department of Education

NAICS: 923110
Title Collaborative speech and language services for students

with learning disabilities
Author Elksnin, Linda K
Publication title Journal of Learning Disabilities; Austin
Volume 30
Issue 4
Pages 414-26
Number of pages 13
Publication date Jul/Aug 1997

Psychology, Medical Sciences
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
ISSN 00222194
CODEN JLDIAD
Accession number 9220710

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright PRO-ED Journals Jul/Aug 1997
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
document 18 of 18
Teacher Competence, Student Diversity, and Staff Training for the

Inclusion of Middle School Students with Emotional and
Behavioral Disorders
Cheney, Douglas; Barringer, Craig.
Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders; Austin Vol. 3, Iss. 3, (Jul 1995): 174-182.
DOI:10.1177/106342669500300307
Subject Knowledge base;

Behaviour disordered students;
Competence;
Classrooms;
Emotionally disturbed students;
Teachers;
Skills;
Staff development;
Middle school students;
Student teacher relationship;
Multiculturalism & pluralism
Title Teacher Competence, Student Diversity, and Staff Training

for the Inclusion of Middle School Students with Emotional
and Behavioral Disorders
Author Cheney, Douglas 1 ; Barringer, Craig 2
1
DOUGLAS CHENEY is the director of the Institute on
Emotional Disabilities and an assistant professor of
education at Keene State College in Keene, New Hampshire.
He is the principal investigator for Project Destiny, a 3-year
study of the effects of staff development on the functioning
of students with EBD who are included in general education
classrooms. Dr. Cheney received his PhD in special education
(behavior disorders) from the University of Washington. His
research interests include evaluating strategies for inclusion
of students with EBD in general education classrooms,
teacher education concerning EBD, and the development of
school-based services for students with EBD.
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
2
CRAIG BARRINGER serves as the mental health
coordinator for Project Destiny. Dr. Barringer received his
PhD in clinical psychology from Memphis State University.
His research interests focus on the social and emotional
development of students with EBD and on school-based,
mental health service delivery models. In his present role,
Dr. Barringer is responsible for providing teacher education
in the area of mental health and for evaluating the impact of
that education on the social and emotional development of
youth with EBD.
Publication title Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders; Austin
Volume 3
Issue 3
Pages 174-182
Publication date Jul 1995
Publication subject Medical Sciences,

Medical Sciences--Psychiatry And Neurology,
Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation, Psychology
ISSN 10634266
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

accountid=47253
Copyright Copyright SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. Jul 1995
17/11/2019, 11)19 AM
Database copyright © 2019 ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. Terms and Conditions

Inclusive Ed Lit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Inclusive Ed Lit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Inclusive Ed Lit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

17/11/2019, 11)19 AM

Back to previous page

Innovations in Classroom Technology for Students with

Subject Emotional-Behavioural problems;

Behaviour disordered students;

Identifier / keyword technology; intervention; academic;

Title Innovations in Classroom Technology for Students with

Author Boyle, Joseph R 1 ; Kennedy, Michael J 2

Publication title Intervention in School and Clinic; Austin

Publication year 2019

Publication date Nov 2019

Publisher SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.

Place of publication Austin

Country of publication United States, Austin

Publication subject Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation, Psychology

Source type Scholarly Journals

Language of publication English

Document type Journal Article

ProQuest document ID 2305754548

Document URL https://search.proquest.com/docview/2305754548?

Copyright © Hammill Institute on Disabilities 2019

Last updated 2019-10-16

Database ProQuest Central

Do Regular Schools in Spain Respond to the Educational Needs of

Identifier / keyword Relationship; Inclusion; Down syndrome;

Title Do Regular Schools in Spain Respond to the Educational

Author Fernández Batanero, José María 1 ;

Publication title Journal of Child and Family Studies; New York

Publication year 2019

Publication date Sep 2019

Publisher Springer Nature B.V.

Place of publication New York

Country of publication Netherlands, New York

Publication subject Children And Youth - About, Psychology

Source type Scholarly Journals

Language of publication English

Document type Journal Article

Online publication date 2019-09-21

Milestone dates 2019-09-11 (Registration)

ProQuest document ID 2294758196

Document URL https://search.proquest.com/docview/2294758196?

Copyright Journal of Child and Family Studies is a copyright of

Last updated 2019-09-22

Database ProQuest Central

Understanding of inclusive education practices among parents in

Subject Parents & parenting;

Identifier / keyword Parents; inclusive education; Ghana; attitudes; knowledge;

Title Understanding of inclusive education practices among

Author Amponteng, Michael 1 ; Opoku, Maxwell Peprah 2 ;

Publication title Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs; Oxford

Publication year 2019

Publication date Jul 2019

Section Original Articles

Publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Place of publication Oxford

Country of publication United Kingdom, Oxford

Publication subject Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation

Source type Scholarly Journals