KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Course Name EXC 8300 / Inclusive Policy and Practices in Special Education
Department Special Education
Degree Title (if applicable) Endorsement in Special Education Administration
Proposed Effective Date Fall 2006
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
X
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a
new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new
program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the
program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Faculty Member
_____
Date
Department Curriculum Committee
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Department Chair
Date
School Curriculum Committee
Date
School Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate Studies
Date
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs
Approved
Date
Not Approved
President
1
Date
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number EXC 8300
Course Title Inclusive Policy and Practices in Special Education
Credit Hours 3 credit hours
Prerequisites
n/a
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course assists school leaders in developing their skills in distributed leadership, particularly in terms of
managing large scale change through the identification and alignment of inclusive policies, procedures and
processes. Class discussion focuses upon the federal and state policies that assist school leaders and policymakers in the creation of schools that are inclusive and responsive to the educational needs of all students.
Six key policy areas including, accountability, assessment, curriculum, funding, professional development,
governance and discipline will be examined, along with how they translate into inclusive schooling
practices at the district and local level. Secondarily, the course assists aspiring school leaders with basic
collaborative strategies to implement policy at the local levels through shared governance and site-based
management.
Justification
Since 1983 when A Nation at Risk was released, the notions of school improvement and reform have been
a national priority. Currently, policies that drive general and special education as well as ESOL, serve as
an important catalyst for improving the outcomes of all students, including those with disabilities and those
who are English language learners. Research indicates that a set of inclusive policies (Salisbury, Roach
and McGreggor, 2002) that can significantly increase the performance and outcomes of diverse learners
when these policies are effectively translated at the school and classroom levels. Thus, examination of
educational policy is imperative to ensure that it is having its intended effect and that school leaders are
able to think about and advocate for inclusive policies and practices.
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Dr. Toni Strieker
Text:
Skrtic, T. M. , Harris, K. R., & Shriner, J. G., (2004). Special Education
Policy and Practice, Love Publishing Company.
Biech, EDT, E., (2001). The Pfeiffer Book of Successful Team-Building Tools: Best of Annuals, Wiley
Publishing Company.
American Psychological Association, (2001). Publication Manual of the
American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, D. C., Author.
Selected Readings and Web Sites
2
Strieker, T. & Logan, K. (fall, 2001) “Everybody WINS!” The State Education Standard. National
Association of State Boards of Education. Alexandria, VA.
Prerequisites:
Course Objectives: Candidates will be able to:
Goal/Objective
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Doctoral
KSDs
PSC/
NCATE
CEC
Standards
DSL*
1c
1.6
1
1b, 4b
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1, 8
1c
1.6
3
C
LD
C
DA
CIA
PI
C
1b, 4e, 3c
1.1, 1.2,
1.4-1.8
7
O
3b
1.3, 1.4, 1.7,
1.8
7
LD
CIA
Articulate the fundamentals of a multidisciplinary team
approach, as well as other collaborative approaches.
2a-d
1.4-1.8
10
C, O
PI, RD
Research special education/TESOL trends and legal issues
using the internet and electronic databases.
1a-b
1.1-1.6
1
CIA
LD, C
1b, 2a-d,
5b,6b
1.1-1.8
1, 7
O
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
1.1-1.8
7
Articulate laws, students’ and parents’ rights and political
foundations for general and special education / TESOL.
Articulate policies and issues regarding assessment,
accountability, curriculum, funding and governance as related
to individuals with disabilities and those who are culturally
and linguistically diverse.
Articulate impact of diversity on educational expectations and
programming.
Articulate budgetary process which ensures the efficient and
effective allocation of resources, particularly as related to
QBE.
Articulate discipline policy and procedures for individuals
with exceptional learning and cultural needs.
Prepare a budget based upon currently accepted practices
which is determined to be adequate to serve the needs of a
target population.
Develop and/or utilize a program evaluation system which
provides the user with feedback for deficiencies and
guidelines for adequate service.
10. Develop an inclusive policy & procedure manual for a
building, based upon state and federal mandates and design
implementation plan.
11. Develop a professional development plan for a building that
promotes inclusive schooling.
12. Consult and collaborate as a multidisciplinary team in
administrative and instructional settings.
13. Employ various collaborative and team-based strategies as
they related to administering programs and communicating
with families.
14. Serve as a leader and promote the highest educational quality
for students and their families.
15. Participate in continued professional development through
consumer and professional organizations, workshops, and
professional literature.
16. Participate in the activities of the professional organization in
the field of Special Education Administration/TESOL.
17. Communicate and demonstrate a high standard of ethical
3
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
1.1-1.8
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
2c
1.1-1.8
1.6
10
DA, PI
CIA,
LD,
C
DA, PI
CIA,
LD, C
LD, DA, PI,
CIA, C
C, RD
2c, 6a-b
1.4-1.6
10
C, RD
3a, 2d, 6b
1.1-1.8
9
CIA, LD
RD, C
5b
1.6
9
LD, RD
5b
5b
1.6
1.6
9
9
LD, RD
LD, RD
1, 3, 7, 9, 10
practice.
*Code for Distributed School Leadership
DA = Data Analysis
CIA = Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment
RD = Relationship Development
PI = Process Improvement
O = Operations
P = Performance
C = Change
LD = Learning and Development
Instructional Method
The following instructional strategies will be used to collaboratively and interactively present course
material and engage students in critical thinking and discourse at the doctoral level:

Lecture

Discussion

Collaborative Group Work

Case Study Analysis

Simulation Activities

Role Play
Methods of Evaluation
Assessment of student learning in this course will be done through the following assignments and
performance-based projects meeting specific course objectives and relating to identified knowledge, skills,
and dispositions. Those assessments that are targeted as possibilities for unit assessment at a later date are
annotated (*).
Assignments
PTEU Doctoral
KSDs
1a-b, 2 a-d, 5a-b, 6ab
Assessments
1-11
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Project Rubric*
2,4,8,10,
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Case Study
2-3, 12
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Project Rubric
Program Evaluation System
Role Play of Team Facilitation
1-10
6,12
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
2c, 2d, 3a, 6d,
Project Rubric
Observation Rubric
Class Participation/Professionalism
1-17
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Proficiency Exams
Course
Objectives
1-6
Develop a manual inclusive policies and
procedures at the building level and a plan to
implement them.
Case Study-Maximizing State Dollars to
Support Inclusive Practices
Develop school-wide professional
development plan to support inclusive
schooling
4
Proficiency Exam*
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
0 – Existing Faculty
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
0
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
0
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the Registrar once the
course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
Education / Special Education
COURSE NUMBER
EXC 8300
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
Inclusive Policy (Note: Limit 16 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
3 Credit Hours
Approval, Effective Term
Fall 2006
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
Regular
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
NA
Learning Support Programs courses which are required as prerequisites
NA
APPROVED:
_______________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee
5
VII Attach Syllabus
EXC 8300
Inclusive Policy and Practices in Special Education
2006
INSTRUCTOR: Name:
Telephone:
Fax:
Office:
E-mail:
Office hours: By Appointment
CLASS MEETING:
KH 1107
TEXT:
Skrtic, T. M. , Harris, K. R., & Shriner, J. G., (2004). Special Education
Policy and Practice, Love Publishing Company.
Biech, EDT, E., (2001). The Pfeiffer Book of Successful Team-Building Tools: Best of Annuals, Wiley Publishing
Company.
American Psychological Association, (2001). Publication Manual of the
American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, D. C., Author.
Selected Readings and Web Sites
Strieker, T. & Logan, K. (fall, 2001) “Everybody WINS!” The State Education Standard. National Association of
State Boards of Education. Alexandria, VA.
CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
This course assists school leaders in developing their skills in distributed leadership, particularly in terms of
managing large scale change through the identification and alignment of inclusive policies, procedures and
processes. Class discussion focuses upon the federal and state policies that assist school leaders and policy-makers
in the creation of schools that are inclusive and responsive to the educational needs of all students. Six key policy
areas including, accountability, assessment, curriculum, funding, professional development, governance and
discipline will be examined, along with how they translate into inclusive schooling practices at the district and local
level. Secondarily, the course assists aspiring school leaders with basic collaborative strategies to implement policy
at the local levels through shared governance and site-based management.
6
PURPOSE:
Since 1983 when A Nation at Risk was released, the notions of school improvement and reform have been a national
priority. Currently, policies that drive general and special education as well as ESOL, serve as an important catalyst
for improving the outcomes of all students, including those with disabilities and those who are English language
learners. Research indicates that a set of inclusive policies (Salisbury, Roach and McGreggor, 2002) that can
significantly increase the performance and outcomes of diverse learners when these policies are effectively
translated at the school and classroom levels. Thus, examination of educational policy is imperative to ensure that it
is having its intended effect and that school leaders are able to think about (a
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Though certain historical discoveries and events in Special Education / TESOL do not change, each passing day
alters the knowledge base in the areas of research, legislation, societal change, and litigation, requiring teachers and
leaders to be informed consumers of instructional research.
COLLABORATIVE DEVELOPMENT OF EXPERTISE IN TEACHING AND LEARNING
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PETU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing
expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability,
intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based
practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU
fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert
and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not
an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning
are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and
reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally,
the PTEU recognizes, values, and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends
collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, public and
private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia
schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning.
KNOWLEDGE BASE:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: pre-service, induction, inservice, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise
is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believes that the concept
of expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how
during the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward
becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is
not an end-state but a process of continued development.
USE OF TECHNOLOGY:
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission. Telecommunication
and information technologies will be integrated throughout the administrative preparation program, and all
candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning as outlined in the Georgia Technology
Standards for Educators and the National Educational Technology standards.
Candidates in the special education administration concentration will utilize technology to advance 21 st century
literacy skills such as digital age literacy, inventive thinking, effective communication, and high productivity.
Candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use presentation technologies, technologies to
enhance learning, individualize instruction, and promote critical thinking for 21 st century students. Candidates in
this course will be expected to apply best practices related to using technology for learning and creating curriculum
materials using principles of universal design for learning. Web Resources:
7
Council for Exceptional Children
National Dissemination Center for Children with
Disabilities
The Global Entrepreneurship Institute
Georgia Department of Education
Georgia Department of Human Resources
National Association of State Boards of Education
www.cec.sped.org
www.nichcy.org
www.gcase.org
www.doe.k12.ga.us
www.dhr.state.ga.us
www.nasbe.org
DIVERSITY:
One of the most critical issues in special Education / TESOL today is the effect of personal culture on the efficacy of
instruction, pre-referral procedures, assessment, placement for students with disabilities, and parenting and communication
styles. Candidates will be provided with opportunities through direct instruction and class discussion to gain knowledge,
skills, and understanding to provide effective instruction in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms. A variety of
materials and instructional strategies will also be used to meet the needs of the diverse learning styles of members of this
class.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and reasonable accommodations for persons defined as
disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and/or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A
number of services are available to help disabled candidates with their academic work. In order to make
arrangements for special services, candidates must visit the Office of disAbled Student Services (770/423-6443) and
arrange an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES:
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares leaders who understand their disciplines and principles of
pedagogy, who reflect on practice, and who apply these understandings to making instructional decisions that foster
the success of all learners. As a result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this course, the candidate
will demonstrate a broad base of Knowledge, Skills and Dispositions through performance. Candidates will be able
to:
Goal/Objective
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Doctoral
KSDs
PSC/
NCATE
CEC
Standards
DSL*
1c
1.6
1
1b, 4b
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1, 8
1c
1.6
3
C
LD
C
DA
CIA
PI
C
1b, 4e, 3c
1.1, 1.2,
1.4-1.8
7
O
3b
1.3, 1.4, 1.7,
1.8
7
LD
CIA
Articulate the fundamentals of a multidisciplinary team
approach, as well as other collaborative approaches.
2a-d
1.4-1.8
10
C, O
PI, RD
Research special education/TESOL trends and legal
issues using the internet and electronic databases.
1a-b
1.1-1.6
1
CIA
LD, C
Articulate laws, students’ and parents’ rights and political
foundations for general and special education / TESOL.
Articulate policies and issues regarding assessment,
accountability, curriculum, funding and governance as
related to individuals with disabilities and those who are
culturally and linguistically diverse.
Articulate impact of diversity on educational expectations
and programming.
Articulate budgetary process which ensures the efficient
and effective allocation of resources, particularly as
related to the Georgia state funding formula.
Articulate discipline policy and procedures for individuals
with exceptional learning and cultural needs.
8
8.
Prepare a budget based upon currently accepted practices
adequate to serve the needs of SWD.
Develop and/or utilize a program evaluation system
which provides the user with feedback for deficiencies
and guidelines for adequate service.
1b, 2a-d,
5b,6b
10. Develop an inclusive policy & procedure manual for a
building, based upon state and federal mandates and
design implementation plan.
11. Develop a professional development plan for a building
that promotes inclusive schooling.
12. Consult and collaborate as a multidisciplinary team in
administrative and instructional settings.
13. Employ various collaborative and team-based strategies
related to administering programs and communicating
with families.
14. Serve as a leader and promote the highest educational
quality for students and their families.
15. Participate in continued professional development
through consumer and professional organizations,
workshops, and professional literature.
16. Participate in the activities of the professional
organization in the field of Special Education
Administration/TESOL.
17. Communicate and demonstrate a high standard of ethical
practice.
*Code for Distributed School Leadership
DA = Data Analysis
CIA = Curriculum, Instruction & Assessment
RD = Relationship Development
PI = Process Improvement
O = Operations
P = Performance
C = Change
LD = Learning and Development
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
1.1-1.8
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
2c
1.1-1.8
1.6
10
O
DA, PI
CIA,
LD,
C
DA, PI
CIA,
LD, C
LD, DA, PI,
CIA, C
C, RD
2c, 6a-b
1.4-1.6
10
C, RD
3a, 2d, 6b
1.1-1.8
9
CIA, LD
RD, C
5b
1.6
9
LD, RD
5b
1.6
9
LD, RD
5b
1.6
9
LD, RD
9.
1a-b, 2ad, 5b,6b
1.1-1.8
1, 7
1.1-1.8
7
1, 3, 7, 9, 10
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
Assignments
Course
Objectives
PTEU Doctoral
KSDs
Assessments
Proficiency Exams
1-6
1a-b, 2 a-d, 5a-b, 6ab
Proficiency Exam*
Prepare a manual of inclusive policies and
procedures at the building level and a plan to
implement them.
1-11
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Project Rubric*
Case Study-Maximizing State Dollars to
Support Inclusive Practices
2,4,8,10
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Case Study
Develop school-wide professional
development plan to support inclusive
schooling
2-3, 12
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Project Rubric
9
Program Evaluation System
1-10
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
Project Rubric
Role Play of Team Facilitation
6,12
2c, 2d, 3a, 6d,
Observation Rubric
Class Participation/Professionalism
1-17
1a-b, 2a-d, 5b, 6b
* Targeted for unit assessment.
EVALUATION AND GRADING
A = 90% or better
(Level 4)
B = 80-89%
(Level 3)
C = 70-79%
(Level 2)
D = 60-69%
(Level 1)
STUDENT EXPECTATIONS FOR ATTENDANCE AND PARTICIPATION:
Cooperative and collaborative learning group activities in class will enable candidates to apply new skills and
knowledge. This requirement emphasizes the importance of class attendance and supports the belief from the
conceptual framework that learning is an interactive endeavor requiring the presence and participation of all class
members in order to facilitate growth and learning. Each candidate has something unique to contribute to the class
experience that will facilitate the learning of other class members. For full credit, candidates must: a.) Participate
fully in collaborative group work and focus groups; b.) Listen attentively to presentations; and c.) Refrain from
working on personal computers (or otherwise) on other assignments during class presentations.
Candidates, like the instructor, are expected to come to class meetings thoroughly prepared. “Thoroughly prepared” is
defined as having read the readings well enough to verbally and in writing discuss ideas, notions, concepts, issues, and
procedures in relation to previous information presented in class or in previous readings; and apply the information from
the readings to problems. It also implies the candidate has reviewed information from the previous class meetings.
When information from the readings is unclear, the candidate should prepare questions to discuss in class. Note:
Because most of the course assignments are oral, a failure to come to class well prepared will result in a lowered
grade. In addition, group members can ask candidates who are not contributing equally to the development of
the presentation to be removed from their group.
Regular attendance is required for all scheduled classes because the candidate is responsible for obtaining all
materials, instruction, etc. presented during class. Attendance at all class meetings is stressed because of the
interactive nature of the class. Not all material covered will be found in the required readings. You are required to
inform the instructor in advance of your absence. Failure to do so will result in your not being allowed to make-up
any missed class work (i.e., class activities). Attendance will be monitored and reflected in the class
participation/attendance points (see KSU Graduate Catalog).
All assignments must be submitted on or before the class meeting on the assigned due date. All grading will be
done as objectively as possible. Rubrics for class presentation and facilitation will be provided. In case of
qualitative assessment, evaluation will be based on instructor judgment. Points will be summed for each student and
final course grades will be based on the percent of total points earned (i.e., A = 100 - 90%, B = 89 - 80%, etc.)and
the total points earned will indicate the candidate’s level (i.e.,1,2,3 or 4) of achievement..
The assignment of incomplete (“I”) grades is discouraged and will be assigned only in cases of extreme emergencies and
in cases where a passing grade may be earned. It is the student’s responsibility to notify the instructor when such
circumstances exist. Upon notification, a contract between the student and instructor for completion of the course will be
developed before the last week of the semester.
10
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY:
Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the
Graduate Catalog. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the University's policy on academic honesty,
including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials,
misrepresentation/falsification of University records or academic work, malicious removal, retention, or destruction
of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of student
identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the established procedures
of the University Judiciary Program, which includes with an "informal resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a
grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum
one semester suspension requirement.
DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR:
The University has a stringent policy and procedure for dealing with behavior that disrupts the learning
environment. Consistent with the belief that your behavior can interrupt the learning of others, behavior that fits the
University's definition of disruptive behavior will not be tolerated. Candidates should refer to the University Catalog
to review this policy.
HUMAN RELATIONS:
The University has formulated a policy on human relations that is intended to provide a learning environment that
recognizes individual worth. That policy is found in the University Catalog. It is expected, in this class, that no
Professional should need reminding but the policy is there for your consideration. The activities of this class will be
conducted in both the spirit and the letter of that policy.
COURSE OUTLINE
1.
Policy Shifts from Procedural Compliance to Academic Performance of Students
2.
NCLB and IDEA Amendments of 2004 and Conditions of Practice Which Ensure the Learning of Every
Child
3.
Special Education / TESOL Teacher Supply and Teacher Quality
4.
Standards-Based Curricular Reform and Implications for Diverse Students
5.
Assessment & Accountability
6.
Funding and Budgetary Issues
7.
Professional Learning Communities to Support Inclusive Practices
8.
Shared Governance, Multidisciplinary Team and Collaborative Approaches
9.
Research-based Prevention and Intervention Strategies for Improving Behavior of Students with
Disabilities and those who are Culturally and Linguistically Diverse.
10. Program Evaluation
11
REFERENCES
Beveridge, S., (1999). Special Educational Needs in School, (2nd Edition), Routledge Publishing.
Eller, J. (2004). Effective Group Facilitation in Education: How to Energize Meetings and Difficult Groups. Corwin
Press, SAGE Publication Company.
Glaser, John, (2005). Leading Through Collaboration: Guiding Groups to Productive Solutions, Corwin Press,
SAGE Publication Company.
Gersch, I. & Gersch, A. (2003). Resolving Disputes in Special Education Needs: A Practical Guide to Conciliation
and Mediation. National Professional Resources, Inc.
Hammond, L. D., Sykes, G., Eds. (1999). Teaching as the Learning Profession: Handbook of Policy and Practice,
Corwin Press, SAGE Publication Company.
Havelock, R., & Hamilton, J., (2003). Guiding Change in Special Education: How to Help Schools with New Ideas
and Practices. Corwin Press, SAGE Publication Company.
Johnson, R. (2002). Using Data to Close the Achievement Gap: How to Measure Equity in Our Schools. National
Professional Resources, Inc.
Salisbury, C., Roach, V. & McGreggor, G. (2002). Application of a Policy Framework to Evaluate and Promote
Large-Scale Change. Exceptional Child. Vol 68 (4), Summer.
Salisbury, C. & McGreggor, G. (2002). Administrative Climate and Context for Inclusive Elementary Schools.
Exceptional Child, Vol. 68 (2) Winter.
Salisbury, C., Strieker, T., Roach, V. & McGregor, G. (2001) “Pathways to Inclusive Practices: Systems-Oriented,
Policy-Linked, and Research-Based Strategies that Work!” Preparation and publication of this document
was supported by Cooperative Agreement (86V-4007) of the Consortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices,
the Office of Special Education Programs in the United States Department of Education in Washington,
D.C., and the National Association for State Boards of Education.
Strieker, T., Salisbury, C., & Roach, V. (2001). Determining Policy Support for Inclusive Schools. Consortium on
Inclusive Schooling Practices, Erikson Institute, Chicago: IL. Preparation and publication of this
assessment was supported by Cooperative Agreement (86V-4007) of the Consortium on Inclusive
Schooling Practices, the Office of Special Education Programs in the United States Department of
Education in Washington, D.C., and the National Association for State Boards of Education.
Rubin, H. (2002). Collaborative Leadership: Developing Effective Alliances Between Communities and Schools.
SAGE Publication Company.
Wright, P., Wright, P. & Heath, S. (2004). Wrightslaw: No Child Left Behind. Harbor House Law Press.
12