Supporting Teachers
Paper presented at
The 17th Annual Conference of the Hong Kong Educational Research Association
Theme: “Educational Reform in Hong Kong Prospects and Possibilities”
Subtheme “(6) Teacher and Teacher Education”
November 18, 2000
Running Head: SUPPORTING TEACHERS
Supporting Teachers for Successful Inclusion of
Children with Learning Difficulties
連明剛 教育博士
Ming-Gon John Lian, Ed.D.
Department of Education
Faculty of Education
The University of Hong Kong
1
Supporting Teachers
Abstract
Teachers in the general education system are facing the challenges of increasing
number of the incoming children with learning difficulties. These teachers need to be
prepared with information and skills relating to individualized needs and educational
objectives of these children, who may have specific disabling conditions, strengths,
and weaknesses. A series of studies were conducted to better understand field
practitioners’ awareness, perceptions/attitudes, willingness/preferences, as well as
implementation of classroom accommodations and strategies for an inclusion school.
The present paper shares data-based findings and provide recommendations for more
appropriate and effective approaches. It is concluded that a mutual transdisciplinary
teamwork, extensive preservice and inservice training, and ongoing support are
especially needed.
2
Supporting Teachers
3
Supporting Teachers for Successful Inclusion of
Children with Learning Difficulties
The Trend of inclusive Education
The education of children with learning difficulties has significantly moved
from the stage of securing rights to an education via a centralized service delivery
model to the current era of collaborative support for inclusion (Clasberry, 2000; Lian,
2000). This evolutional change leads to the development of inclusive schools.
An inclusive school is one that educates all students in general education and
regular classes. All students are provided educational programs that are
challenging yet geared to their capabilities and needs. An inclusive school is one
where everyone has a place, is accepted… and is supported by peers, teachers
and commumty. (Kelly, 1993, p. 2)
Choate (1997) pinpointed that, in today’s schools, special education teachers are no
longer the only group of professionals who are assigned to teach children with special
needs. General education teachers find that part of their case load may include
children who are integrated into the regular classroom settings. As a result, a question
appears to be frequently asked, “How do we work with these children without
reducing the quality of instruction for the children without disabilities in the
classroom?” (Lian & Henning, 2000, p. 7).
General education teachers might have been willing to provide effective
instructional and accommodation services to students with special needs in the
classroom but they tend to lack data-based models for determining services,
adaptations, and accommodations by which to assist them (Clasberry & Lian, 1998;
Dyches & Lian, 1996; Lian, 1992; Vaughn & Schumm, 1994). Using the
Collaboration and Consultation Questionnaire (CCQ), Lian, Booth, and Surfus (1996)
conducted a survey among 202 general education teachers in metropolitan (42%),
suburban (15%), city (23%), small town (3%), and rural (12%) schools of Illinois,
United States, for children in the grades of K-6 (51%), 7-8 (17%) and 9-12 (32%).
These teachers had had experiences working with the integrated students who had
learning disabilities (66%), emotional/behavior disorders (34%), physical disabilities
(30%), visual impairments (25%), deaf and hard-of hearing conditions (24%), mild
mental retardation (20%), moderate mental retardation (13%), severe and profound
disabilities (10%), and other health impairments (8%). The CCQ includes: (l) the
Attitudes Toward Inclusion Scale, (2) the Collaboration Participation Surrey, (3) the
Collaboration/Consultation Goals Survey, and (4) the Classroom Modification
Checklist. Data indicated that the teachers surveyed seemed to have emerging
agreement to and support for the effort of inclusive education, but with specific
Supporting Teachers
4
concerns and hesitation (see Table 1).
Table 1
Inclusion Survey Among General Education Teachers (N=202)
Disagree Neutral
Students with disabilities have the ability to participate
appropriately in regular classes.
Inclusive education would benefit the teaching and learning
processes of the regular classroom.
Inclusive education is appropriate in a regular education class of
medium to large size (e.g., 25 or more students).
Students with disabilities should be included only in basic skills
class, such as reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Regular teachers generally possess the expertise teaching
students with disabilities in the inclusive classroom.
The behavior of students with disabilities in the inclusive
classroom too often sets a bad example for regular students.
Agree
(%)
(%)
(%)
20
27
54
28
28
44
49
19
32
74
15
10
71
12
17
56
19
26
Source: Lian, M-G. J, Booth, S., & Surfus, J. (1996, Januny 26). Collaboration and support services in
inclusive education. Paper presented at the Illinois Teachers of the Physically/Health Impaired
ORTHO’96 Convention, Chicago.
The teachers in Lian et al. (1996) survey also expressed their unwillingness as
well as need for collaborative consultation programs in order to improve their job
performance in inclusive education:1% would refuse to participate, 10% did not want
to participate, 21% did not know if they wanted to participate, 49% would participate
if requested, and 19% greatly desired to participate. Generally, there was no
significant difference (p>.05) between beginning teachers and senior teachers
regarding their attitudes toward inclusion of students with disabilities. However,
senior teachers were more likely to agree that regular education teachers possess the
expertise for effectively teaching integrated students (p<.05). On the contrary,
beginning teachers were more likely to express need for collaborative-consultant
services and inservice training for inclusion of children with special needs (p<.05).
Accommodation, for Integrated Students with Disabilities
Enhancing school reforms to support an inclusive education has been a major
trend (Lipsky & Gartner, 1989, 1998; Stainback & Stainback, 1984, 1992). In a great
Supporting Teachers
5
number of schools in the United States as well as many other countries, there have
been increased efforts which continue to include students with various disabling
conditions in general education programs and activities through effective support
systems (Clasberry & Lian, 1998; Stainback & Stainback, 1990). General and special
educators, with the available support services, have become more involved in the
innovative adaptations and accommodations to overcome barriers and achieve
successful inclusive education for students with special needs (Clasberry, 2000;
Johnson & Pugach 1991; Kachur, Lian, & Booth, 1992; Pugach & Johnson, 1991).
Dyches (1995), for example, suggested an accommodation planning guide (APG) for
teachers to effectively work with the integrated students with disabilities. The APG
includes: (1) four vignettes of children who have variousdisabling conditions, (2) the
Decision-Making Process Worksheet, and (3) the Services, Adaptations, and
Accommodations Worksheet.
Lian et al. (1996) listed teachers’ preference of classroom modifications, i.e.,
percentages of teachers who have arranged each specific classroom modification and,
if they had not done so, those who would be willing to implement (see Table 2).
Further Chi-square analysis fount that more elementary or primary school teachers
tended to implement classroom modifications of “Mark student’s correct and
acceptable work, instead of his/her mistakes,” “Reversals and transpositions of letters
and numbers should not be marked wrong; instead, they are pointed out for
correction,” and “Repeat directions to the student, after these directions have been
given to the class and, then, have him/her repeat and explain directions” (p<.05).
Comparatively, secondary (junior/senior high school) teachers were more likely to
allow students to tape classroom lectures or discussions (p<.05).
Table 2
Classroom modifications (N=202)
l*
2**
(%)
(%)
Recognize and give credit for student’s oral participation in class.
74
23
Utilize peer tutoring.
71
28
Provide extra test time.
68
23
Repeat directions to the student, after these directions have been given to the
63
32
63
27
Examination and quizzes given orally.
57
30
Avoid placing student under pressure of time or competition.
57
27
class, then, have him/her repeat and explain directions to you.
Accompany oral directions with written directions for the student to refer to (on
chalkboard or paper).
Supporting Teachers
6
Table 2 (continued)
Student is permitted to choose to use cursive writing or manuscript writing.
55
29
Make arrangements for homework assignments to reach home with clear, concise 54
36
directions.
Spelling errors are not marked wrong, but pointed out for correction.
53
27
Reversals and transpositions of letters and numbers should not be marked wrong.
52
34
Avoid lengthy outside reading assignments.
51
28
Student is allowed to copy another student’s class notes.
49
38
Conduct task analysis to break a task or assignment down to sequential
42
44
42
43
Give a different set of assignment or mastery criteria.
42
40
Utilize cross-age tutoring.
37
50
Do not return hand written work to be copied over, paper is often improved and
37
29
Mark student’s correct and acceptable work, instead of his/her mistakes.
36
46
Present reading assignments on cassette tapes.
27
52
Student is provided a Xeroxed copy of another student’s class note.
22
48
Student is allowed to tape classroom lectures or discussions.
20
65
Let student dictate themes or answers to questions on a cassette tape
15
63
Instead, they are pointed out for correction.
component steps for students with disabilities to implement and achieve.
Accept homework papers typed by the student or dictated by him/her and
recorded by someone else, if needed be.
student’s frustration is increased.
* Currently have.
** Would be willing to implement.
Source: Lian, M-G. J., Booth, S., & Surfus, J. (1996, January 26).Collaboration and support services in
inclusive education. Paper presented at the Illinois Teachers of the Physically/Health Impaired
ORTHO’96 Convention, Chicago.
Strategies for an Inclusion School
A review of related literature found that a great number of field practices have
concentrated on itinerant teaching, consultation services provided by specialists,
therapists, and special educators, or arrangement with special educators assisting in
interventions in the general education environment (Goodlad & Lovitt, 1993; Turner,
1996). Clasberry and Lian (1998) conducted a survey among 137 general education
teachers, 42 special education teachers, 11 administrators and/or program coordinators,
and 20 related service professionals (i.e., school psychologists, speech pathologists,
physical/occupational therapists, and social workers) who had worked in inclusive
environments in urban, suburban, and rural school districts in the Mid-west Area of
Supporting Teachers
7
the United States. Along with this survey, a series of interviews with randomly
selected aforementioned professionals and their integrated students’ sample IEPs
(individualized educational plans) for confirmation of the findings. Quantitative and
qualitative data gathered through the use of a rating scale formed a field practitioner’s
handbook of strategies for an inclusive school. Implementation and perceived
effectiveness of these strategies are listed in Table 3 and briefly described below.
Table 3
Implementation and Perceived Effectiveness of Strategies for an Inclusive School*
Implementation
Perceived Effectiveness
M
S.D.
M
S.D.
Cooperative learning
3.66
.95
3.92
.86
Instructional adaptation
3.62
1.06
4.00
.85
Material adaptation
3.15
1.23
3.94
.87
Teacher’s assistant
3.12
1.49
4.01
1.03
Peer tutoring
3.08
1.20
3.61
.97
Multi-level curriculum
2.88
1.26
3.57
1.03
Itinerant teaching
2.85
1.26
3.71
1.03
Consultant services
2.85
1.23
3.75
1.06
Assistive technology
2.77
1.33
3.76
1.07
Team teaching
2.77
1.19
3.88
.93
Curriculum overlapping
2.52
1.31
3.41
1.07
Alternative Curriculum
2.38
1.21
3.21
1.07
Cross-age tutoring
2.14
1.18
3.27
1.11
Peer physical assistant
2.01
1.23
3.43
1.24
*1=never; 2=seldom; 3=sometime; 4=frequently; 5=always.
Source: Clasbeny, G., & Lian, M-G. J. (1998). Strategies for an inclusive school: A hand-book for
teachers & program coordinators. Project ID# H023B60037, CFDA 84.023B, funded by U.S.
Department of Education, Washington, DC.
Supporting Teachers
8
Cooperative learning is a classroom assignment for students with and without
disabilities to work together and, therefore, to help each other and learn together.
Instructional adaptation is the restructuring of instructional strategies to
accommodate the needs of students (e.g., changing response modes, allowing for
different completion rates, or work loads, curriculum accommodations,
computer-assisted instruction).
Material adaptation may include the use of larger and lighter pens, a tape
recorder for taking notes, a calculator for math tasks, and a name stamp for
substituting signatures.
Teacher’s assistant is the use of a paraprofessional/paraeducator to assist
teaching one or more students with and without disabilities in the inclusive
environment.
Peer tutoring is the use of peers in the regular education classroom to assist
students with disabilities through physical or instructional assistance.
Multi-level curriculum is implemented when students are working in the same
area, with each individual student working at a different level of curriculum.
Itinerant teaching is an arrangement for the special education teacher to
provide support services to students with special needs and to the regular education
teacher.
Consultant services are implemented when the special education teacher, with
his/her specialty in a specific disability area and related remedial approaches, works
directly with the regular education teacher to develop intervention plans for a specific
student.
Assistive technology includes technological equipment and related techniques
which are used to assist students with disabilities in the inclusive classroom.
Team teaching or co-teaching is implemented by regular and special educators
who jointly plan and teach the targeted curricular subjects to all students. Salend
(1998) use the term “cooperative teaching” to encourage the mutual teamwork
relationship.
Curriculum overlapping can be implemented when students with disabilities
are involved in the same activity as their nondisabled peers, but students with
disabilities are working toward a goal from a different curriculum area.
Alternative curriculum is the use of a curriculum other than the grade-level
curriculum being selected for the primary needs of students with disabilities in the
regular classroom.
Cross-age tutoring is the use of older students to assist students with
disabilities in the inclusive classroom through physical and/or instructional assistance.
Peer physical assistance is the physical manipulation of materials, equipment,
Supporting Teachers
9
or body parts which is provided by the nondisabled peers.
Clasberry and Lian (1998) provided the following recommendations for more
successful implementation of the strategies described above:
1. Thorough preparation is the primary key for success.
2. All students, whether disabled or not, are unique children who have strengths and
weaknesses in their learning abilities and specific educational needs.
3. Utilize all available resources to support a smooth system change and transition.
4. Students are consumers who deserve individualized educational
programs/services.
5. Promote active interactions among children with and without disabling conditions.
6. Teach all students to appreciate various perspectives of diversity, as well as
personal preferences in school learning and community life management.
7. Respect each parent as the stakeholder and team partner.
8. Encourage effective teamwork.
9. Provide continuous information and collaborative services, and maintain ongoing
communication in order to facilitate awareness and positive attitudinal changes.
10. Provide ongoing administrative and technological support.
11. Adopt flexible but appropriate evaluation procedures for child’s progress report.
12. Enhance preservice/inservice personnel development with hands-on experiences.
13. Utilize research-based investigation and program evaluation for assurance of
successful and high-quality inclusive education. (pp. 23-24)
Conclusions
Shifting of paradigms in the field of educational services for children with and
without leaning difficulties and/or disabling conditions tend to be evolutional, steady,
but often-time not in a rush pace. The effort to enhance inclusive education takes time
as well as a thorough preparation; otherwise, it may become a controversial issue and
lead to extreme disagreement and hostile confrontations among general and special
education teachers, administrators/program coordinators, other school personnel
parents, and the student. Besides, what has been implemented in other countries may
not be suitable for carrying out in the unique Hong Kong educational system.
Further studies are needed to continue investigating awareness,
perceptions/attitudes, and preferences of those who are involved. Innovative
approaches should be explored and empirically tested in longitudinal research designs.
Most importantly, successful inclusion of children with special needs in general
school and classroom settings require a mutual transdisciplinary teamwork, extensive
preservice and inservice training, and ongoing support.
Supporting Teachers 10
References
Choate, J. S. (1997). Successful inclusive teaching (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and
Bacon.
Clasberry, G. (2000). Perceptions of inclusion held by general education
teachers at different grade levels. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State
University, Normal, Il.
Clasberry, G., & Lian, M-G. J. (1998). Strategies for an inclusive school: A
hand- book for teachers & program coordinators. Project ID# H023B60037, CFDA
84.023B, funded by U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC.
Dyches, T. T. (1995). Effects of an accommodation planning guide on teachers’
recommendations of services, adaptations, and accommodations for students with
disabilities. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State University, Normal, Il.
Dyches, T. T., Lian, M-G. J. (1996, November 22). Supporting and assisting
teachers for successful inclusion. Paper presented at the 23rd TASH Conference, New
Orleans, La.
Goodlad, J. I., & Lovitt, T. C. (1993). Integrating general and special education.
New York: Merrill/MacMillan.
Johnson, L. J., & Pugach, M. C. (1991). Peer collaboration: Accommodating
students with mild learning and behavior problems. Exceptional Children, 57(5),
454-461.
Kachur, D., Lian, M-G. J., & Booth, S. (1992). Dean’s Symposium: Teacher and
Administrator Preparation, Certification and Training for Inclusive Education. The
Deans Symposium Grant funded by Illinois Planning Council on Developmental
Disabilities, Springfield, Il.
Kelly, Z. (1993). Full inclusion handbook. Irvine, CA: Irvine United School
Disirict.
Lian, M-G. J. (1992). A vision of full inclusion in Illinois. IL-TASH Newsletter,
6(2/3), 2, 10.
Lian, M-G. J. (2000, June 14). Current status, development, and trend of
inclusive education in the U.S. Paper presented at the 1999-2000 School Year
Sino-U.S. Special Education Conference, Changhua, Taiwan.
Lian, M-G. J., Booth. S., & Surfus, J. (1996, January 26). Collaboration and
support services in inclusive education. Paper presented at the Illinois Teachers of the
Physically/Health impaired ORTHO’96 Convention, Chicago.
Lian, M-G. J., & Henning, R. (2000). Inclusive education. In L. Attherton (Ed),
Promising practices (pp. 7-14). Illinois Chapter of the Association for Persons with
Severe Handicaps grant project funded by the Illinois Planning Council on
Supporting Teachers 11
Developmental Disabilities.
Lipsky, D. K. & Gartner, A (Eds.). (1989). Beyond separate education: Quality
for all. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1998). Factors for successful inclusion: Learning
from the past, looking toward the future. In S. J. Vitello & D. E. Mithaun (Eds),
Inclusive schooling: National and international perspectives (pp. 98-112). Mahwah,
NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Pugach, M. C. & Johnson, L. J. (1988). Peer Collaboration: Enhancing teacher
problem-solving capabilities for students at risk. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Education.
Salend, S. J. (1998). Effective mainstreaming: Creating inclusive classrooms
(3rd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1984). A rationale for the merger of special and
regular education. Exceptional Children, 51(2), 102-111.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1990). Rationale for integration and
restructuring: A synopsis. In J. W. Lloyd, N. N. Singh, & A. Repp (Eds.), The regular
education initiative: Alternative perspectives on concepts, issues, and models
(pp.225-240). Sycamore, IL:Sycamore Publishing Co.
Stainback, W., Stainback, S. (1992). Curriculum considerations in inclusive
classrooms: Facilitating learning for all students. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
Turner, B. (1996). Teachers’ perceptions of inclusionary practices in an urban
school setting. Unpublished doctoral dissertations. Illinois State University, Normal,
Il.
Vaughn, S., &, Schumn, J. S. (1994). Middle school teachers’ planning for
students with learning disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(3), 152-161.