Capable of Achievement and Worthy of Respect: Education for Handicapped Students as If They Were Full-Fledged Human Beings

Lipsky, Dorothy Kerzner; Gartner, Alan

doi:10.1177/001440298705400112

Cited by 61 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The issue remains whether stigmatization originates from the categorical label and placement or stems from the experience of repeated academic failure (Kauffman et aI., 1988). Unless the devastating impact of consistent academic failure is alleviated, it is unlikely that simply removing categorical labels will, in and of itself, effect the desired change predicted by Lipsky and Gartner ( 1987), Stainback and Stainback (1984), Will (1986aWill ( , 1986b, and other REI enthusiasts.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher Perceptions of the Regular Education Initiative

Semmel

Abernathy

Butera

et al. 1991

Exceptional Children

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A survey of 381 special and regular educators assessed perceptions and opinions surrounding the regular education initiative. Confirmatory factor analysis supported an a priori hypothesized structure of teachers' responses. Items factored into 14 categories. These factors describe issues related to preferred placement of students with mild disabilities, teachers' responsibility and ownership, teacher preparedness for meeting the needs of these students, achievement outcomes for all children, and the changes that would result from adopting the proposed consultant model rather than a pullout program. Results favored current special education practices (pullout programs) in elementary schools.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teacher Perceptions of the Regular Education Initiative

Semmel

Abernathy

Butera

et al. 1991

Exceptional Children

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Inclusion has remained a topic of concern as advocacy groups, teachers, and professionals continue to debate the most appropriate course of action for educating students with disabilities (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994;Kauffman, 1993). Many advocates for students with lowincidence disabilities (e.g., severe cognitive impairments) have called for the inclusion of all students with disabilities and the elimination of special education (Fuchs & Fuchs, 1994;Lipsky & Gartner, 1987;Stainback & Stainback, 1992; Thousand & Villa, 1990). Advocates for students with highincidence disabilities (e.g., LD) represent a more moderate perspective that recommends the provision of a continuum of educational services for students with disabilities (Council for Exceptional Children, 1993;Division for Learning Disabilities, 1993; National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, 1991).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Social Outcomes for Students With and Without Learning Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms

et al. 1998

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social outcomes of students who participated in two different educational settings designed to provide special services for students with learning disabilities (LD) placed full-time within the general education classroom were examined. Participants were 185 third-through sixth-grade students: 59 students with LD, 72 low to average achieving, and 54 high achieving. There was an overall educational setting effect, with students on the consultation/collaborative teaching setting demonstrating more positive outcomes than students in the co-teaching setting on friendship quality and peer acceptance. Students with LD in the consultation/collaborative teaching setting also demonstrated moderate increases in the number of reciprocal friendships from fall to spring. Discussion addresses the positive social outcomes for students with LD and high-achieving students in the consultation/collaborative teaching setting, and the importance of monitoring student progress in all settings.

show abstract

“…Other students, however, progress as well or more rapidly when the supplementary, supportive instruction they need is provided in regular classroom settings. Calling attention to the latter fact, proponents of what has been called the "regular education initiative" (Lipsky & Gartner, 1987;Reynolds, Wang, & Wahlberg, 1987;Stainback & Stainback, 1984Wang & Reynolds, 1986;Will, , 1986 advocate that more attention and resources be given to developing what is certainly the most desirable placement option for students with special needs. An energetic debate has developed around these proposals (Lieberman, 1985;Mesinger, 1985; Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional Children, 1986).…”

Section: Why the Controversy?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Students at Risk: Supporting the Growth of Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Wood

1989

The Pointer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Capable of Achievement and Worthy of Respect: Education for Handicapped Students as If They Were Full-Fledged Human Beings

Cited by 61 publications

References 18 publications

Teacher Perceptions of the Regular Education Initiative

Teacher Perceptions of the Regular Education Initiative

Social Outcomes for Students With and Without Learning Disabilities in Inclusive Classrooms

Students at Risk: Supporting the Growth of Students With Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About