How Effective Is Special Education? A Best-Evidence Synthesis

Gloski, Cecelia A.; Woods, Adrienne D.; Wang, Yangyang; Morgan, Paul L.

doi:10.1108/978-1-80117-494-720221008

Cited by 5 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 53 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To our knowledge, there have been no meta-analyses or systematic reviews of the body of evidence on the effectiveness of business-as-usual special education since 1980. In our comprehensive literature search (Gloski et al, 2022), the only meta-analysis evaluating the effects of general education placement to business-as-usual special education was published by Carlberg and Kavale (1980). Other meta-analyses of special education completed since this time have instead examined the effectiveness of particular interventions, accommodations, and instructional strategies (e.g., Forness, 2001;Forness et al, 1997;Scruggs et al, 2010) as well as special education placement (Heller, 1982;Wang & Baker, 1985).…”

Section: Methodological Limitations Of Prior Meta-analytic Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multivariate Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Business-as-Usual Special Education Services in U.S. Schools

Woods¹,

Gloski²,

Wang³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Special education services provided in U.S. schools should be designed to enable students with disabilities (SWD) to make “appropriately ambitious” educational progress (Endrew F., 2017). Yet the field lacks consensus on whether business-as-usual (BAU) special education services effectively support outcomes for SWD. We conducted a moderated multilevel multivariate meta-analysis of 40 studies and 1,721 effect sizes from more than 14 million participants to evaluate the effectiveness of BAU special education services. Effects ranged from null-to-positive (z = -0.07 to 0.12) for achievement and negative-to-null (z = -0.13 to -0.01) for behavior. We observed positive outcomes for educational attainment including graduation outcomes (z = 0.12 to 0.24) and postsecondary outcomes (z = 0.10 to 0.23), as well as for other outcomes (z = 0.21 to 0.38). Studies that used a more rigorous research design or comparison condition reported more positive effects across outcomes. Additional casual work is needed in this field.

show abstract

Section: Methodological Limitations Of Prior Meta-analytic Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Multivariate Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Business-as-Usual Special Education Services in U.S. Schools

Woods¹,

Gloski²,

Wang³

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Clearly, more research is needed to investigate the comparative effectiveness of special education and inclusive education. Moreover, a more accurate interpretation of the existing research literature is an essential part of attempts to avoid confusion and misrepresentation, as Oreskes ( 2023) indicated in a recent essay about the confusion of scientific evidence in which she showed how experimental rigor can cloud reality, concluding that scientific questions and methodology must fit the issue at hand (see also Gloski et al 2022). The key issue regarding special education is the effectiveness of interventions, including placement, on student achievement.…”

Section: Research On the Effectiveness Of Inclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inclusive Education, Intellectual Disabilities and the Demise of Full Inclusion

Hornby,

Kauffman

2024

J. Intell.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inclusive education has developed worldwide popularity in education for learners with various disabilities but is particularly controversial for students with intellectual disabilities because of their unique needs. The foremost of these are the development of the social, vocational and life skills needed to facilitate their transition to adulthood. This article presents a discussion that focuses on theory, practice and research relevant to inclusive education for students with intellectual disabilities. It points out that the movement for full inclusion started by focusing on students with intellectual disabilities and has encountered roadblocks to further progress because of its difficulties in addressing their special needs. This is explored by considering the theory underpinning the international drivers of the full inclusion movement, the reality of the implementation of inclusion policies worldwide, and research on the effects of inclusion of students with intellectual disabilities in mainstream schools.

show abstract

“…The Single Case Analysis and Review Framework (SCARF; Ledford et al, 2020) is the only tool that has been validated for use with SCD studies (Zimmerman et al, 2018; Zimmerman & Ledford, 2017). A best-evidence synthesis could then provide a trustworthy review of the effectiveness of NC interventions in early childhood by exclusively synthesizing research in which outcomes can be trusted based on the methodological quality and rigor of the primary studies (see Gloski et al, 2022 for an exemplar best-evidence synthesis). Further, given the robustness of the NC literature, explorations of the extent to which NC assessment and intervention can be feasibly and effectively implemented in typical contexts with typical implementers is critically needed to support decision-making when treating NC behaviors in young children (Ledford et al, 2023), as NC is a developmentally expected behavior in young children.…”

Section: Noncompliance Reviewsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noncompliance Interventions for Young Children: A Best Evidence Synthesis and Meta-Analysis

Malone,

Zimmerman,

Joo

et al. 2023

Topics in Early Childhood Special Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A best-evidence synthesis and meta-analysis were conducted to evaluate interventions designed to decrease noncompliance in early childhood settings. Studies were examined for quality, intervention components, and outcomes for young children (ages 2–8 years) across settings. Results indicated most designs were high-quality and produced desired outcomes. However, participant inclusion criteria were commonly underreported, and social and ecological validity data were absent. Thus, for whom noncompliance interventions are effective, appropriate, feasible, or preferred is largely unknown. Contrary to prior evidence from the broader challenging behavior literature, function-based assessments had no impact on intervention outcomes. Reasons for this finding are explored, including the narrow application of function-based assessment findings to compliance interventions. Future implications for research and practice are presented.

show abstract

How Effective Is Special Education? A Best-Evidence Synthesis

Cited by 5 publications

References 53 publications

A Multivariate Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Business-as-Usual Special Education Services in U.S. Schools

A Multivariate Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Business-as-Usual Special Education Services in U.S. Schools

Inclusive Education, Intellectual Disabilities and the Demise of Full Inclusion

Noncompliance Interventions for Young Children: A Best Evidence Synthesis and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About