Promoting Systemic, Statewide Inclusion From the Bottom Up

Roach, Virginia; Salisbury, Christine L.

doi:10.1207/s15430421tip4503_10

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Hu (2011) further adds the shared commitment of the entire school community shall produce a greater positive outcome for students with disabilities taught within inclusive settings. Consistent with the current findings, prior research (Beets, Flay, Vuchinich, Acock, Li, & Allred, 2008;DiPaola, Tschannen-Moran, & Walther-Thomas, 2004;Guzman, 1997;Roach & Salisbury, 2006) suggests the need for administrators and teachers to establish a shared vision for the success of inclusive programs. Hord (1992) and the SEDL (2000) regard monitoring progress as a method to evaluate the effectiveness of a program in efforts to identify problems, challenges and concerns, and resolve them quickly.…”

Section: How Does Fidelity To the Constructs Of The Change Process Insupporting

confidence: 84%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are school administrators and teachers' attitudes toward inclusion influence by the change process?

Goley¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

DEDICATIONThroughout life, regardless of our experiences and endeavors, we must persevere and realize that we hold the key to our existence and expectations. This dissertation is dedicated to eight individuals who have taught me far more about life through their eyes and words -London, Noah, Aaron, Geordan, Jase, Gage, Gavin, and Grayson. It is my hope this illustrates that little is impossible if you endure and remain steadfast in your hopes, dreams, and aspirations. successful. This research contributes to the education field by highlighting the necessity for both teacher preparation programs and school districts to infuse their programs with training on topics of special education, particularly on the inclusive teaching practices for students with disabilities. The results also point out the importance of attention to all parts of the change process when any innovation is introduced in educational settings. III ACKNOWLEDGMENTSVll

show abstract

Section: How Does Fidelity To the Constructs Of The Change Process Insupporting

confidence: 84%

“…The practice of inclusion has been part of the educational system for quite some time (Ryan, 2010), but not without its challenges (Roach & Salisbury, 2006). King (2000 reports that challenges take time to resolve, particularly in order to elicit a new change in student results.…”

Section: Administrator Attitudesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are school administrators and teachers' attitudes toward inclusion influence by the change process?

Goley¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Support is needed for schools to resolve challenges that can hinder inclusion (Roach & Salisbury, 2006). Challenges with inclusion encompass several domains (Carter & Hughes, 2006), including academic issues (Idol, 2006), social issues (Brown et al, 2004), architectural barriers (Hemmingson & Borell, 2002), and transportation services (Graham, Keys, & McMahon, 2014 [this issue]).…”

Section: Inclusion and Challenges To Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Low graduation rates of students with disabilities reflect the need to modify the curriculum and provide appropriate supports (Roach & Salisbury, 2006). Academic modifications for students with disabilities may include copies of lecture notes, less homework, more examples, extended time, study guides, tests read aloud, organizational tools (e.g., binders), assistive technology (e.g., laptop computers), and school supplies (e.g., calculators) (Biddulph, Hess, & Humes, 2006).…”

Section: Inclusion and Challenges To Implementationmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

School Problems and Solutions for Students With Disabilities: A Qualitative Examination

Sorani-Villanueva

McMahon

Crouch

et al. 2014

Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The inclusion of students with disabilities is a process that requires collaboration among multiple individuals, with teachers, aides, parents, students, and school systems playing important roles in resolving student problems. In the current study, we examined data from 75 teachers concerning 126 students about problems that students with disabilities had following a transition from a school primarily serving students with disabilities to more inclusive schools. Reported problems were reviewed and five major themes emerged: academic, behavioral, mobility/accessibility, social, and transportation issues. Teachers typically resolved academic problems by working directly with the student or collaborating with school staff. Social problems were resolved through student and teacher initiatives. Behavioral, transportation, and mobility/accessibility problems were resolved through collaboration among many key school figures and family members. Implications for theory, research, and inclusive school practices related to academic curricula, resources, services, and architectural accommodations for students with disabilities are discussed.

show abstract

Speech-Language Pathology Services in the Schools: A Follow-Up 9 Years Later

Brandel

2020

LSHSS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Speech-language pathologists (SLPs) in the schools provide services to students with a variety of disorders and severity levels. This study built upon a previously published survey (Brandel & Loeb, 2011) to examine whether factors related to the place and time for services for students with language disorders had changed since the 2008 survey and to examine the differentiation of decisions made by the SLPs across the three severity levels. Method Responses from 439 SLPs to an online national survey related to the place and time of services for students with language disorders were examined using regression in regard to the current factors impacting service delivery and the amount of variation in these decisions by the individual SLPs across the three severity levels. Results Similar to previous findings, students participated in services primarily in groups outside the classroom once or twice a week for 20–30 min. Factors that continued to impact decisions were the SLP's caseload and year of graduation. Related to the differentiation of decisions, most SLPs made two different decisions across the three severity levels for where and how long to provide services, while almost one third made the same decision for the place. Conclusions The results indicate that service delivery and the factors impacting it have remained relatively the same. While most SLPs do differentiate decisions related to time, less variation is observed regarding the place for services. Research is needed to clearly identify barriers and test possible solutions so that school practice can improve.

show abstract

Promoting Systemic, Statewide Inclusion From the Bottom Up

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

Are school administrators and teachers' attitudes toward inclusion influence by the change process?

Are school administrators and teachers' attitudes toward inclusion influence by the change process?

School Problems and Solutions for Students With Disabilities: A Qualitative Examination

Speech-Language Pathology Services in the Schools: A Follow-Up 9 Years Later

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About