Use of Instructional Time in Classrooms Serving Students with and without Severe Disabilities

Abstract

This investigation explored the use of teacher and student time in an inclusive elementary school where students with mild to profound disabilities were enrolled in general education classrooms. Participants included 6 students with severe disabilities and 12 students without disabilities. Observers recorded time used for instruction, as well as levels and types of student engagement and types of interruptions. Students in each group evidenced comparable levels of engaged time, and students with severe disabilities had no effect on losses of instructional time. Results were discussed in light of this school's contextual characteristics and the inclusive schools movement.

An examination of teacher instruction and student engagement involving adolescents with and without challenging behavior.

“…Previous findings of active engagement for students with challenging behaviors average approximately 70% and range from 49% to 94% (Baker et aL, 2008;Hayling et aL, 2008;Hollowood et aL, 1994). The t-test analysis noted that active engagement observed in this study was significantly less than findings of approximately 70% active engagement in the research t (826) = -34.51, P < .001…”

Knowledge and Perceptions of Students with Disabilities in Regard to a Resource Room in a Private School

“…According to studies performed by Peck, Staub, Gallucci & Schwartz (2004) parents expressed concern that students with disabilities unfairly received more time and attention from the teacher than did the students without disabilities. Hollowood, Salisbury, Rainforth and Palombero (1994) found no differences in planned and observed instructional time between inclusive and noninclusive settings. The concern that academic progress might be impeded has been studied by numerous researchers.…”

Clinical trials in children with Down syndrome: Issues from a cognitive research perspective

“…The development of educational policies, such as early intervention and inclusion in the least restricted environment, have helped focus attention on children's abilities rather than their disabilities [Baker et al, 1994;Hollowood et al, 1995;Hassold and Patterson, 1998]. These policies bring hope that individuals with DS can lead relatively independent and productive lives.…”