Knowledge of classroom practices for exceptional students is limited. The purpose of this investigation was to document teacher planning and instruction for the mentally retarded and multiply handicapped. Data were obtained by interviewing teachers on their planning activities and by observing their classroom instruction. The results demonstrate that teachers engage in virtually the same instructional acts regardless of diagnostic label (i.e., MR versus MH) or teacher training model (i.e., categorical versus noncategorical). Descriptive data on teacher classroom practices is presented and discussed in light of current literature on the needs of the severely handicapped.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatesP., RenzagliaA., & WehmanP. (1981). Characteristics of an appropriate education for severely and profoundly handicapped student. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 16, 142–149.
BrickerD. (1979). Educating the severely handicapped: Philosophical and implementation dilemmas. Teacher Education and Special Education, 2(3), 59–64.
4.
BritoT., & ReynoldsK. (1979). An epilogue. Teacher Education and Special Education, 2(3), 10–11.
5.
BryanT., & WheelerR. (1976). Teacher behavior in classes for severely retarded, multiply handicapped, trainable mentally retarded, learning disabled, and normal children. Mental Retardation, 14(4), 41–45.
6.
CantrellR., WoodT., & NicholsC. (1974, April). Teacher knowledge of behavior principles and classroom teaching patterns. Paper presented at the convention of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
7.
EdwardsA. (1965). Experimental design in psychological research. (Rev. Ed.) New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
8.
GableR., HendricksonJ., ShoresR., & YoungC. (1983). An investigation of teacher-handicapped child interactions in classrooms for learning/behavior disordered and mentally retarded youngsters. Teacher Education and Special Education, 6(2), 88–95.
9.
KerrM. M., & GableR. (1977). Field-based programming in special education. NSPI Journal, 16, 6–9.
10.
ReynoldsM. (1979). Categorical vs. noncategorical teacher training. Teacher Education and Special Education, 2(3), 5–8.
11.
ReynoldsM., & BalowB. (1972). Categories and variables in special education. Exceptional Children, 38, 357–366.
ShoresR., BurneyJ., & WiegerinkR. (1976). Teacher training in special education: A review of research. In MannL. & SabatinoD. (Eds.), Third review of special education. New York: Grune & Stratton.
14.
SkinnerB. F.Science and human behavior. (1983). New York: Free Press.
15.
SnellM., & SmithD. (1978). Management and planning. In SnellM. (Ed.), Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped. Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
16.
SontagE., BurkeP., & YorkR. (1973). Considerations for serving the severely handicapped in the public schools. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 8, 20–26.
17.
StowitschekJ. (1977). Prototype model for developing empirically-based special education teacher competencies (BEH Grant 60075-345)Interim Report. Nashville, TN, George Peabody College.
18.
StowitschekJ., GableR., & HendricksonJ. (1980). Instructional materials for exceptional children: Selection, management and evaluation. Germantown, MD: Aspen System.
19.
ThomasA. (1980). Current trends in preparing teachers of the severely and profoundly retarded: A conversation with Susan and William Stainback. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 15, 43–49.
20.
ThurmanS. K., & HareB. (1979). Teacher training in special education: Some perspectives circa 1980. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 14, 292–295.
21.
WhitneyR., & StreifelS. (1981). Functionality and generalization in training the severely and profoundly handicapped. Journal of Special Education Technology, 4, 33–39.
22.
WinerB. (1971). Statistical principles in experimental design. New York: McGraw-Hill.
