This ethnographic study investigated the ways general and special education teachers and school staff worked to identify and solve their concerns about children with disabilities in their classrooms. Educators collaborated to resolve concerns by following problem-solving steps somewhat similar to traditional approaches. Teachers used this process (a) primarily during the school day whenever they had a free moment; (b) in pairs, small groups, or alone; and (c) repeated it until feasible solutions were determined. The demands of these teachers' jobs seemed to require that solutions be refined through repeated applications rather than developed optimally as a whole team before acting. These teachers' propensity for collaboration seemed motivated by their realization that cooperation was necessary to meet the educational needs of these children.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ClarkC. M.PetersonP. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In WittrockC. M. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (pp. 328–375). New York: Macmillan.*
2.
CootsJ. J.BishopK. D.Grenot-ScheyerM. (1998). Supporting elementary age students with significant disabilities in general education classrooms: Personal perspectives on inclusion. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33, 317–330.
3.
DenoS. L.FuchsL. S. (1987). Developing curriculum-based measurement systems for data-based special education problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19(8), 1–16.
4.
FarlowL. J.SnellM. E. (1994). Making the most of student performance data. Washington DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.*
5.
FergusonD. L.MeyerG.JeanchildL.JuniperL.ZingoJ. (1993). Figuring out what to do with the grownups: How teachers make inclusion “work” for students with disabilities. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 218–226.
6.
FullanM. G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.*
7.
GiangrecoM. F. (1990). Making related service decisions for students with severe disabilities: Roles, criteria, and authority. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 15(1), 22–31.
8.
GiangrecoM. F. (1993). Using creative problem-solving methods to include students with severe disabilities in general education classroom activities. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 4, 113–135.
9.
GiangrecoM. F.CloningerC.DennisR.EdelmanS. (1994). Problem-solving methods to facilitate inclusive education. In ThousandJ. S.VillaR. A.NevinA. I. (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning (pp. 321–346). Baltimore: Brookes.*
10.
GiangrecoM. F.DennisR.CloningerC.EdelmanS.SchattmanR. (1993). “I've counted Jon”: Transformational experiences of teachers educating students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 359–372.
11.
HuntP.GoetzL. (1997). Research on inclusive educational programs, practices, and outcomes for students with severe disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 3–29.
12.
JanneyR. E.SnellM. E. (1997). How teachers include students with moderate and severe disabilities in elementary classes: The means and meaning of inclusion. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 22, 159–169.
13.
KargeB. D.McClureM.PattonP. L. (1995). The success of collaboration in resource programs for students with disabilities in grades 6 through 8. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 79–89.
14.
KozleskiE. B.JacksonL. (1993). Taylor's story: Full inclusion in her neighborhood elementary school. Exceptionality, 4, 153–175.
15.
LincolnY. S.GubaE.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.*
16.
LittleJ. W. (1990). The persistence of privacy: Autonomy and initiative in teachers' professional relations. Teachers College Record, 91, 509–536.
17.
LittleJ. W. (1982). Norms of collegiality and experimentation: Workplace conditions of school success. American Educational Research Journal, 19, 325–340.
18.
MartinA. (1988). Screening, early intervention, and remediation: Obscuring children's potential. Harvard Educational Review, 58, 407–424.
19.
NewellA.SimonH. A. (1972). Human problem solving. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.*
20.
PotterM. L. (1992). Research on teacher thinking: Implications for mainstreaming students with multiple handicaps. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 4, 115–127.
21.
PugachM. C.JohnsonL. J. (1988). Rethinking the relationship between consultation and collaborative problem solving. Focus on Exceptional Children, 21(4), 1–8.
22.
PugachM. C.JohnsonL. J. (1995). Unlocking expertise among classroom teachers through structured dialogue: Extending research on peer collaboration. Exceptional Children, 62, 101–110.
23.
SalisburyC. L.PalombaroM. M.HollowoodT. M. (1993). On the nature and change of an inclusive elementary school. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 18, 75–84.
24.
SarasonS. B. (1990). The predictable failure of educational reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.*
25.
SassoG. M.ReimersT. M.CooperL. J.WackerD.BergW.SteeleM.KellyL.AllaireA. (1992). Use of descriptive and experimental analyses to identify the functional properties of aberrant behavior in school settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25, 809–822.
26.
VillaR. A.ThousandJ. S.NevinA. I.MalgeriC. (1996). Instilling collaboration for inclusive schooling as a way of doing business in public schools. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 169–181.
27.
WertsM. G.WoleryM.SnyderE. D.CaldwellN. K.SalisburyC. L. (1996). Supports and resources associated with inclusive schooling: Perceptions of elementary school teachers about need and availability. The Journal of Special Education, 30, 187–203.
28.
WestJ. F.IdolL. (1990). Collaborative consultation in the education of mildly handicapped and at-risk students. Remedial and Special Education, 11, 22–31.
