This in-depth study addressed the nature of general education teachers' planning for content area instruction for students with learning disabilities. Participants included 12 teachers, elementary through high school. Through interviews, classroom observations, teacher reflections, and surveys, we used the Flow of the Planning Process Model to investigate teachers' preplanning, interactive planning, and postplanning activities. Elementary general education teachers did more planning to include the needs of diverse students—and collaborated more with special education teachers—than did teachers at other levels. Other results indicated the extent of special help offered by teachers, as well as the pressures felt by teachers to cover the curriculum.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlvermannD. E.O'BrienD. G., & DillonD. R. (1990). What teachers do when they say they're having discussions of content reading assignments: A qualitative analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 296–322.
2.
BakerJ. M., & ZigmondN. (1990). Are regular education classes equipped to accommodate students with learning disabilities?Exceptional Children, 56, 515–526.
3.
BorgW. R., & GallM. D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
4.
BorkoH.EisenhartM.KelloM., & VandettN. (1984). Teachers as decision-makers versus technicians. In NilesJ. & HarrisL. (Eds.), Thirty-third yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 124–131). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
5.
BorkoH., & LivingstonC. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 473–498.
6.
BrownD. S. (1988). Twelve middle-school teachers' planning. The Elementary School Journal, 89, 69–87.
7.
ClarkC. M., & JoyceB. R. (1981). Teacher decision-making and teaching effectiveness. In JoyceB. R. & PeckL. (Eds.), Flexibility in teaching: An excursion into the nature of teaching and training (pp. 228–235). New York: Longman.
8.
ClarkC. M., & PetersonP. L. (1981). Stimulatedrecall. In JoyceB. R.BrownC. C., & PeckL. (Eds.), Flexibility in teaching: An excursion into the nature of teaching and training (pp. 256–261). New York: Longman.
9.
ClarkC. M., & PetersonP. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In WittrockM. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed., pp. 255–296). New York: Macmillan.
10.
CorreaV., & TulbertB. (1991). Teaching culturally diverse students. Preventing School Failure, 35, 20–25.
11.
DenzinN. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
12.
DePauloB. M.NadlerA., & FisherJ. D. (Eds.). (1983). New directions in help. Vol. 2. Help-seeking. San Diego: Academic Press.
13.
EvertsonC. M., & GreenJ. L. (1986). Observation as inquiry and method. In WittrockM. C. (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching, (3rd ed., pp. 162–213). New York: Macmillan.
14.
GerstenR., & WoodwardJ. (1992). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: Strategies for assisting classroom teachers' work with “at risk” students and students with disabilities. In CarnineD. & KameenuiE. (Eds.), Higher cognitive functioning for all students (pp. 201–218). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
15.
GoldsteinS.StricklandB.TurnbullA. P., & CurryL. (1980). An observational analysis of the IEP conference. Exceptional Children, 46, 278–286.
16.
LalikR. V., & NilesJ. A. (1990). Collaborative planning by two groups of student teachers. Elementary School Journal, 90, 319–336.
17.
LampertM., & ClarkC. (1990). Expert knowledge and expert thinking in teachers: A response to Floden and Klinzing. Educational Researcher, 19, 21–23.
McCutcheonG. (1980). How do elementary school teachers plan? The nature of planning and influences on it. Elementary School Journal, 81, 4–23.
20.
McIntoshR.VaughnS.SchummJ. S.HaagerD., & LeeO. (1994). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 60, 249–261.
21.
McLeodM. A. (1981). The identification of intended learning outcomes by early childhood teachers: An exploratory study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
22.
McNairK. (1978–79). Capturing in-flight decisions. Educational Research Quarterly, 3, 26–42.
23.
MerriamS. B. (1988). Case study research in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
24.
Morine-DershimerG. (1977, April). What's in a plan? Stated and unstated plans for lessons. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
25.
Morine-DershimerG. (1978–79). Planning and classroom reality: An in-depth look. Educational Research Quarterly, 3, 83–99.
26.
NewmanR. S. (1990). Children's help-seeking in the classroom: The role of motivational factors and attitudes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 71–80.
27.
NewmanR. S., & GoldinL. (1990). Children's reluctance to seek help with schoolwork. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 92–100.
28.
PetersonP. L.MarxR. W., & ClarkC. M. (1978). Teacher planning, teacher behavior, and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 417–432.
29.
PressleyM.GoodchildF.FleetJ.ZajchowskiR., & EvansE. (1989). The challenges of classroom strategy instruction. Elementary School Journal, 89, 301–342.
30.
SchummJ. S., & VaughnS. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 18–27.
31.
SchummJ. S., & VaughnS. (1992). Planning for mainstreamed special education students: Perceptions of general classroom teachers. Exceptionality, 3, 81–98.
32.
SchummJ. S.VaughnS.GordonJ., & RothleinL. (1994). General education teachers' beliefs, skills, and practices in planning for mainstreamed students with learning disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 22–37.
33.
SchummJ. S.VaughnS., & LeavellA. G. (1994). Planning pyramid: A framework for planning for diverse student needs during content area instruction. The Reading Teacher, 47, 608–615.
34.
StewartD. W., & ShamdasaniP. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
35.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36.
VaughnS.BosC. S.HarrellJ. E., & LaskyB. A. (1988). Parent participation in the initial placement/IEP conference ten years after mandated involvement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 82–89.
37.
VaughnS.McIntoshR.SchummJ. S.HaagerD., & CallwoodD. (1993). Social status, peer acceptance and reciprocal friendships revisited. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 8, 82–88.
38.
VaughnS., & SchummJ. S. (1994). Middle school teachers' planning for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 152–161.
39.
VaughnS.SchummJ. S., & KouzekananiK. (1993). What do students with learning disabilities think when their general education teachers make adaptations?Journal of Learning Disabilities, 26, 545–555.
40.
VaughnS.SchummJ. S.NiarhosF., & DaughertyT. (1993). What do students think when teachers make adaptations?Teaching and Teacher Education, 9, 107–118.
41.
VaughnS.SchummJ. S.NiarhosF., & GordonJ. (1993). Students' perceptions of two hypothetical teachers' instructional adaptations for low achievers. Elementary School Journal, 94, 87–102.
42.
VerloopN. (1989). Interactive cognitions of student-teachers: An intervention study. Dissertation, National Institute for Educational Measurement, Arnheim, The Netherlands. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 331776).
43.
WangM. C.HaertelG. D., & WalbergH. J. (1990). What influences learning? A content analysis of review literature. Journal of Educational Research, 84, 30–43.
44.
YinR. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
45.
YingerR. J. (1977). A study of teacher planning: Description and theory development using ethnographic and information processing methods. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
46.
YsseldykeJ. E.ThurlowM. L.WotrubaJ. W., & NanaiaP. A. (1990). Instructional arrangement: Perceptions from general education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22, 4–8.
