This study examined the sociometric status of children with disabilities in a full-inclusion school that did not use eligibility labels for special education services. The study used a positive and negative peer nomination technique to interview all students. The subject population included students with a range of disabilities; the majority were students with learning disabilities. Findings indicated significant differences between how students who were currently eligible for special education services and students who were likely eligible for services were perceived by their peers when compared to a control group. Full-inclusion strategies did not eliminate negative social perceptions of students with disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonS., & MessickS. (1974). Social competency in young children. Developmental Psychology, 10, 282–293.
2.
AsherS. R., & DodgeK. A. (1986). Identifying children who are rejected by their peers. Developmental Psychology, 22, 444–449.
3.
AsherS. R., & HymelS. (1981). Children's social competence in peer relations: Sociometric and behavioral assessments. In WineJ. D. & SmyeM. D. (Eds.), Social competence (pp. 125–157). New York: Guilford Press.
4.
Bell-DolanD. J.FosterS. L., & SikoraD. M. (1989). Effects of sociometric testing on children's behavior and loneliness in school. Developmental Psychology, 25, 306–311.
5.
BiklenD., & ZollersN. (1986). The focus of advocacy in the LD field. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19, 579–586.
6.
BruckM. (1986). Social and emotional adjustments of learning disabled children: A review of the issues. In CeciS. (Ed.), Handbook of cognitive, social and neuropsychological aspects of learning disabilities (pp. 200–232). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
BruininksV. L. (1978). Actual and perceived peer status of learning disabled students in mainstream programs. The Journal of Special Education, 12, 51–58.
9.
BryanT. H. (1974). An observational study of classroom behaviors of children with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 7, 26–34.
10.
BryanT. H. (1976). Peer popularity of learning disabled children: A replication. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 9, 307–311.
11.
CoieJ. D.DodgeK. A., & CoppotelliH. (1982). Dimensions and types of status: A cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–570.
12.
ColeD. A. (1991). Social integration and severe disabilities: A longitudinal analysis of child outcomes. Journal of Special Education, 25(5), 340–351.
13.
The Council for Exceptional Children. (1993). CEC policy on inclusive schools and community settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25, supplement to issue Number 4.
14.
CowenE. L.PedersonA.BabiganH.IzzoL. D., & TrostM. A. (1973). Long-term follow-up of early detected vulnerable children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 41, 438–446.
15.
Dudley-MarlingD. D., & EdmiastonR. (1985). Social status of learning disabled children and adolescents: A review. Learning Disabled Quarterly, 8, 189–204.
16.
FaughtK. K.BallewegB. J.CrowR. E., & van den PolR. A. (1983). An analysis of social behaviors among handicapped and nonhandicapped preschool children. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 75, 210–214.
17.
FergusonG. A. (1971). Statistical analysis in psychology and education. New York: McGraw Hill.
18.
GiangrecoM. F.DennisR.CloningerC.EdelmanS., & SchattmanR. (1993). ‘I've counted Jon’: Transformational experiences of teachers educating students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 359–372.
19.
GreshamF. M., & StuartD. (1992). Stability of sociometric assessment: Implications for uses as selection and outcome measures in social skills training. Journal of School Psychology, 30, 223–231.
20.
HallahanD. P.KellerC. E.McKinneyJ. D.LloydJ. W., & BryanT. (1988). Examining the research base of the regular education initiative: Efficacy studies and the adaptive learning environments model. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(1), 29–35, 55.
21.
HanlineM. F. (1993). Inclusion of preschoolers with profound disabilities: An analysis of children's interactions. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 18(1), 28–35.
22.
HayvrenM., & HymelS. (1984). Ethical issues in sociometric testing: Impact of sociometric measures on interactive behavior. Developmental Psychology, 20, 844–849.
23.
LandauS.MilichR., & McFarlandM. (1987). Social status differences among subgroups of LD boys. Learning Disability Quarterly, 10, 277–282.
24.
MaddenN. A., & SlavinR. E. (1983). Mainstreaming students with mild handicaps: Academic and social outcomes. Review of Educational Research, 53, 519–569.
25.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (1992). Winners all: A call for inclusive schools. Alexandria, VA: Author.
26.
NewcombA. F., & BukowskiW. M. (1983). Social impact and social preference as determinants of children's peer group status. Developmental Psychology, 19, 856–867.
27.
ParkerJ. G., & AsherS. R. (1987). Peer relations and later personal adjustment: Are low-accepted children at risk?Psychological Bulletin, 102, 357–389.
28.
PerlmutterB. F.CrockerJ.CordrayD., & GarsteckiD. (1983). Sociometric status and related personality characteristics of mainstreamed and learning disabled adolescents. Learning Disability Quarterly, 6, 20–30.
29.
PetersonN. L. (1982). Social integration of handicapped and nonhandicapped preschoolers: A study of playmate preferences. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 2(2), 56–59.
30.
PetersonN. L., & HaralickJ. G. (1977). Integration of handicapped and nonhandicapped preschoolers: An analysis of play behavior and social interaction. Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 12, 235–245.
31.
RatinerC.WeissbergR., & CaplanM. (1986, August). Ethical considerations in sociometric testing: The reaction of preadolescent subjects. Paper presented at the 94th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.
32.
RobinsL. N. (1966). Deviant children grown up. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.
33.
RoffM.SellsS. B., & GoldenM. M. (1972). Social adjustment and personality development in children. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minneapolis Press.
34.
SaterG. M., & FrenchD. C. (1989). A comparison of the social competencies of learning disabled and low achieving elementary-aged children. The Journal of Special Education, 23(1), 29–42.
35.
ScrantonT., & RyckmanD. (1979). Sociometric status of learning disabled children in an integrative program. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 12, 402–407.
36.
SemmelM. I.AbernathyT. V.ButeraG., & LesarS. (1991). Teacher perceptions of the regular education initiative. Exceptional Children, 58, 9–24.
37.
SipersteinG. N.BoppM. J., & BakJ. J. (1978). Social status of learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 11, 98–102.
38.
StainbackS.StainbackW., & JacksonH. J. (1992). Toward inclusive classrooms. In StainbackS. & StainbackW. (Eds.), Curriculum considerations in inclusive classrooms: Facilitating learning for all students (pp. 3–17). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
39.
TerryR., & CoieJ. D. (1991). A comparison of methods for defining sociometric status among children. Developmental Psychology, 27, 867–880.
40.
WangM. C., & BirchJ. W. (1984a). Comparison of a full-time mainstreaming program and a resource room approach. Exceptional Children, 51, 33–40.
41.
WangM. C., & BirchJ. W. (1984b). Effective special education in regular classes. Exceptional Children, 50, 391–398.
42.
WangM. C.PeverlyS., & RandolphR. (1984). An investigation of the implementation and effects of a full-time mainstreaming program. Remedial and Special Education, 5(6), 21–32.
43.
WangM. C., & WalbergH. J. (1986). Adaptive instruction and classroom time. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 601–626.
44.
WienerJ. (1987). Peer status of learning disabled children and adolescents: A review of the literature. Learning Disabilities Research, 2(2), 62–79.
45.
WillM. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility. Exceptional Children, 52, 411–415.
46.
YsseldykeJ. E.AlgozzineB.ShinnM. R., & McGueM. (1982). Similarities and differences between low achievers and students classified learning disabled. The Journal of Special Education, 16, 73–85.
