The perspectives and experiences of 20 paraeducators working with inclusion students with disabilities who also present significant behavioral challenges were investigated in this research. The inclusion students were in Grades K through 8 and represented a range of disability categories (e.g., autism spectrum disorder, serious emotional disturbance [SED], learning disability, attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder [AD/HD]). Findings from this study indicate that paraeducators tend to assume high levels of responsibility for managing the academic and behavioral needs for special education students in inclusive settings. This tendency appears to be due to the nature of the job, which can create conflicting roles in meeting both the needs of inclusion students as well as those of general education teachers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlgozzineB., MaheadyL., SaccaK. C., O'SheaL., & O'SheaD. (1990). Sometimes patent medicine works: A reply to Braaten, Kauffman, Braaten, Polsgrove, and Nelson.Exceptional Children, 56, 552–557.
2.
BakerJ. M., & ZigmondN. (1990). Are regular education classes equipped to accommodate students with learning disabilities?Exceptional Children, 56, 515–526.
3.
BassettD. S., JacksonL., FerrellK. A., LucknerJ., HagertyP. J., BunsenT. D., & MacIsaacD. (1996). Multiple perspectives on inclusive education: Reflections of a university faculty.Teacher Education and Special Education, 19(4), 355–386.
4.
BlackmanH. P. (1989). Special education placement: Is it what you know or where you live?Exceptional Children, 55, 459–462.
5.
BraatenS., KauffmanJ. M., BraatenB., PolsgroveL., & NelsonM. C. (1988). The regular education initiative: Patent medicine for behavioral disorders.Exceptional Children, 55, 21–27.
6.
DoyleM. B. (1997). The paraprofessional's guide to the inclusive classroom.Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.*
7.
EvansI. M., SalisburyC. L., PalombaroM. M., Berry-manS., & HollowoodT. M. (1992). Peer interactions and social acceptance of elementary-age children with severe disabilities in an inclusive school.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 205–212.
8.
FoxN. E., & YsseldykeJ. E. (1997). Implementing inclusion at the middle school level: Lessons from a negative example.Exceptional Children, 64, 81–98.
9.
FrenchN. K., & PickettA. L. (1997). Paraprofessionals in special education: Issues for teacher educators.Teacher Education and Special Education, 20(1), 61–73.
10.
FuchsD., & FuchsL. S. (1994). Inclusive schools' movement and the radicalization of special education reform.Exceptional Children, 60, 294–309.
11.
GiangrecoM. F., EdelmanS. W., LuiselliT. E., & MacFarlandS. Z. C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities.Exceptional Children, 64, 7–18.
12.
JanneyR. E., & SnellM. E. (1997). How teachers include students with moderate and severe disabilities in elementary classes: The means and meaning of inclusion.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 22(3), 159–169.
13.
KauffmanJ. M. (1993). How we might achieve the radical reform of special education.Exceptional Children, 60, 6–16.
14.
KennedyC. H., ShuklaS., FryxellD. (1997). Comparing the effects of educational placement on the social relationships of intermediate school students with severe disabilities.Exceptional Children, 64, 31–48.
15.
LewisT. J., ChardD., & ScottT. M. (1994). Full inclusion and the education of children and youth with emotional and behavioral disorders.Behavioral Disorders, 19(4), 277–293.
16.
LincolnY., & GubaE. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry.Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.*
17.
LipskyD. K., & GartnerA. (1987). Capable of achievement and worthy of respect: Education for handicapped students as if they were full-fledged human beings.Exceptional Children, 54, 69–74.
18.
MacMillanD. L., GreshamF. M., & FornessS. R. (1996). Full inclusion: An empirical perspective.Behavioral Disorders, 21(2), 145–159.
19.
McIntoshR., VaughnS., SchummJ. S., HaagerD., & LeeO. (1993). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms.Exceptional Children, 60, 249–261.
20.
MilesM. B., & HubermanA. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.*
21.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (1990). Winners all: A call for inclusive schools. The report of the NASBE study group on special education.Alexandria, VA: Author.
22.
PattonM. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newberry Park, CA: Sage.*
23.
SeidmanI. E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and the social sciences.NY: Teachers College Press.*
24.
ShragJ. A. (1993). Restructuring schools for better alignment of general and special education. In GoodladJ., & LovittT. (Eds.), Integrating general and special education (pp. 203–228). New York: Macmillan.*
25.
StoreyK. (1993). A proposal for assessing integration.Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 28(4), 279–287.
26.
StraussA., & CorbinJ. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques.Newberry Park, CA: Sage.*
27.
TaylorS. J. (1988). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of least restrictive environment.Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 13, 41–53.
28.
WillM. C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility.Exceptional Children, 52, 411–415.
29.
WoleryM., WertsM. G., CaldwellN. K., SnyderE. D., & LisowskiL. (1995). Experienced teachers' perceptions of resources and supports for inclusion.Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30(1), 15–26.
30.
WoodM. (1998). Whose job is it anyway? Educational roles in inclusion.Exceptional Children, 64, 181–195.
31.
ZigmondN., & BakerJ. M. (1994). Is the mainstream a more appropriate educational setting for Randy? A case study of one student with learning disabilities.Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9(2), 108–117.
