This article discusses the alternative roles and responsibilities that researchers might assume to bridge the gap between special education research and classroom practice. Literature is reviewed that addresses why some research-based practices fail, and the factors likely to lead to sustained use of research-based practices. The roles of researchers as collaborators, facilitators and coaches, interpreters of the culture and dynamics of the school, and critics are described in an attempt to promote researchers as leaders in efforts to improve practices in the field of special education.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allinder, R. M. (1995). An examination of the relationship between teacher efficacy and curriculum-based measurement and student achievement. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 247–254.
2.
Ball, D. L. (1990). Reflections and deflections of policy: The case of Carol Turner. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 12, 247–259.
3.
Ball, D. L. (1993). With an eye on the mathematical horizon: Dilemmas of teaching elementary school mathematics. Elementary School Journal, 93, 373–397.
4.
Bereiter, C., & Kurland, M. (1981-1982). A constructive look at Follow Through results. Interchange, 12(1), 1–22.
5.
Bickel, W., & Hattrup, R. (1995). Teachers and researchers in collaboration: Reflections on the process. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 35–62.
6.
Chard, D. (1995). An observational study of low-performing readers' responses in first-grade reading instruction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Oregon.
7.
Cochran-Smith, M. (1995). Color blindness and basket making are not the answers: Confronting the dilemmas of race, culture, and language diversity in teacher education. American Educational Research Journal, 32, 493–522.
8.
Covey, S. R. (1989). The seven habits of highly effective people. New York: Simon & Schuster.
9.
Crandall, D. P. (1981). Emulation and replication. Teacher Education and Special Education, 4(2), 13–22.
10.
Cuban, L. (1990). Reforming again, again, and again. Educational Researcher, 19(1), 3–13.
11.
Deal, T. E. (1990). Reframing reform. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 6–12.
12.
Delacato, C. H. (1966). Neurological organization and reading. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
13.
Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J.B. (1994). Grounding intervention research in the larger context of schooling: A response to Pressley and Harris. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 215–222.
14.
Douglas, A. (1995). Terrible honesty: Mongrel Manhattan in the 1920s. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.
15.
Eisner, E. (1992). Educational reform and the ecology of schooling. Teachers College Record, 93, 610–627.
16.
Englert, C. S., & Tarrant, K. L. (1995). Creating collaborative cultures for educational change. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 325–336.
17.
Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Bentz, J. (1994). Classwide curriculum-based measurement: Helping general educators meet the challenge of student diversity. Exceptional Children, 60, 518–537.
18.
Gabella, M. S., Kinzer, C. K., & Rieth, H. (1995, April). At the nexus: Linking research on technology, learning disabilities, and social studies and literacy learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
19.
Gersten, R. (1994). Lost opportunities: A study of the dilemmas faced by teachers of language minority students in the intermediate grades. Manuscript submitted for publication.
20.
Gersten, R., & Brengelman, S. (1996). The quest to translate research into practice: The emerging knowledge base. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 67–74.
21.
Gersten, R., Carnine, D., & Williams, P. (1982). Measuring implementation of a structured educational model in an urban setting: An observational approach. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 4, 67–79.
22.
Gersten, R., Morvant, M., & Brengelman, S. (1995). Closer to the classroom is close to the bone: Coaching as a means to translate research into classroom practice. Exceptional Children, 62(1), 52–66.
23.
Gersten R. & Woodward, J. (1990). Rethinking the Regular Education Initiative: Focus on the classroom teacher. Remedial and Special Education, 11(3), 7–16.
24.
Greenwood, C. R., Delquardi, H., & Hall, R. V. (1989). Longitudinal effects of class-wide peer tutoring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 371–383.
25.
Guskey, T. (1995). Professional development in education: In search of the optimal mix. In T. R. Guskey & M. Huberman (Eds.), Professional development in education (pp. 114-131). New York: Teachers College Press.
26.
Harris, K. C. (1995). School-based bilingual special education teacher assistance teams. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 337–343.
27.
Hofmeister, A. M. (1993). Elitism and reform in school mathematics. Remedial and Special Education, 14(6), 8–13.
28.
Huberman, A. M., & Miles, M. B. (1984). Innovation up close: How school improvement works. New York: Plenum Press.
29.
Huberman, M. (1993). The model of the independent artisan in teachers' professional relations. In J. W. Little & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), Teachers' work: Individuals, colleagues, and contexts (pp. 11-50). New York: Teachers College Press.
30.
Jenkins, J., & Leicester, N. (1992). Specialized instruction within general education: A case study of one elementary school. Exceptional Children, 58, 555–563.
31.
Joint Committee on Teacher Planning for Students with Disabilities. (1995). Planning for academic diversity in America's classrooms: Windows on reality, research, change, and practice. Lawrence: The University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning.
32.
Kauffman, J. M. (1993). How we might achieve the radical reform of special education. Exceptional Children, 60(1), 6–16.
33.
Kelly, B., Gersten, R., & Carnine, D. (1990). Student error patterns as a function of curriculum design. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 23, 23–32.
34.
Kennedy, M. M. (1991). Following through on Follow Through. In E. A. Ramp & C. S. Pederson (Eds.), Follow Through: Program and policy issues. Washington, DC: Office of Education Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education.
35.
Kline, F. M., Deshler, D. D., & Schumaker, J. B. (1992). Implementing learning strategy instruction in class settings: A research perspective. In M. Pressley, K. R. Harris, & J. T. Guthrie (Eds.), Promoting academic competence and literacy in school (pp. 361-406). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
36.
Leinhardt, G. (1977). Program evaluation: An empirical study of individualized instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 14(3), 277–293.
37.
Lenz, B. K., Bulgren, J., & Hudson, P. (1990). Content enhancement: A model for promoting the acquisition of content by individuals with learning disabilities. In T. E. Scruggs & B. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), Intervention research in learning disabilities (pp. 122-165). New York: Springer-Verlag.
38.
Little, J. W. (1993). Teachers' professional development in a climate of educational reform. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 129–151.
39.
Loucks, S. F., & Zacchei, D. A. (1983). Applying our findings to today's innovations. Educational Leadership, 41(3), 28–31.
40.
Malouf, D. B., & Schiller, E. P. (1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61, 414–424.
41.
Marston, D., Deno, S. L., Kim, D., Diment, K., & Rogers, D. (1995). Comparison of reading intervention approaches for students with mild disabilities. Exceptional Children, 62(1), 20–37.
42.
McKenna, B. (1992). Special education research priorities focus on action. Educational Researcher, 12(5), 27–29.
43.
McLaughlin, M. (1990). The Rand Change Agent Study revisited: Macro perspectives and micro realities. Educational Research, 19(9), 11–16.
44.
McLaughlin, M. W. (1995, April). Making change happen: The search for coherence. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
45.
Mercer, C., Jordan, L., & Miller, S. (1994). Implications of constructivism for teaching math to students with moderate to mild disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 290–306.
46.
Morvant, M., Gersten, R., Gillman, J., Keating, T., & Blake, G. (1995). Attrition/ retention of urban special education teachers: Multi-faceted research and strategic action planning. Final performance report. Eugene, OR: Eugene Research Institute.
47.
National Academy of Education. (1991). Research and the renewal of education. Stanford, CA: Author.
48.
O'Connor, R., & Jenkins, J. (1996). Cooperative learning as an inclusion strategy: A closer look. Exceptionality, 6(1), 29–52.
49.
Palincsar, A. S. (1993, April). Designing best contexts for learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
50.
Peterson, A. (1995). Teacher-researcher compatibility: A view from both sides. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 364–367.
51.
Pressley, M., & Rankin, J. (1994). More about whole language methods of reading instruction for students at risk for early reading failure. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9(3), 157–168.
52.
Pugach, M. C., & Johnson, L. J. (1995). Unlocking expertise among classroom teachers through structured dialogue: Extending research on peer collaboration. Exceptional Children, 62, 101–110.
53.
Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5–10.
54.
Rosenfield, S., & Rubinson, F. (1985). Introducing curriculum-based assessment through consultation. Exceptional Children, 52, 282–287.
55.
Santa, C. M., Isaacson, L., & Manning, G. (1987). Changing content instruction through action research. The Reading Teacher, 40(4), 34–38.
56.
Sashkin, M., & Egermeier, J. (1993). School change models and processes: A review and synthesis of research and practice. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement Programs for the Improvement of Practice.
57.
Scanlon, D., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (1994). Collaborative dialogues between teachers and researchers to create education interventions: A case study. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 5(1), 69–76.
58.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
59.
Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. (1992). Validation of learning strategy interventions for students with learning disabilities: Results of a programmatic research effort. In B. Y. L. Wong (Ed.), Contemporary research in learning disabilities: An international perspective. New York: Springer-Verlag.
60.
Schumaker, J. B., Deshler, D., & McKnight, P. (1991). Teaching routines for content areas at the secondary level. In G. Stover, M. R. Shinn, & H. M. Walker (Eds.), Interventions for achievement and behavior problems (pp. 473-494). Washington, DC: National Association for School Psychology.
61.
Schumm, J. S., Vaughn, S., Haager, D., McDowell, J., Rothlein, L., & Saumell, L. (1995). General education teacher planning: What can students with learning disabilities expect? Exceptional Children, 61(4), 335–352.
62.
Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday Currency.
63.
Shavelson, R. (1988). Contributions of educational research to policy and practice: Constructing, challenging, changing cognition. Educational Researcher, 17(7), 4–11.
64.
Showers, B., Joyce, B., & Bennett, B. (1987). Synthesis of research on staff development: A framework for future study and state-of-the-art analysis. Educational Leadership, 45(3), 77–87.
65.
Simmons, D. C., Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P., & Hodge, J. P. (1995). Effects of explicit teaching and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of learning disabled and low-performing students in general education. Elementary School Journal, 95, 387–408.
66.
Smylie, M. (1994). The principal and community-school connections in Chicago's radical reform. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(3), 42–64.
67.
Sparks, G. M. (1988). Teachers' attitudes toward change and subsequent improvements in classroom teaching. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 111–117.
68.
Stallings, J. (1975). Follow Through program classroom observation evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute.
69.
Stanovich, K. E. (1993/1994). Romance and reality. The Reading Teacher, 47, 280–291.
70.
Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J. S. (1995). Responsible inclusion for students with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 264–270, 290.
71.
Walker, H., Fonseca-Retana, G., & Gersten, R. (1988). Replication of the CLASS program in Costa Rica: Implementation procedures and program outcomes. Behavior Modification, 12(1), 133–154.
72.
Wolcott, H. E. (1977). Teachers versus technocrats: An educational innovation in anthropological perspective. Washington, DC: National Institute of Education.
73.
Woodward, J. (1993). The technology of technology-based instruction: Comments on the research, development, and dissemination approach to innovation. Education and Treatment of Children, 16, 345–360.
74.
Woodward, J., & Gersten, R. (1992). Innovative technology for secondary learning disabled students: A multi-faceted study of implementation. Exceptional Children, 58, 407–421.
75.
Zahorik, J. A. (1984). Can teachers adopt research findings?Journal of Teacher Education, 25, 34–36.
76.
Zigmond, N., Jenkins, J., Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S., Fuchs, D., Baker, J. N., Jenkins, L., & Coutinho, M. (1995, March). Special education in restructured schools: Findings from three multi-year studies. Phi Delta Kappan, pp. 531–540.
