Achievement of Students With IEPs and Associated Relationships With an Inclusive MTSS Framework

Abstract

The present study investigated the effectiveness of an equity-based inclusive school reform model nested within a multitiered system of support (MTSS) framework on the improvement of math and reading performance of students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs). Descriptive statistics revealed that math state assessment scores of students with IEPs increased over the implementation period. Results of multilevel modeling demonstrated that the model’s fidelity of implementation scores positively and significantly predicted state assessment math scores. A further analysis examining the effectiveness of the model in three schools that implemented with adequate fidelity compared with nonimplementing schools indicated students with IEPs in implementing schools increased their math scores at a greater rate than their peers in comparison schools; however, effects on reading scores were equivocal. Findings are discussed in the context of inclusion and efforts to support high fidelity implementation of MTSS.

Keywords

equity-based inclusion school reform whole school interventions MTSS

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ainscow

(2005). Developing inclusive education systems: What are the levers for change? Journal of Educational Change, 6(2), 109–124. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10833-005-1298-4

Algozzine

Putnam

Horner

R. H.

(2012). Support for teaching students with learning disabilities academic skills and social behaviors within a response-to-intervention model: Why it doesn’t matter what comes first. Insights on Learning Disabilities, 9(1), 7–36.

Balu

Zhu

Doolittle

Schiller

Jenkins

Gersten

(2015). Evaluation of response to intervention practices for elementary school reading (NCEE 2016-4000). National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.

Billingsley

DeMatthews

Connally

McLeskey

(2018). Leadership for effective inclusive schools: Considerations for preparation and reform. Australasian Journal of Special and Inclusive Education, 42(1), 65–81. https://doi.org/10.1017/jsi.2018.6

Blackorby

Schiller

Knokey

Wagner

(2007). Relationships between the school programs of students with disabilities and their longitudinal outcomes. In Blackorby

Knokey

Wagner

Levine

Schiller

Sumi

(Eds.), What makes a difference? Influences on outcomes for students with disabilities (pp. 7-1–7-22). SRI International.

Bryant

D. P.

Bryant

B. R.

Gersten

R. M.

Scammacca

N. N.

Funk

Winter

Pool

(2008). The effects of tier 2 intervention on the mathematics performance of first-grade students who are at risk for mathematics difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31(2), 47–63. https://doi.org/10.2307/20528817

Burrello

L. C.

Lashley

Beatty

E. E.

(2001). Educating all students together. Corwin Press.

Chatterji

(2006). Reading achievement gaps, correlates, and moderators of early reading achievement: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study (ECLS) kindergarten to first grade sample. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98, 489–507.

Choi

J. H.

(2007). Preliminary analysis of SAMAN. Unpublished manuscript. Department of Special Education, University of Kansas, Lawrence.

10.

Choi

J. H.

Meisenheimer

J. M.

McCart

A. B.

Sailor

(2017). Improving learning for all students through equity-based inclusive reform practices. Remedial and Special Education, 38, 28–41. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516644054

11.

Coburn

C. E.

Turner

E. O.

(2012). The practice of data use: An introduction. American Journal of Education, 118, 99–111. https://doi.org/10.1086/663272

12.

Cosier

(2010). Exploring the relationship between inclusive education and achievement: New perspectives [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Syracuse University.

13.

Cronin

Kingsbury

G. G.

McCall

M. S.

Bowe

(2005). The impact of the No Child Left Behind Act on student achievement and growth: 2005 edition. Northwest Evaluation Association.

14.

Denton

C. A.

Fletcher

J. M.

Anthony

J. L.

Francis

D. J.

(2006). An evaluation of intensive intervention for students with persistent reading difficulties. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 447–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194060390050601

15.

Farrell

Dyson

Polat

Hutcheson

Gallannaugh

(2007). Inclusion and achievement in mainstream schools. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22, 131–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250701267808

16.

Fuchs

L. S.

(2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1598/rrq.41.1.4

17.

Fuchs

L. S.

Compton

D. L.

(2012). Smart RTI: A next-generation approach to multilevel prevention. Exceptional Children, 78, 263–279.

18.

Fuchs

L. S.

Vaughn

(2012). Responsiveness-to-intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 45, 195–203. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219412442150

19.

Gersten

Chard

D. J.

Jayanthi

Baker

S. K.

Morphy

Flojo

(2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654309334431

20.

Harn

B. A.

Chard

D. J.

Kame’enui

E. J.

(2011). Meeting societies’ increased expectations through responsive instruction: The power and potential of systemwide approaches. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 55, 232–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2010.548416

21.

Hehir

Katzman

(2012). Effective inclusive schools: Designing successful schoolwide programs. Jossey-Bass.

22.

Henson

R. K.

(2001). Understanding internal consistency reliability estimates: A conceptual primer on coefficient alpha. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 34, 177–189.

23.

Hochschild

J. L.

Scovronick

N. B.

(2003). The American dream and the public schools. Oxford University Press.

24.

Huefner

D. S.

(2000). The risks and opportunities of the IEP requirements under IDEA ‘97. The Journal of Special Education, 33, 195–204. https://doi.org/10.1177/002246690003300402

25.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (1975).

26.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (1997).

27.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. §1400 et seq. (2004).

28.

Kozleski

E. B.

Artiles

Waitoller

(2004). Translating inclusive education: Equity concerns. In Florian

(Ed.), The handbook of specialeducation (pp. 231–249). SAGE.

29.

Kozleski

E. B.

Huber

J. J.

(2012). System-wide leadership for culturally-responsive education. In Crockett

J. B.

Billingsley

B. S.

Boscardin

M. L.

(Eds.), Handbook of leadership and administration for special education (pp. 155–169). Taylor & Francis.

30.

Kozleski

E. B.

Waitoller

F. R.

(2010). Teacher learning for inclusive education: Understanding teaching as a cultural and political practice. International Journal for Inclusive Education, 14, 655–666.

31.

Lassen

S. R.

Steele

M. M.

Sailor

(2006). The relationship of school-wide positive behavior supports to academic achievement in an urban middle school. Psychology in the Schools, 43(6), 701–712.

32.

Lembke

E. S.

Hampton

Beyers

S. J.

(2012). Response to intervention in mathematics: Critical elements. Psychology in the Schools, 49, 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21596

33.

McIntosh

Flannery

K. B.

Sugai

Braun

D. H.

Cochrane

K. L.

(2008). Relationships between academics and problem behavior in the transition from middle school to high school. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 10, 243–255. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300708318961

34.

McIntosh

Goodman

(2016). Integrated multi-tiered systems of support: Blending academic RTI and schoolwide PBIS. Guilford.

35.

McLeskey

(2011). Supporting improved practice for special education teachers: The importance of learner centered professional development. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24, 26–35.

36.

McLeskey

Waldron

N. L.

Redd

(2012). A case study of a highly effective, inclusive elementary school. The Journal of Special Education, 48, 59–70. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466912440455

37.

Montague

Jitendra

A. K.

(2012). Research-based mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities. In Forgasz

Rivera

(Eds.), Toward equity: Gender, culture, and diversity (pp. 481–502). Springer.

38.

Newton

J. S.

Algozzine

Horner

R. H.

Todd

A. W.

(2011). Building local capacity for training and coaching data-based problem solving with positive behavior intervention and support teams. Journal of Applied School Psychology, 27, 228–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377903.2011.590104

39.

Peetsma

Vergeer

Roeleveld

Karsten

(2001). Inclusion in education: Comparing pupils’ development in special and regular education. Educational Review, 53, 125–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910125044

40.

Raudenbush

S. W.

Bryk

A. S.

(2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed.). SAGE.

41.

Reardon

S. F.

Galindo

(2009). The Hispanic-White achievement gap in math and reading in the elementary grades. American Educational Research Journal, 46, 853–891. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831209333184

42.

Sailor

(2017). Equity as a basis for inclusive educational systems change. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 41, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1017/jse.2016.12

43.

Sailor

Burrello

L. C.

(2013). Shifting perspective to frame disability policy. In Burrello

L. C.

Sailor

Kleinhammer-Tramill

(Eds.), Unifying educational systems: Leadership and policy perspectives (pp. 21–40). Routledge.

44.

Sailor

McCart

A. B.

Choi

J. H.

(2018). Reconceptualizing inclusive education through multi-tiered system of support. Inclusion, 6(1), 3–18. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-6.1.3

45.

Sailor

Roger

(2005). Rethinking inclusion: Schoolwide applications. Phi Delta Kappan, 86, 503–509.

46.

Sailor

Roger

(2006). PBS in the urban core. TASH Connections, 32(1/2), 23–24.

47.

Sailor

Roger

(2008). SAMAN: An instrument for the analysis of selected critical features of the Schoolwide Applications Model (SAM) (2nd ed.). SAMSCHOOLS.

48.

Sailor

Wolf

Choi

J. H.

Roger

(2009). Sustaining positive behavior support in a context of comprehensive school reform. In Sailor

Dunlap

Sugai

Horner

(Eds.), Handbook of positive behavior support (pp. 633–670). Springer.

49.

Sailor

Zuna

Choi

J. H.

Thomas

McCart

Roger

(2006). Anchoring schoolwide positive behavior support in structural school reform. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 18–30. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.31.1.18

50.

Simmons

D. C.

Coyne

M. D.

Kwok

McDonagh

Harn

B. A.

Kame’enui

E. J

. (2008). Indexing response to intervention. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 41, 158–173. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219407313587

51.

Skrtic

T. M.

(1995). Deconstructing/reconstructing public education: Social reconstruction in the postmodern era. In Skrtic

T. M.

(Ed.), Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity (pp. 233–273). College Press.

52.

Sugai

Horner

R. H.

(2008). What we know and need to know about preventing problem behavior in schools. Exceptionality, 16(2), 67–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362830801981138

53.

Sugai

Lewis-Palmer

Todd

Horner

R. H.

(2001). School-wide evaluation tool (SET). Center for Positive Behavioral Supports, University of Oregon.

54.

U.S. Department of Education. (2013). Individual with Disabilities Education Improvement Act: Data accountability center. www.ideadata.org

55.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2003). Summary of major issues. http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/Policy/IDEA/regs.html

56.

Waldron

N. L.

McLeskey

Redd

(2011). Setting the direction: The role of the principal in developing an effective, inclusive school. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 24(2), 51–60.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.49 MB