As legislation designed to protect the rights of handicapped and minority groups through mainstreaming comes into force, questions arise as to what actually happens to mainstreamed children in the classroom. Two types of achievement are posited: social and educational; but the dearth of instrumentation to measure social achievement and the relative simplicity of measuring educational achievement has led to an unbalanced emphasis on the latter. Sociometric choices mapped through Smallest Space Analysis generate maps that depart radically from traditional target sociograms and provide new bases for assessing social achievement. Examples are presented on the use of the technique in assessing these mainstreaming effects in the classroom in Israel and in California.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, E.The disabled schoolchild: A study of integration in primary schools. Scanton, PaBarnes and Noble, 1973.
2.
Becker M.Sociometric location and innovativeness. American Sociological Review, 1970, 35, 267-282.
3.
Boyle, R.Algebraic systems for normal and hierarchical sociograms. Sociometry, 1969,32, 99-119.
4.
Brown, D.Helping adolescents win social acceptance. The High School Journal, 1955, 38, 157-162.
5.
Carithers, M.School desegregation and racial cleavage 1954-1970: A review of the literature . Journal of Social Issues, 1970 , 26(4), 25-27.
6.
Chenault, J.Improving the social acceptance of unpopular educable mentally retarded pupils in special classes. American Journal Mental Deficiency , 1967, 72, 455-458.
7.
Davis, J.Clustering and hierarchy in interpersonal relations. American Sociological review, 1970, 35, 843-852.
8.
Davis, J., Holland, P., & Leinhardt, S. Comment. American Sociological Review, 1971, 36, 309-311.
9.
Glidewell, J.Socialization and social structure in the classroom in Hoffman and Hoffman (Eds.). Review of child development research (Vol. II). New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1966.
10.
Granovetter, M.The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology , 1973, 78, 1360-80.
11.
Guttman, L.What is not what in statistics. The Statistician. 1977, 26(2), 81-107.
12.
Karnes, M.Evaluation and implications of research with young handicapped and low income children. In J. Stanley (Ed.), Compensatory education, ages 2-8: Recent studies of educational intervention . Baltimore : Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973.
13.
Killworth, P., & Bernard, H.R.Informant accuracy in social network data. Human Organization , 1976, 35(3), 269-286.
14.
Laumann, E.Friends of urban men: An assessment of accuracy in reporting their socioeconomic attributes, mutal choice and attitude agreement. Sociometry , 1969, 32, 54-69.
15.
Laumann, Ed. (Ed.). Bonds of pluralism: The form and substance of urban social networks. New York: Wiley, 1973.
16.
Laumann, E., & Pappi, F.New directions in the study of community élites. American Sociological Review, 1973, 38, 212-230.
17.
Lilly, M.Improving social acceptance of low sociometric status, low achieving students . Exceptional Children, 1971, 37, 341-347.
18.
Lingoes, J.The Guttman-Lingoes non metric program series. Ann Arbor, Mich.: Mathesis Press, 1973.
19.
Mazur, A.Comment on Davis' graph models. ASR, 1971, 36, 308-309.
20.
McFarland, D., & Brown, D.Social distance as a metric: A systematic introduction to Smallest Space Analysis . In E. Laumann (Ed.), Bonds of pluralism: The form and substance of urban social networks, New York: Wiley, 1973.
21.
Meacham, M., & Wiesen, A.Changing classroom behaviour. New York: Intext Educational Publishers, 1974.
22.
Northway, M.A method for depicting social relationships obtained by sociometric testing . Sociometry. 1940, 3, 144-150.
23.
Northway, M.A primer of sociometry. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1952.
Rucker, C., & Vincenzo, F.Maintaining social acceptance gains made by mentally retarded children . Exceptional Children, 1970, 36, 679-680.
26.
St. John, N., & Lewis, R.Race and the social structure of the elementary classroom. Sociology of Education, 1975, 48, 346-368.
27.
Sarason, I., Glaser, E., & Fargo, C.Reinforcing productive classroom behaviour. New York: Behavioral Publishers, 1972 .
28.
Schmuck, R.Helping teachers improve classroom group processes. Journal of Applied Behavioural Science, 1968, 4(4), 401-435.
29.
Thelen, H.Classroom grouping for teachability. New York: Wiley, 1967.
30.
Bernard, H.R., & Killworth, P.Informant accuracy in social network data II (Report No. BK-112-76) . Department of Sociology/Anthropology, West Virginia University, Morgantown, W.V., 1976 .
