The purpose of the investigation was to study Academic Learning Time (ALT) of mainstreamed handicapped and nonhandicapped students. ALT was obtained on 60 nonhandicapped and 60 mainstreamed handicapped students in elementary school physical education classes. Subjects were selected from the classes of 7 teachers classified as individualized instruction users and 7 teachers classified as nonusers. A 2 × 2 analysis of variance was used in the data analysis. Results indicated that the students in the classes of users of individualized instruction were engaged in a significantly greater amount of ALT than were students of nonusers. There was no significant difference in the amount of ALT engaged in by mainstreamed handicapped and regular students.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, W. A., & Barrette, G. T.What's going on in gym: Descriptive studies in physical education. Motor Skills: Theory into Practice, 1978. (Monograph 1)
2.
Berliner, D. C.Tempus educare. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. WalbergResearch on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications.Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchan, 1979.
Costello, J., & Laubach, S. A.Student behavior. In W. A. Anderson & G. T. BarretteWhat's going on in gym: Descriptive studies in physical education. Motor Skills: Theory into Practice1978, 11–24. (Monograph 1)
5.
Crowe, P. D. An observational study of teacher's expectancy effects and their mediating mechanisms. AAHPER Research Consortium symposium papers: Teaching behavior and women in sports (Vol. 2, Book 1), 1979, 17–21.
6.
Hall, G. E., Loucks, S. F.A developmental model for determining whether the treatment is actually implemented. American Educational Research Journal, 1977, 14: 263–276
7.
Hall, G. E., Loucks, S. F., Rutherford, W. L., & Newlove, B. W.Levels of use of the innovation: A framework for analyzing innovation adoption. Journal of Teacher Education, 1975, 26(1), 52–56.
8.
Hawkins, R. P., & Dotson, V. A.Reliability scores that delude: An Alice in Wonderland trip through misleading characteristics of interobserver agreement scores in interval recording. In E. Ramp & G. SembBehavior analysis: Areas of research and application.Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1975.
9.
Hersen, M., & Barlow, D.Single case experimental designs.New York: Pergamon Press, 1976
10.
Jernstedt, G. C.The relative effectiveness of individualized and traditional instruction methods. Journal of Educational Research, 1976, 69: 211–218
11.
Locke, L.Research on teaching physical education: New hope for a dismal science. Quest, 1977, 28: 2–16
12.
Loucks, S. F., Newlove, B. W., & Hall, G. E.Measuring Levels of Use of the innovation: A manual for trainers, interviewers, and raters.Austin, Texas: Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, 1975
13.
Martinek, T. J. A model for the study of Pygmalion effects in physical education. AAHPER Research Consortium symposium papers: Teaching behavior and women in sports (Vol. 2, Book 1), 1979, 7–12.
14.
Medley, D. M.The effectiveness of teachers. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. WalbergResearch on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications.Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchan, 1979.
15.
Miller, R. L.Individualized instruction in mathematics: A review of research. Mathematics Teacher, 1976, 69: 345–351
16.
Rosenshine. B. V.Content, time and direct instruction. In P. L. Peterson & H. J. WalbergResearch on teaching: Concepts, findings, and implications.Berkeley, Calif.: McCutchan, 1979.
17.
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobson, L.Pygmalion in the classroom.New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1968
18.
Taylor, P.Student performance and attitudes in contingency management course. Journal of Experimental Education, 1975, 43: 55–60
19.
Yarber, W. L.Comparing contract and traditional grading techniques for ninth grade students. Education, 1975, 95: 363–367
