BrowderD.FlowersC.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.KarvonenM.SpoonerF.AlgozzineR. (2004). The alignments of alternate assessment content with academic and functional curricula. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 211–223.
2.
BrowderD.SpoonerF.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.FlowersC.AlgozzineR.KarvonenM. (2004). A content analysis of the curricular philosophies reflected in states' alternate assessment performance indicators. Research & Practice for Persons With Severe Disabilities, 28, 165–181.
3.
BrowderD.SpoonerF.AlgozzineR.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.FlowersC.KarvonenM. (2003). What we know and need to know about alternate assessment. Exceptional Children, 70, 45–61.
4.
BrownL.BranstonM. B.Hamre-NietupskiS.PumpianI.CertoN.GruenwaldL. (1979). A strategy for developing chronological age-appropriate and functional curricular content for severely handicapped adolescents and young adults. The Journal of Special Education, 13, 81–90.
5.
CollinsB. C. (2007). Moderate to severe disabilities: A foundational approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
6.
CollinsB. C.EvansA.GallowayC. G.KarlA.MillerA. (2007). A comparison of the acquisition and maintenance of teaching functional and core content in special and general education settings. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 22, 220–233.
7.
CollinsB. C.HagerK. D.GallowayC. C. (in press). The addition of functional content during core content instruction with students with moderate disabilities. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities.
FalkenstineK. J.CollinsB. C.SchusterJ. W.KleinertK. (2009). Presenting chained and discrete tasks as nontargeted information when teaching discrete academic skills through small group instruction. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 127–142.
10.
JamesonJ.McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ.RiesenT.PolychronisS. (2007). A comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in the special education classroom. Education and Treatment of Children30, 23–44.
11.
KarlJ.CollinsB. C.HagerK. D.SchusterJ. W. (2010). Teaching core content embedded in a functional activity to students with moderate cognitive disabilities using a simultaneous prompting procedure. Unpublished manuscript.
12.
KleinertH.CollinsB. C.WickhamD.RiggsL.HagerK. (in press). Embedding life skills, self-determination, and enhancing social relationships and other evidence-based practices. In KearnsJ.KleinertH. (Eds.), Meaningful outcomes for students with significant cognitive disabilities: Alternate assessment on alternate achievement standards.
13.
ManleyK.CollinsB. C.StenhoffD. M.KleinertH. (2008). Using a system of least prompts procedure to teach telephone skills to elementary students with cognitive disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 17, 221–236.
14.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.PolychronisS.RiesenT. (2002). The effects of embedded instruction on students with moderate disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 363–377.
15.
McDonnellJ.JohnsonJ. W.PolychronisS.RiesenT.JamesonM.KercherK. (2006). Comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in general education classes with small group instruction in special education classes. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 41, 125–138.
16.
StokesT. F.OsnesP. G. (1986). Programming the generalization of children's social behavior. In StrainP. S.GuralnickM. J.WalkerH. J. (Eds.), Children's social behavior: Development, assessment, and modification (pp. 407–433). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
17.
WestlingD. L.FoxL. (2009). Teaching students with severe disabilities (4th Ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.