The flow of the planning process model was used to investigate one science and two social studies middle school teachers' preplanning, interactive planning, and postplanning for students with learning disabilities who were mainstreamed into their general education classes. Data were collected from interviews, classroom observations, free-flowing commentary of their lesson plans (think alouds), teachers' planning, videotaped teaching episodes, stimulated recalls, rating scales, and open-ended questions. data analysis revealed that content coverage, classroom/student management, and interest/motivation of the individual student are themes that guide teachers' planning. Teachers' practices and comments reflected little discourse pertaining to knowledge acquisition or planning for students with learning disabilities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alvermann, D. E., O'Brien, D. G., & Dillon, D. R. (1990). What teachers do when they say they're having discussions of content area reading assignments: A qualitative analysis. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 296–322.
2.
Baker, J. M., & Zigmond, N. (1990). Are regular education classes equipped to accommodate students with learning disabilities?Exceptional Children, 56, 515–526.
3.
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1989). Educational research: An introduction (5th ed.). New York: Longman.
4.
Borko, H., Eisenhart, M., Kello, M., & Vandett, N. (1984). Teachers as decision-makers versus technicians. In J. Niles & L. Harris (Eds.), Thirty-third yearbook of the National Reading Conference (pp. 124–131). Rochester, NY: National Reading Conference.
5.
Borko, H., & Livingston, C. (1989). Cognition and improvisation: Differences in mathematics instruction by expert and novice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 26, 473–498.
6.
Bos, C. S., & Richardson, V. (in press). Qualitative research and learning disabilities. In S. Vaughn & C. S. Bos (Eds.), Learning disabilities: Theory, methodology, assessment and ethics. New York: Springer-Verlag.
7.
Brown, D. S. (1988). Twelve middle-school teachers' planning. Elementary School Journal, 89(1), 69–87.
8.
Clark, C. M., & Elmore, J. L. (1981). Transforming curriculum in mathematics, science, and writing: A case study of teacher yearly planning (Research Series No. 99). East Lansing: Michigan State University Institute for Research on Teaching.
9.
Clark, C. M., & Joyce, B. R. (1981). Teacher decision-making and teaching effectiveness. In B.R. Joyce & L. Peck (Eds.), Flexibility in teaching: An excursion into the nature of teaching and training (pp. 228–235). New York: Longman.
10.
Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1981). Stimulated-recall. In B. R. Joyce, C. C. Brown, & L. Peck (Eds.), Flexibility in teaching: An excursion into the nature of teaching and training (pp. 256–261). New York: Longman.
11.
Clark, C. M., & Peterson, P. L. (1986). Teachers' thought processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching (3rd ed.255–296). New York: Macmillan.
12.
Coleman, L. J. (1992). Reflections on the cognitive map of a master teacher conducting discussions with gifted students. Exceptionality: A Research Journal, 3(1), 49–53.
13.
Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
14.
Durkin, D. (1990). Matching classroom instruction with reading abilities: An unmet need. Remedial and Special Education, 11(3), 23–28.
15.
Farrell, E., Peguero, G., Lindsey, R., & White, R. (1988). Giving voice to high school students: Pressure and boredom, ya know what I'm sayin'. American Educational Research Journal, 25, 489–502.
16.
Gersten, R., Darch, C., Davis, G., & George, N. (1991). Apprenticeship and intensive training of consulting teachers: A naturalistic study. Exceptional Children, 57, 226–236.
17.
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago: Aldine.
18.
Goldstein, S., Strickland, B., Turnbull, A. P., & Curry, L. (1980). An observational analysis of the IEP Conference. Exceptional Children, 46, 278–286.
19.
Huefner, D. S. (1988). The consulting teacher model: Risks and opportunities. Exceptional Children, 54, 403–414.
Jenkins, J. R., & Leicester, N. (1992). Specialized instruction within general education: A case study of one elementary school. Exceptional Children, 58, 555–563.
22.
Joyce, B. R. (1991). The doors to school improvement. Educational Leadership, 48(8), 59–62.
23.
Lalik, R. V., & Niles, J. A. (1990). Collaborative planning by two groups of student teachers. Elementary School Journal, 90, 319–336.
24.
Lampert, M., & Clark, C. M. (1990). Expert knowledge and expert thinking in teaching: A response to Floden and Klinzing. Educational Researcher, 19(5), 21–23.
25.
McCutcheon, G. (1980). How do elementary school teachers plan? The nature of planning and influences on it. Elementary School Journal, 81(1), 4–23.
26.
McIntosh, R., Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Haager, D., & Lee, O. (in press). Observations of students with learning disabilities in general education classrooms: You don't bother me and I won't bother you. Exceptional Children.
27.
McNair, K. (1978--1979). Capturing inflight decisions: Thought while teaching. Educational Research Quarterly, 3(4), 26–42.
28.
Morine-Dershimer, G. (1978). Planning and classroom reality: An in-depth look. Educational Research Quarterly, 3(4), 83–99.
29.
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1992). School reform: Opportunities for excellence and equity for individuals with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 276–280.
30.
Peterson, P. L., Marx, R. W., & Clark, C. M. (1978). Teacher planning, teacher behavior, and student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 15, 417–432.
31.
Schumm, J. S., & Vaughn, S. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students: General classroom teachers' perspectives. Remedial and Special Education, 12(4), 18–27.
32.
Schumm, J. S., & Vaughn, S. (1992). Planning for mainstreamed special education students: Perceptions of general classroom teachers. Exceptionality, 3, 81–98.
33.
Schumm, J. S., Vaughn, S., Haager, D., McDowell, J., Rothlein, L., & Saumell, L. (in preparation). Teachers' planning for mainstreamed special education students.
34.
Schumm, J. S., Vaughn, S., & Saumell, L. (1992). What teachers do when the textbook is tough: Students speak out. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24, 481–503.
35.
Stewart, D. W., & Shamdasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
36.
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Vaughn, S., Bos, C. S., Harrell, J. E., & Lasky, B. A. (1988). Parent participation in the initial placement/IEP Conference ten years after mandated involvement. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 82–89.
38.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., & Kouzekanani, K. (in press). What do students with learning disabilities think when their general education teachers make adaptations?Journal of Learning Disabilities.
39.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J. S., Niarhos, F., & Gordon, J. (in press). Students' perceptions of two hypothetical teachers' instructional adaptations for low achievers. Elementary School Journal.
40.
Verloop, N. (1989). Interactive cognitions of student-teachers: An intervention study. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Institute for Educational Measurement, Arnheim, The Netherlands.
41.
West, J. F., & Idol, L. (1990). Collaborative consultation in the education of mildly handicapped and at-risk students. Remedial and Special Education, 11(1), 22–31.
42.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
43.
Yinger, R. J. (1977). A study of teacher planning: Description and theory development using ethnographic and information book methods. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing.
