APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTION IN CLASSROOMS WITH DIVERSE LEARNERS REQUIRES A VARIETY OF INSTRUCTIONAL METHODS TO ADDRESS INDIVIDUAL NEEDS. MANY EDUCATORS, HOWEVER, FIND THEMSELVES PHILOSOPHICALLY TIED TO ONE INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH FOR EVERY LEARNER TO THE EXCLUSION OF OTHER APPROACHES. THIS ALLEGIANCE TO ONE METHOD OF TEACHING REDUCES CHOICES FOR TEACHERS AND STUDENTS. STRICT ADHERENCE TO A LIMITED VIEW OF LEARNING CAN ALSO HINDER INCLUSION EFFORTS BY DENYING SOME STUDENTS APPROPRIATE INSTRUCTION. A CONTINUUM OF TEACHING METHODS THAT INCLUDES “EXPLICIT” AND “IMPLICIT” INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACHES IS PROPOSED AS A MORE INCLUSIVE ALTERNATIVE. RESEARCH THAT SUPPORTS A CONTINUUM OF APPROACHES IS REPORTED ALONG WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR CLASSROOM INSTRUCTION AND TEACHER EDUCATION.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adams, M. J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
Allen, J. (1988). Literacy development in whole language kindergartens (Tech. Rep. No. 436). Urbana: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Center for the Study of Reading. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 300 780)
3.
Allsopp, D. H. (1995). Classwide peer tutoring and the acquisition of algebra problem-solving skills for middle school students at risk for math failure in mainstream general math classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
4.
Blanton, L. P., Blanton, W. E., & Cross, L. S. (1994). An exploratory study of how general and special education teachers think and make instructional decisions about students with special needs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 17, 62–74.
5.
Bradley, L., & Bryant, P. E. (1985). Rhyme and reason in reading and spelling.Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
6.
Chall, J. S. (1983). Learning to read: The great debate (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
7.
Chall, J. S. (1989). Learning to read: The great debate 20 years later. Phi Delta Kappan, 70, 521–538.
8.
Christenson, S., Thurlow, M., Ysseldyke, J., & McVicar, R. (1989). Written language instruction for students with mild handicaps: Is there enough quantity to ensure quality?Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 219–229.
9.
Cipani, E. (1995). Inclusive education: What do we know and what do we still have to learn?Exceptional Children, 61, 498–500.
10.
Dixon, R., & Carnine, D. (1994). Ideologies, practices, and their implications for special education. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 356–367.
11.
Engelmann, S. (1988). The direct instruction follow through model: Design and outcomes. Education and Treatment of Children, 11, 303–317.
12.
Evans, M. A., & Carr, T. H. (1985). Cognitive abilities, conditions of learning, and the early development of reading skill. Reading Research Quarterly, 20, 327–350.
13.
Graham, S. (1990). The role of production factors in learning disabled students' compositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 781–791.
14.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. R. (1994). Implications of constructivism for teaching writing to students with special needs. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 275–289.
15.
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1994). Constructivism: Principles, paradigms, and integration. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 233–247.
16.
Heshusius, L. (1989). The Newtonian-mechanistic paradigm, special education, and contours of alternatives: An overview. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22, 403–415.
17.
Heshusius, L. (1991). Curriculum-based assessment and direct instruction: Critical reflections on fundamental assumptions. Exceptional Children, 57, 315–329.
18.
Howell, K. W., Fox, S. L., & Morehead, M. K. (1993). Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision-making (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
19.
Isaacson, S. (1989). Confused dichotomies: A response to DuCharme, Earl, and Poplin. Learning Disability Quarterly, 12, 243–247.
20.
Iverson, S., & Tunmer, W. E. (1993). Phonological processing skills and the Reading Recovery Program. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 112–126.
21.
Jenkins, J. R., Jewell, M., Leicester, N., O'Connor, R. E., Jenkins, L. M., & Troutner, N. M. (1994). Accommodations for individual differences without classroom ability groups: An experiment in school restructuring. Exceptional Children, 60, 344–358.
22.
Lane, H. B. (1994). The effects of explicit instruction in contextual application of phonological awareness on the reading skills of first-grade students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, Gainesville.
23.
Liberman, I. Y., & Liberman, A. M. (1990). Whole language vs. code-emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 40, 51–77.
24.
Mather, N., & Roberts, R. (1994). Learning disabilities: A field in danger of extinction?Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9, 49–58.
25.
Mercer, C. D. (in press). Students with learning disabilities (5th ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall.
26.
Mercer, C. D., Jordan, L., & Miller, S. P. (1994). Implications of constructivism for teaching math to students with moderate to mild disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 290–306.
27.
Mercer, C. D., & Miller, S. P. (1992). Strategic Math Series: Multiplication facts 0 to 81.Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises.
28.
Moshman, D. (1982). Exogenous, endogenous, and dialectical constructivism. Developmental Review, 2, 371–384.
29.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for school mathematics.Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.
30.
National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities. (1994). Collective perspectives on issues affecting learning disabilities: Position papers and statements.Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
31.
Palincsar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1986). Interactive teaching to promote independent learning from text. The Reading Teacher, 39, 771–777.
32.
Palincsar, A., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 211–225.
33.
Poplin, M. S. (1988). The reductionist fallacy in learning disabilities: Replicating the past by reducing the present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21, 389–400.
34.
Reyes, M. (1991). A process approach to literacy using dialogue journals and literature logs with second language learners. Research in the Teaching of English, 25, 291–313.
35.
Schumaker, J. B., Denton, P. H., & Deshler, D. D (1984). The paraphrasing strategy.Lawrence: The University of Kansas.
36.
Schumm, J. S., & Vaughn, S. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students. Remedial and Special Education, 12, 18–27.
37.
Schumm, J. S., Vaughn, S., Haager, D., McDowell, J., Rothlein, L., & Saumell, L. (1995). General education teacher planning: What can students with learning disabilities expect?Exceptional Children, 61, 335–352.
38.
Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1994). The construction of scientific knowledge by students with mild disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 307–321.
39.
Slavin, R. E, Madden, N. A., Dolan, L. J., Wasik, B. A., Ross, S. M., & Smith, L. J. (1994). “Whenever and wherever we choose”: The replication of “Success for All.”Phi Delta Kappan, 75, 639–647.
40.
Spiegel, D. L. (1992). Blending whole language and systematic direct instruction. The Reading Teacher, 46, 38–44.
41.
Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–406.
42.
Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Constructivism in reading education. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 259–274.
43.
Vaughn, S., Schumm, J., Elbaum, B., Saumell, L., Cohen, P., Caballero, K., Duryea, J., & Gonzalez, M. (1995, March). Effective inclusive practices: From implementation to evaluation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Learning Disabilities Association of America, Orlando, FL.
44.
Warren, S. T., & Yoder, P. J. (1994). Communication and language intervention: Why a constructivist approach is insufficient. The Journal of Special Education, 28, 248–258.
45.
Wise, B. W. (1991). What reading disabled children need: What is known and how to talk about it. Learning and Individual Differences, 3, 307–321.
46.
Zigmond, N., Jenkins, J., Fuchs, L. S., Deno, S., Fuchs, D., Baker, J. N., Jenkins, L., & Couthino, M. (1995). Special education in restructured schools: Findings from three multi-year studies. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 531–540.
