Sixteen elementary students were observed systematically over 2 entire school days to examine the nature of instruction and academic responding times during resource room instruction and mainstream classroom instruction. Data were recorded in six categories at 10-second intervals. Analyses of the results indicate that in the mainstream setting, the nature of instruction and academic responding was similar for LD students and their non-LD classmates. Similarly, when LD students were in the resource room and non-LD students were in the regular classroom, no statistical differences were found in the nature of instruction or in academic responding times of the two groups of students. Overall active academic responding time was low, even in the resource room, averaging just over 29 minutes of a 95-minute time period. Implications of the findings for practice and training of mainstream and resource room teachers are explored.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Acheson, K.A., & Gall, M.D.Techniques in the clinical supervision of teachers. New York: Longman, 1980.
2.
Algozzine, B., Christenson, S., & Ysseldyke, J.Probabilities associated with the referral to placement process. Teacher Education and Special Education, 1982, 5(3), 19-23.
3.
Bergan, J.Behavioral consultation. Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill, 1977.
Borg, W.Time and school learning. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education, 1980.
6.
Bryan, T.H., Wheeler, R., Felcan, J., & Henek, T."Come on dummy": An observational study of children's communication. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1976, 9(10), 661-669.
7.
Chapman, R.B., Larsen, S.C., & Parker, R.M.Interactions of first-grade teachers with learning disordered children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 1979, 12(4), 20-25.
8.
Cooley, W., & Leinhardt, G.The instructional dimensions study. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1980, 2, 7-24.
9.
Gaver, D., & Richards, H.Dimensions of naturalistic observation for the prediction of academic success . Journal of Educational Research, 1979, 72, 123-127.
10.
Good, T., & Grouws, D.Teaching effects: A process-product study in 4th grade mathematics classrooms . Journal of Teacher Education, 1977, 28, 49-54.
11.
Graden, J., Thurlow, M.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E.Instructional ecology and academic responding time for students at three levels of teacher-perceived behavioral competence . Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, in press.
12.
Graden, J.L., Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., & Algozzine, B.Instructional ecology and academic responding time for students in different reading groups (Research Report No. 79). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
13.
Greener, J.W., Thurlow, M.L., Graden, J.L., & Ysseldyke, J.E.The educational environment and students' responding times as a function of students' teacher-perceived academic competence (Research Report No. 86). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
14.
Greenwood, C.R., Delquadri, J., & Hall, R.V.Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response: CISSAR. Kansas City, Kans.: University of Kansas, Bureau of Child Research, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, 1978 .
15.
Greenwood, C., Delquadri, J., Stanley, S., Terry, B., & Hall, R.Process-product study of relationships among instructional ecology, student response, and academic achievement. Unpublished manuscript, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, 1981.
16.
Houck, C., & Given, B.Status of SLD programs: Indications from a teacher survey. Learning Disability Quarterly, 1981, 4, 320-325.
17.
Kepler, K.B.BTES: Implications for preservice education of teachers. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, D.C. : National Institute of Education, 1980.
18.
McKinney, J., Mason, J., Perkerson, K., & Clifford, M.Relationship between classroom behavior and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 1975, 67, 198-203.
19.
McNair, K., & Joyce, B.Teachers' thoughts while teaching: The South Bay study, Part II (Research Series No. 58). Lansing: Michigan State University, The Institute for Research on Teaching, 1979.
20.
Miller, L.BTES: Implications for staff development. in C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education, 1980.
21.
Muir, R.A teacher implements instructional changes using the BTES framework. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education, 1980.
22.
Noli, P.A principal implements BTES. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Education, 1980.
23.
Sargent, L.R.Resource teacher time utilization: An observational study. Exceptional Children, 1981, 47, 420-425.
24.
Stallings, J.Implementation and child effects of teaching practices in Follow-Through classrooms . Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development , 1975, 40 (Serial No. 163).
25.
Stanley, S.O., & Greenwood, C.R.CISSAR: Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response: Observer's manual. Kansas City, Kans.: University of Kansas, Bureau of Child Research, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, 1980.
26.
Thurlow, M.L., Graden, J., Greener, J.W., & Ysseldyke, J.E.Academic responding time for LD and non-LD students (Research Report No. 72). Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
27.
Thurlow, M.L., Ysseldyke, J.E., Graden, J., Greener, J.W., & Mecklenburg, C.Academic responding time for LD students receiving different levels of special education services (Research Report No. 78). Minneapolis : University of Minnesota, Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities, 1982.
28.
Ysseldyke, J.E., & Algozzine, B.Where to begin in diagnosing reading problems. Topics in Learning and Learning Disabilities, 1983, 2(4), 60-69.
29.
Zigmond, N., Vallecorsa, A., & Leinhardt, G.Reading instruction for students with learning disabilities. Topics in Language Disorders, 1980, 1(1), 89-98.
