The purpose of this article is to carefully describe the content, implementation, and impact of a secondary education pilot program in which special educators provided services to regular educators and learning handicapped students in regular classrooms. Qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques were used to describe the content, implementation, and impact of the program. Implications for defining the characteristics of the structure and service delivery of an effective secondary program and teacher competencies needed for successful implementation are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aloia, G.F. (1983). Special educators' perceptions of their roles as consultants. Teacher Education and Special Education, 6, 83-87.
2.
Becker, H.S. (1958). Problems of inference and proof in participant observation. American Sociological Review, 28, 652-660.
3.
California State Department of Education. ( 1984). California Education Code, Part 30, Section 56337. Special education programs: Eligibility criteria for special education and related services on the basis of language and speech disorder or specific learning disabilities.
4.
Davis, W.E. (1983). Competencies and skills required to be an effective resource teacher. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 16, 596-598.
5.
Deshler, D.D., Lowrey, N., & Alley, G.R. (1979). Programming alternatives for learning adolescents: A nationwide survey. Academic Therapy, 14, 389-397.
6.
Ellen, R.F (Ed.). (1984). Ethnographic research: A guide to general conduct. New York: Academic Press.
7.
Gottlieb, J., & Leyser, Y. (1981). Friendship between mentally retarded and non-retarded children. In S. Asher & J. Gottman (Eds.), The development of children's friendships (pp. 150-181). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Hagerty, G.J., & Abramson, M. (1987). Impediments to implementing national policy change for mildly handicapped students. Exceptional Children, 53, 315-323.
9.
Heron, T.E., & Harris, K.C. (1987). The educational consultant: Helping professionals, parents, and mainstreamed students (2nd ed.). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
10.
Idol-Maestas, L., & Ritter, S. (1985). A follow-up study of resource/onsulting teachers: Factors that facilitate and inhibit teacher consultation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 8, 121-131.
11.
Kaufman, M.J., Gottlieb, J., Agard, J.A., & Kukic, M.B. (1975). Mainstreaming: Toward an explication of the constructFocus on Exceptional Children, 71-12.
12.
Keogh, B.K., & Levitt, M.L. (1976). Special education in the mainstream: A confrontation of limitations? Focus on Exceptional Children, 8, 1-11.
13.
MacMillan, D.L., & Becker, L.D. (1977). Mainstreaming the mildly handicapped learner. In R.D. Kneedler & S.G. Tarver (Eds.), Changing perspectives in special education (pp. 208-227). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
14.
Reynolds, M.C., Wang, M.C., & Walberg, H.J. (1987). The necessary restructuring of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 53, 391-398.
15.
Stainback, W., Stainback, S., Courtnage, L., & Jaben, T. (1985). Facilitating mainstreaming by modifying the mainstream . Exceptional Children, 53, 77-79.
16.
Wang, M.C., & Birch, J.W. (1984). Effective special education in regular classes . Exceptional Children, 53, 77-79.
17.
West, J.F., Cannon, G.S., & Brown, P.A. (1986). National delphi study on essential collaborative consultation competencies for regular and special education. (Available from Dr. J. Frederick West, Research and Training Institute on School Consultation, Department of Special Education, the University of Texas at Austin).
