Ecobehavioral Assessment of Instructional Contexts in Bilingual Special Education Programs for English Language Learners at Risk for Developmental Disabilities
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online February, 2003
Ecobehavioral Assessment of Instructional Contexts in Bilingual Special Education Programs for English Language Learners at Risk for Developmental Disabilities
This article presents empirical data using The Ecobehavioral System for the Contextual Recording of Interactional Bilingual Environments to examine the instructional context, teacher behavior, and academic engaged behavior for English language learners at risk for developmental disabilities in general education and bilingual special education programs. Thirty-six English language learners at risk for developmental disabilities were observed for 6 full school days each, for a total of 213 days and 1,491 hours, within 4 elementary-level school settings and 26 different classrooms. The results revealed that (a) the most frequently taught subjects were math (20%), reading (18%), and language arts (16%); (b) English was the most frequently used language of instruction (58%); and (c) students were actively engaged in academic behaviors for slightly less than half of a typical school day (44%).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
American Education Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education. (1985). Standards of educational and psychological testing . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
2.
Arreaga-Mayer, C. (1993). Ecobehavioral assessment of exceptional culturally and linguistically diverse students: Evaluating effective bilingual special education programs. Paper presented at the Third National Research Symposium on Limited English Proficient Student Issues: Focus on Middle and High School Issues, Washington, DC.
3.
Arreaga-Mayer, C., Carta, J., & Tapia, Y. (1994). Ecobehavioral assessment of bilingual special education settings: The opportunity to respond. In R Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. E. Eshelman, & T. A. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 226-239). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
4.
Arreaga-Mayer, C., Tapia, Y., & Carta, J.J. (1992). Ecobehavioral system for the contextual recording of interactional bilingual environments. Training manual. Kansas City: University of Kansas, Juniper Gardens Children's Project.
5.
August, D., & Hakuta, K. (1997). Improving schooling for language-minority children: A research agenda. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6.
Baca, L.M., & Cervantes, H.T. (1998). The bilingual special education interface. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
7.
Baker, K., & DeKanter, A. (1981). Effectiveness of bilingual education: A review of the literature. (Final report to the White House Regulatory Analysis and Review Group). Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Budget and Evaluation.
8.
Bulgren, J.A., & Carta, J.J. (1992). Examining the instructional contexts of students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59(3), 182-191.
9.
Carta, J.J., Greenwood, C.R., & Atwater, J. (1985). Ecobehavioral system for the complex assessment of preschool environments: ESCAPE. Kansas City: University of Kansas, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, Bureau of Child Research.
10.
Carta, J.J., Greenwood, C.R., Schulte, D., Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Terry, B. (1987). Code for the instructional structure and student academic response: Mainstream version (MS-CISSAR). Kansas City: University of Kansas, Juniper Gardens Children's Project, Bureau of Child Research.
11.
Dyches, T., Wilder, L.K., & Obiakor, F.E. (2002). Autism: Multicultural perspectives. In T. Wahlberg, F. E. Obiakor , S. Burkhardt, & A. F. Rotatori (Eds.), Autistic spectrum disorders: Educational and clinical interventions (Advances in Special Education, Vol. 14, pp. 151-177). Stamford, CT: JAI Press.
12.
Garcia, G.E., & Pearson, P.D. (1994). Assessment and diversity. Review of Research in Education, 20, 337-391.
13.
Gersten, R., & Baker, S. (2000). The professional knowledge base on instructional practices that support cognitive growth for English-language learners. In R. Gersten, E. P. Schiller, & S. Vaughn (Eds.), Contemporary special education research: Syntheses of the knowledge base on critical instructional issues (pp. 31-79). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Greenwood, C.R. (1991). A longitudinal analysis of time to learn, engagement, and academic achievement in urban versus suburban schools. Exceptional Children, 57, 521-535.
15.
Greenwood, C.R. (1996). The case for performance-based instructional models . School Psychology Quarterly, 11, 283-296.
16.
Greenwood, C.R., Carta, J.J., & Atwater, J. (1991). Ecobehavioral analysis in the classroom. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 1, 59-77.
17.
Greenwood, C.R., Carta, J.J., Kamps, D., & Delquadri, J.C. (1997). Ecobehavioral Assessment Systems Software (EBASS Version 3.0): Practitioner's manual. Kansas City: University of Kansas, Juniper Gardens Children's Project.
18.
Greenwood, C.R., & Delquadri, J.C. (1988). Code for instructional structure and student academic response: CISSAR. In M. Hersen & A. S. Bellack (Eds.), Dictionary of behavioral assessment techniques (pp. 120-122). New York: Pergamon.
19.
Greenwood, C.R., Delquadri, J.C., & Hall, V.R. (1984). Opportunity to respond and student academic performance . In W. Heward, T. Heron, D. Hill, & J. Trap-Porter (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education (pp. 58-88). Columbus, OH: Merrill .
Greenwood, C.R., Hart, B., Walker, D., & Risley, T. (1994). The opportunity to respond and academic performance revisited: A behavioral theory of developmental retardation and its prevention . In R. Gardner III, D. M. Sainato, J. O. Cooper, T. E. Heron, W. L. Heward, J. Eshleman , & T. A. Grossi (Eds.), Behavior analysis in education: Focus on measurably superior instruction (pp. 213-224). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
23.
Hollowood, T.M., Salisbury, C.L., Rain-forth, B., & Palombaro, M.M. (1995). Use of instructional time in classrooms serving students with and without severe disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61, 242-253.
24.
Hunt, P., Farron-Davis, F., Beckstead, S., Curtis, D., & Goetz, L. (1994). Evaluating the effects of placements of students with severe disabilities within the context of cooperative learning groups . Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps , 19, 200-214.
25.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, 20 U.S.C. §1401 (26).
26.
Kamps, D.M., Leonard, B.R., Dugan, E.P., Boland, D., & Greenwood, C.R. (1991). The use of ecobehavioral assessment to identify naturally occurring effective procedures in classrooms serving children with autism and other developmental disabilities. Journal of Behavioral Education, 1, 367-397.
27.
Kamps, D.M., Leonard, B.R., & Greenwood, C.R. (1991). Ecobehavioral assessment of students with autism and developmental disabilities. In R. J. Prinz (Ed.), Advances in behavioral assessment of children and families (Vol. 5, pp. 201-237). London: Kingsley.
28.
Logan, K.R., & Keefe, E.B. (1997). A comparison of instructional context, teacher behavior, and engaged behavior for students with severe disabilities in general education and self-contained elementary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 22, 16-27.
29.
Medina, M., Saldate, M., & Mishra, S. (1985). The sustaining effects of bilingual instruction: A follow-up study. Journal of InstructionalPsychology, 12(3), 132-139.
30.
Ysseldyke, J.E., Christenson, S.L., Thurlow, M.L., & Bakewell, D. (1989). Instructional tasks used by mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally disturbed and nonhandicapped elementary students (Research Report No. 2). Minneapolis: Instructional Alternatives Project, University of Minnesota.
