Inclusive and collaborative intervention settings represent a restructuring of service delivery for students with special needs. This article contrasts traditional versus collaborative service delivery settings designed for students with language impairments. The Class Within a Class model (CWC) of collaborative practice is discussed and effective practices for adapting this model to use for a language intervention is explained. The described case study contrasts language gains when service delivery is changed from a pull-out model to the CWC model. Significantly more language gains were obtained when services were delivered through CWC.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Affleck, J.Q., Madge, S., Adams, A., & Lowenbraun, S. (1988). Integrated classroom versus resource model: Academic viability and effectiveness. Exceptional Children, 54(4), 339-348.
2.
Applebee, A.N. (1978). A child's concept of story: Ages two to seventeen . Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Friend, M., & Bursuck, W.D. (1999). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon .
8.
Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (1994). Inclusion schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60(4), 294-309.
9.
Hill, S., & Hill, T. (1990). The collaborative classroom: The guide to cooperative learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann .
10.
Hudson, F.G. (1989). Class within a class staff development workshop: Module III and module IV. Jefferson City: Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.
11.
Hudson, F.G. (1991). Effective teaching lessons. Unpublished workshop materials, University of Kansas, Department of Special Education, Kansas City.
12.
Idol, L. (1989). The resource/consulting teacher: An integrated model of service delivery. Remedial and Special Education , 10(6), 38-48.
13.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1990, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
14.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997, Pub. L. No. 105-17.
15.
Landers, M.R., & Weaver, H.R. (1997). Inclusive education: A process, not a placement . Swampscott, MA: Watersun.
16.
Larkin, M.J., & Ellis, E.S. (1998). Adolescents with learning disabilities. In B. Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (2nd ed.; pp.557-584). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
17.
McCormick, L., Loeb, D.F., Schiefelbusch, R.L. (1997). Supporting children with communication difficulties in inclusive settings: School-based language intervention. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
18.
McKinney, J.D., & Hocutt, A.M. (1988). The need for policy analysis in evaluating the regular education initiative. Journal of Learning Disabilities , 21(1), 12-18.
19.
McLeskey, J., Henry, D., & Axelrod, M.I. (1999). Inclusion of students with learning disabilities: An examination of data from reports to Congress. Exceptional Children, 66(1), 55-66.
20.
Moran, M.R. (1984). Excellence at the cost of instructional equality? The potential impact of recommended reforms upon low achieving students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 16(7), 1-12.
21.
Murray, C., Anderson, J., Bersani, H., & Mesaros, R. (1986). Qualitative research methods in special education: Ethnography, microethnography, and ethology. Journal of Special Education Technology, 7, 15-31.
22.
Naremore, R.C., Densmore, A.E., & Harman, D.R. (1995). Language interventions with school-aged children . San Diego, CA: Singular.
23.
Palincsar, A.S., & Klenk, L. (1992). Fostering literacy learning in supportive contexts . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 25, 211-225.
24.
Pehrsson, R.S., & Denner, P.R. (1988). Semantic organizers: Implications for reading and writing. Topics in Language Disorders, 8(3), 24-37.
25.
Reid, D.K. (2000). Discourse in classrooms. In K. Fahey & D. Reid (Eds.), Language development, differences and disorders (pp. 3-38). Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
26.
Schneider, P., & Watkins, R.V. (1996). Applying Vygotskian developmental theory to language intervention. Language, Speech, and Hearing in Schools, 27, 159-169.
27.
Semel, E., Wiig, E.H., & Secord, W. (1987). Clinical evaluation of language functions-Revised . San Antonio: Psychological Corp.
Simon, C.S. (1987). Out of the broom closet and into the classroom: The emerging SLP. Journal of Childhood Communication Development , 11 (1), 41-66.
30.
Simpson, R.L., Myles, B.S., & Simpson, J.D. (1997). Inclusion of students with disabilities in general education settings: Structuring for successful management. In P. Zionts (Ed.), Inclusion strategies for students with learning and behavior problems: Perspectives, experiences, and best practices (pp. 171-196). Austin, TX: PRO-ED .
31.
Slavin, R.E. (1990). General education under the regular education initiative: How must it change? Remedial and Special Education , 11 (3), 41-66.
32.
Stainback, S., & Stainback, W. (1992). Curriculum considerations in inclusive classrooms: Facilitating learning for all students. Baltimore: Brookes.
33.
Swenson, N.C. (1998). Effectiveness of language interventions in collaborative co-teaching classrooms with elementary-aged students and impact on self-concept and social integration: In the Class Within A Class model. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Kansas , Lawrence.
34.
Walsh, J. (1992). Student, teacher, and parent preferences for less restrictive special education models—Cooperative teaching. Case in Point, 6, 1-11.
35.
Will, M. (1986). Educating students with learning problems—A shared responsibility, Exceptional Children, 52, 411-415.
