Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2006-9
Participation of Students with Moderate to Severe Disabilities in the General Curriculum: The Effects of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction
This study investigated the effects of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (SDLMI) on the academic skill performance of three junior high school students with moderate to severe intellectual disabilities. The academic skills taught were aligned to the district general curriculum, and extended benchmarks were individually determined. The students were instructed to engage in a self-regulated problem-solving strategy, as well as to use one or more additional student-directed learning strategies. The results suggested that all students were able to acquire and maintain target academic skills to mastery levels. Also, all stakeholders had positive perceptions about the value of such instruction. The implications of these findings relative to the general curriculum initiative are discussed.
AgranM.AlperS. (2000). Curriculum and instruction in general education: Implications for service delivery and teacher preparation. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25, 167–174.
2.
AgranM.AlperS.WehmeyerM. (2002). Access to the general curriculum for students with significant disabilities: What it means to teachers. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 123–133.
3.
AgranM.BlanchardC.WehmeyerM. L. (2000). Promoting transition goals and self-determination through student self-directed learning: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35, 351–364.
4.
AgranM.BlanchardC.WehmeyerM.HughesC. (2002). Increasing the problem-solving skills of students with severe disabilities participating in general education. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 279–288.
5.
AgranM.King-SearsM. E.WehmeyerM. L.CopelandS. R. (2003). Teachers' guides to inclusive practices: Student-directed learning. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
6.
AgranM.SnowK.SwanerJ. (1999). Teacher perceptions of self-determination: Benefits, characteristics, strategies. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 34, 291–301.
7.
AgranM.WehmeyerM. (1999). Teaching problem solving to students with mental retardation. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
8.
BillingsleyF. F.KelleyB. (2004). An examination of the acceptability of instructional practices for students with severe disabilities in general education settings. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 75–83.
9.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.AlgozzineR.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.FlowersC.KarvonenM. (2003). What do we know and need to know about alternate assessment. Exceptional Children, 70, 45–61.
10.
BrownF.GothelfC. R.GuessD.LehrD. H. (1998). Self-determination for individuals with the most severe disabilities: Moving beyond chimera. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 23, 17–26.
11.
CarterE. W.CushingL. S.ClarkN. M.KennedyC. H. (2005). Effects of peer support interventions on students' access to the general curriculum and social interactions. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30, 15–25.
12.
GrigalM.NeubertD. A.MoonM. S.GrahamS. (2003). Self-determination for students with disabilities: Views of parents and teachers. Exceptional Children, 70, 97–112.
13.
JacksonL.RyndakD. E.BillingsleyF. (2000). Useful practices in inclusive education: A preliminary view of what experts in moderate to severe disabilities are saying. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 25, 129–141.
KazdinA. E. (1982). Single-case research designs: Methods for clinical and applied settings. New York: Oxford.
16.
KlingnerJ. K.VaughnS. (1999). Students' perceptions of instruction in inclusion classrooms: Implications for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 66, 23–37.
17.
KnowltonE. (1998). Considerations in the design of personalized curricular supports for students with developmental disabilities. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 33, 95–107.
18.
MasonC.FieldS.SawilowskyS. (2004). Implementation of self-determination activities and student participation in IEPs. Exceptional Children, 70, 441–451.
19.
McGlashingJ.AgranM.SitlingtonP.CavinM.WehmeyerM. (2004). Enhancing the job performance of youth with moderate to severe cognitive disabilities using the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 28, 194–204.
20.
MithaugD. E.MithaugD. K.AgranM.MartinJ. E.WehmeyerM. L. (2003). Self-determined learning theory: Construction, verification, and evaluation. Mahway, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21.
MithaugD. E.WehmeyerM. L.AgranM.MartinJ. E.PalmerS. (1998). The self-determined learning model of instruction: Engaging students to solve their learning problems. In WehmeyerM. L.SandsD. J., Making it happen: Student involvement in educational planning, decision making, and instruction (pp. 299–328). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
22.
NietupskiJ.Hamre-NietupskiS.CurtinS.ShirkanthK. (1997). A review of curricular research in severe disabilities from 1976 to 1995 in six selected journals. Journal of Special Education, 31, 36–55.
23.
PalmerS. B.WehmeyerM. L.GipsonK.AgranM. (2004). Promoting access to the general curriculum by teaching self-determination skills. Exceptional Children, 70, 427–440.
24.
Rules and Regulations, 64 Federal Register 12,592 (1999, March 12).
25.
RyndakD. L.AlperS. (2003). Curriculum and instruction for students with significant disabilities in inclusive settings. Boston:Allyn and Bacon.
26.
U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (n.d.). Access to, participation and progress in the general education curriculum. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
27.
WehmeyerD. L.LanceG. D.BashinskiS. (2002). Providing access to the general curriculum for students with mental retardation: A multi-level model. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37, 223–234.
28.
WehmeyerM.AgranM. (2006). Promoting access to the general curriculum for students with significant cognitive disabilities. In SpoonerF.BrowderD., Teaching reading, math, and science to students with significant cognitive disabilities (pp. 15–37). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
29.
WehmeyerM. L. (2003). Access to the general curriculum of middle school students with mental retardation. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 262–272.
30.
WehmeyerM. L.AgranM.HughesC. (2000). A national survey of teachers' promotion of self-determination and student-directed learning. Journal of Special Education, 34, 58–68.
31.
WehmeyerM. L.FieldS.DorenB.JonesB.MasonC. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413–425.
32.
WehmeyerM. L.LattinD.AgranM. (2001). Achieving access to the general curriculum: A curriculum-decision-making model. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 327–342.
33.
WehmeyerM. L.LattinD.Lapp-RinckerG.AgranM. (2003). Access to the general curriculum of middle-school students with mental retardation: An observational study. Remedial and Special Education, 24, 262–272.
34.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS.AgranM.MithaugD. E.MartinJ. E. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children, 66, 439–453.
35.
WehmeyerM. L.SandsD. J.KnowltonE.KozleskiE. B. (2002). Teaching students with mental retardation: Providing access to the general curriculum. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
