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.
2.
AgranM.King-SearsM.WehmeyerM. L.CopelandS. R. (2003). Teachers' guides to inclusive practices: Student-directed learning strategies. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
3.
BrowderD.SpoonerF. (2006). Teaching language arts, math, and science to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
4.
BrowderD. M.SpoonerF.WakemanS.TrelaK.BakerJ. N. (2006). Aligning instruction with academic content standards: Finding the link. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 309–321.
5.
CarterE. W.KennedyC. H. (2006). Promoting access to the general curriculum using peer support strategies. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 284–292.
6.
DaviesD. K.StockS. E.KingL.WoodardJ.WehmeyerM. (2006). “Moby Dick is my favorite:” Evaluating the use of a cognitively accessible portable reading system for audio books by people with intellectual disability. Manuscript submitted for publication.
7.
DymondS. K.RenzagliaA.RosensteinA.ChunE. J.BanksR. A.NiswanderV. (2006). Using a participatory action research approach to create a universally designed inclusive high school science course: A case study. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 293–308.
8.
FordA.DavernL.SchnorrR. (2001). Learners with significant disabilities: Curricular relevance in an era of standards-based reform. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 214–222.
9.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act of 1997, 120 U.S.C. ŝ1400 et seq.
10.
Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. ŝ1400, H. R. 1350.
11.
JanneyR.SnellM. (2004). Teachers guides to inclusive practices: Modifying schoolwork. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
12.
LeeS. H.WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS. B.SoukupJ. H.LittleT. D. (in press). Promoting self-determination as a curriculum augmentation to promote access to the general education curriculum for students with disabilities. Journal of Special Education.
13.
Pennsylvania Association for Retarded Children vs. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 343 F. Supp. 279 (E.D. Pa. 1972).
14.
RoseD.MeyerA. (2002). Teaching every student in the digital age: Universal design for learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
15.
RoseD.MeyerA. (2006). A practical reader in universal design for learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
16.
SpoonerF.DymondS. K.SmithA.KennedyC. H. (2006). What we know and need to know about accessing the general curriculum for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 277–283.
17.
SoukupJ.WehmeyerM. L.BashinksiS.BovairdJ. (in press). Access to the general curriculum of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities and impact of classroom ecological and setting variables. Exceptional Children.
18.
TurnbullA. P.TurnbullH. R.WehmeyerM. L. (2007). Exceptional lives: Special education in today's schools (5th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill-Prentice Hall.
19.
U.S. Senate. (1975, June 2). Education for All Handicapped Children Act. Report No. 94-168.
20.
WehmeyerM. L.FieldS.DorenB.JonesB.MasonC. (2004). Self-determination and student involvement in standards-based reform. Exceptional Children, 70, 413–425.
21.
WehmeyerM. L.LanceG. D.BashinskiS. (2002). Promoting 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.
22.
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.
23.
WehmeyerM. L.PalmerS.AgranM.MithaugD.MartinJ. (2000). Promoting causal agency: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Exceptional Children66, 439–453.