Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Schools have continued to rely on paraeducators to assist special education teachers and other professionals in the provision of special education and related services. Although paraeducators often support students with extensive support needs (ESN) in a range of school environments, the subset of intervention studies focused on paraeducators who support students with ESN in inclusive settings has not been systematically reviewed. The purpose of this literature review was to synthesize single-case research studies involving paraeducator-delivered interventions for students with ESN in inclusive school environments. Our findings suggest that research primarily has focused on communication and social skills interventions that involved paraeducator-facilitated peer supports in core academic classes and specials (e.g., art, music, physical education). Overall, paraeducator-delivered interventions resulted in improved student outcomes. Likewise, paraeducator training, which typically included an oral description, modeling, and/or performance feedback, was effective in improving paraeducator implementation of the target interventions. We present implications for practice specific to paraeducators who support students with ESN in inclusive settings and future research directions.

Keywords

paraeducator paraprofessional extensive support needs severe disabilities inclusion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Agran

Jackson

Kurth

J. A.

Ryndak

Burnette

Jameson

Zagona

Fitzpatrick

Wehmeyer

(2020). Why aren’t students with severe disabilities being placed in general education classrooms: Examining the relations among classroom placement, learner outcomes, and other factors. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45, 4–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919878134

*Biggs

E. E.

Carter

E. W.

Bumble

J. L.

Barnes

Mazur

E. L.

(2018). Enhancing peer network interventions for students with complex communication needs. Exceptional Children, 85(1), 66–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918792899

*Biggs

E. E.

Carter

E. W.

Gustafson

(2017). Efficacy of peer support arrangements to increase peer interaction and AAC use. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 122(1), 25–48. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-122.1.25

Biggs

E. E.

Gilson

C. B.

Carter

E. W.

(2019). “Developing that balance”: Preparing and supporting special education teachers to work with paraprofessionals. Teacher Education and Special Education, 42(2), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406418765611

Brock

M. E.

Anderson

E. J.

(2021). Training paraprofessionals who work with students with intellectual and developmental disabilities: What does the research say? Psychology in the Schools, 58(4), 702–722. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22386

*Brock

M. E.

Biggs

E. E.

Carter

E. W.

Cattey

G. N.

Raley

K. S.

(2016). Implementation and generalization of peer support arrangements for students with severe disabilities in inclusive classrooms. The Journal of Special Education, 49(4), 221–232. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466915594368

Brock

M. E.

Carter

E. W.

(2013). A systematic review of paraprofessional-delivered educational practices to improve outcomes for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(4), 211–221. https://doi.org/10.1177/154079691303800401

*Brock

M. E.

Carter

E. W.

(2016). Efficacy of teachers training paraprofessionals to implement peer support arrangements. Exceptional Children, 82(3), 354–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402915585564

Brock

M. E.

Carter

E. W.

(2017). A meta-analysis of educator training to improve implementation of interventions for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 38(3), 131–144. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516653477

10.

Brock

M. E.

Huber

H. B.

(2017). Are peer support arrangements an evidence-based practice? A systematic review. The Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 150–163. https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669177708184

11.

*Carter

E. W.

Cushing

L. S.

Clark

N. M.

Kennedy

C. 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(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.30.1.15

12.

Carter

E. W.

Moss

C. K.

Hoffman

Chung

Y. C.

Sisco

(2011). Efficacy and social validity of peer support arrangements for adolescents with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 78(1), 107–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291107800107

13.

Carter

E. W.

O’Rourke

Sisco

L. G.

Pelsue

(2009). Knowledge, responsibilities, and training needs of paraprofessionals in elementary and secondary schools. Remedial and Special Education, 30(6), 344–359. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508324399

14.

*Causton-Theoharis

J. N.

Malmgren

K. W.

(2005). Increasing peer interactions for students with severe disabilities via paraprofessional training. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 431–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290507100403

15.

Chopra

R. V.

Giangreco

M. F.

(2019). Effective use of teacher assistants in inclusive classrooms. In Schuelka

Johnstone

Thomas

Artiles

(Eds.), The SAGE handbook on inclusion and diversity in education (pp. 193–207). SAGE.

16.

*Chung

Y. C.

Carter

E. W.

(2013). Promoting peer interactions in inclusive classrooms for students who use speech-generating devices. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(2), 94–109. https://doi.org/10.2511/027494813807714492

17.

*Chung

Y. C.

Douglas

K. H.

(2015). A peer interaction package for students with autism spectrum disorders who use speech-generating devices. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 27(6), 831–849. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10822-015-9461-1

18.

Council for Exceptional Children. (2015). What every special educator must know: Professional ethics and standards (7th ed.).

19.

Gage

N. A.

Cook

G. B.

Reichow

(2017). Publication bias in special education meta-analyses. Exceptional Children, 83(4), 428–445. https://doi.org/11/1177/0014402917691016

20.

Giangreco

M. F.

(2010). One-to-one paraprofessionals for students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms: Is conventional wisdom wrong? Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-48.1.1

21.

Giangreco

M. F.

(2020). “How can a student with severe disabilities be in a fifth-grade class when he can’t do fifth-grade level work?” Misapplying the least restrictive environment. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 45(1), 23–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796919892733

22.

Giangreco

M. F.

(2021). Maslow’s hammer: Teacher assistant research and inclusive practices at a crossroads. European Journal of Special Education, 36(2), 278–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2021.1901377

23.

Giangreco

M. F.

Edelman

S. W.

Broer

S. M.

Doyle

M. B.

(2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 68(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290106800103

24.

Giangreco

M. F.

Suter

J. C.

Doyle

M. B.

(2010). Paraprofessionals in inclusive schools: A review of recent research. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 20(1), 41–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474410903535356

25.

Giangreco

M. F.

Yuan

McKenzie

Cameron

Fialka

(2005). “Be careful what you wish for. . .”: Five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraprofessionals. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37(5), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990503700504

26.

*Huber

H. B.

Carter

E. W.

Lopano

S. E.

Stankiewicz

K. C.

(2018). Using structural analysis to inform peer support arrangements for high school students with severe disabilities. American Journal on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 123(2), 119–139. https://doi.org/10.1352/1944-7558-123.2.119

27.

*Hunt

Soto

Maier

Doering

(2003). Collaborative teaming to support students at risk and students with severe disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 315–332. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440290306900304

28.

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (2004). https://sites.ed.gov/idea/statute-chapter-33

29.

Jackson

Fitzpatrick

Alazemi

Rude

(2018). Shifting gears: Re-framing the international discussion about inclusive education. Journal of International Special Needs Education, 21(2), 11–22. https://doi.org/10.9782/2159-4341-21.2.01

30.

*Jameson

J. M.

McDonnell

Johnson

J. W.

Riesen

Polychronis

(2007). A comparison of one-to-one embedded instruction in the general education classroom and one-to-one massed practice instruction in the special education classroom. Education and Treatment of Children, 30(1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.2007.0001

31.

*Jimenez

B. A.

Barron

(2019). Learner-centered professional development: A model to increase inclusion for students with moderate intellectual disability. Inclusion, 7(2), 125–139. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-7.2.125

32.

*Johnson

J. W.

McDonnell

Holzwarth

V. N.

Hunter

(2004). The efficacy of embedded instruction for students with developmental disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(4), 214–227. https://doi.org/10.1177/10983007040060040301

33.

Kleinert

Towles-Reeves

Quenemoen

Thurlow

Fluegge

Weseman

Kerbel

(2015). Where students with the most significant cognitive disabilities are taught. Exceptional Children, 81(3), 312–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402914563697

34.

*Knight

V. F.

Kuntz

E. M.

Brown

(2018). Paraprofessional-delivered video prompting to teach academics to students with severe disabilities in inclusive settings. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 48, 2203–2216. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-018-3476-2

35.

Koegel

Matos-Freden

R. L.

Koegel

(2012). Interventions for children with autism spectrum disorders in inclusive school settings. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 19(3), 401–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.2010.11.003

36.

*Koegel

R. L.

Kim

Koegel

L. K.

(2014). Training paraprofessionals to improve socialization in students with ASD. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(9), 2197–2208. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-014-2094-x

37.

Kurth

J. A.

Mastergeorge

A. M.

(2012). Impact of setting and instructional context for adolescents with autism. The Journal of Special Education, 46(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466910366480

38.

Kurth

J. A.

Morningstar

M. E.

Kozleski

(2014). The persistence of highly restrictive special education placements for students with low-incidence disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 39(3), 227–239. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796914555580

39.

Ledford

J. R.

Gast

D. L.

(2018). Single case research methodology (3rd ed.). Routledge.

40.

Maggin

D. M.

Briesch

A. M.

Chafouleas

S. M.

(2013). An application of the What Works Clearinghouse standards for evaluating single-subject research: Synthesis of the self-management literature base. Remedial and Special Education, 34(1), 44–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932511435176

41.

*McDonnell

Johnson

J. W.

Polychronis

Risen

(2002). Effects of embedded instruction on students with moderate disabilities enrolled in general education classes. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 37(4), 363–377. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23880070

42.

Morningstar

M. E.

Allcock

H. C.

White

J. M.

Taub

Kurth

J. A.

Gonsier-Gerdin

Ryndak

D. L.

Sauer

Jorgensen

C. M.

(2016). Inclusive education national research advocacy agenda: A call to action. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 41(3), 209–215. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916650975

43.

Morningstar

M. E.

Kurth

J. A.

Johnson

P. J.

(2017). Examining national trends in educational placements for students with significant disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 38(1), 3–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932516678327

44.

Parker

R. I.

Vannest

K. J.

Davis

J. L.

Sauber

S. B.

(2011). Combining nonoverlap and trend for single-case research: Tau-U. Behavior Therapy, 42(2), 284–299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2010.08.006

45.

Pennington

R. C.

Courtade

G. R

. (2015). An examination of teacher and student behaviors in classrooms for students with moderate and severe intellectual disability. Preventing School Failure: Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(1), 40–47. https://doi.org/10.1080/1045988x.2014.919141

46.

*Reyes

E. N.

(2020). Effects of a paraprofessional-implemented video self-modeling and system of least prompts intervention on completion of transitional routines for a student with extensive support needs in inclusive settings [Doctoral dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Charlotte]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses.

47.

Rispoli

Neely

Lang

Ganz

(2011). Training paraprofessionals to implement interventions for people autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Developmental Neurorehabilitation, 14(6), 378–388. https://doi.org/10.3109/17518423.2011.620577

48.

*Robinson

S. E.

(2011). Training paraprofessionals of students with autism to implement pivotal response treatment in inclusive school settings using a brief video feedback training package. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 26(2), 105–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357611407063

49.

Rohatgi

(2020, November). WebPlotDigitizer (Version 4.4). https://automeris.io/WebPlotDigitizer

50.

Ruppar

A. L.

Afacan

Yang

Y.-L.

Pickett

K. J.

(2017). Embedded shared reading to increase literacy in an inclusive English/language arts class: Preliminary efficacy and ecological validity. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 52(1), 51–63. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26420375

51.

*Ryan

Jameson

J. M.

Coleman

O. F.

Eichelberger

Bowman

J. A.

Conradi

L. A.

Johnston

S. S.

McDonnell

(2019). Inclusive social studies content instruction for students with significant intellectual disability using structured inquiry-based instruction. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 54(4), 420–436.

52.

Shogren

K. A.

Burke

K. M.

Antosh

Wehmeyer

M. L.

LaPlante

Shaw

L. A.

Raley

(2019). Impact of the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction on self-determination and goal attainment in adolescents with intellectual disability. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 30(1), 22–34. https://doi.org/10.1177/1044207318792178

53.

*Shukla

Kennedy

C. H.

Cushing

L. S.

(1999). Intermediate school students with severe disabilities: Supporting their participation in general education classrooms. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 1(3), 130–140. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830079900100301

54.

Taub

D. A.

McCord

J. A.

Ryndak

D. L.

(2017). Opportunities to learn for students with extensive support needs: A context of research-supported practices for all in general education classes. The Journal of Special Education, 51(3), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466917696263

55.

Test

D. W.

Mazzotti

V. L.

Mustian

A. L.

Fowler

C. H.

Kortering

Kohler

(2009). Evidence-based secondary transition predictors for improving postschool outcomes for students with disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 32(3), 160–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885728809346960

56.

Thompson

J. R.

Walker

V. L.

Snodgrass

M. R.

Nelson

J. A.

Carpenter

M. E.

Hagiwara

Shogren

K. A.

(2020). Planning supports for students with intellectual disability in general education classrooms. Inclusion, 8(1), 27–42. https://doi.org/10.1352/2326-6988-8.1.27

57.

U.S. Department of Education. (2021). 42nd annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2020. https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/42nd-arc-for-idea.pdf

58.

Vannest

K. J.

Ninci

(2015). Evaluating intervention effects in single-case research designs. Journal of Counseling & Development, 93(4), 403–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/jcad.12038

59.

Vannest

K. J.

Parker

R. I.

Gonen

Adiguezel

(2016). Single case research: Web based calculators for SCR analysis (Version 2.0) [Web-based application]. Texas A&M University. http://www.singlecaseresearch.org/

60.

Walker

V. L.

Carpenter

M. E.

Lyon

K. J.

Button

(2021). A meta-analysis of paraprofessional-delivered interventions to address challenging behavior among students with disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 23(2), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/109830072091147

61.

Walker

V. L.

Coogle

C. G.

Lyon

K. J.

Turf

(2021). A meta-analytic review of paraprofessional-implemented interventions for students with autism spectrum disorder. Psychology in the Schools, 58(4), 686–701. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.22380

62.

Walker

V. L.

Douglas

K. H.

Douglas

S. N.

D’Agostino

S. R.

(2020). Paraprofessional-implemented systematic instruction for students with disabilities: A systematic literature review. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 55(3), 303–317.

63.

Walker

V. L.

Loman

S. L.

Hara

Park

K. L.

Strickland-Cohen

M. K.

(2018). Examining the inclusion of students with severe disabilities in school-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 43(4), 223–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796918779370

64.

Walker

V. L.

Smith

C. G.

(2015). Training paraprofessionals to support students with disabilities: A literature review. Exceptionality, 23(3), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/09362835.2014.986606

65.

*Walker

V. L.

Snell

M. E.

(2017). Teaching paraprofessionals to implement function-based interventions. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 32(2), 114–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357616673561

66.

What Works Clearinghouse. (2020). Standards handbook (Version 4.1). Institute of Education Sciences. https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/WWC-Standards-Handbook-v4-1-508.pdf

67.

Yates

P. A.

Chopra

R. V.

Sobeck

E. E.

Douglas

S. N.

Morano

Walker

V. L.

Schulze

(2020). Working with paraeducators: Tools and strategies for planning, performance feedback, and evaluation. Intervention in School and Clinic, 56(1), 4–50. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451220910740

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB

Paraeducator-Delivered Interventions for Students with Extensive Support Needs in Inclusive School Settings: A Systematic Review

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material