The 1997 amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act included requirements that students with disabilities have access to and progress in the general curriculum. Most discussions of efforts to promote such access and progress do not take into account the unique needs of learners with mental retardation. Wehmeyer, Lattin, and Agran (2001) introduced a decision-making model to enable IEP teams to make decisions about the educational program of students with mental retardation taking into account both the general curriculum and unique student learning needs. This article places that decision-making process into the context of other steps needed to ensure access for students with mental retardation, providing a multi-step and multi-level model to ensure access for students with mental retardation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AultM. M., GuyB., GuessD., BashinskiS., & RobertsS. (1995). Analyzing behavior state and learning environments: Application in instructional settings. Mental Retardation, 33, 304-316.
2.
BoweF. G. (2000). Universal design in education: Teaching nontraditional students. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
3.
CarrE. G., HornerR. H., TurnbullA. P., MarquisJ. G., McLaughlinD. M., McAteeM. L., SmithC. E., RyanK. A., RuefM. B., & DoolabhA. (2000). Positive behavior support for people with developmental disabilities: A research synthesis. Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
4.
CastagneraE., FisherD., RodiferK., & SaxC. (1998). Deciding what to teach and how to teach it: Connecting students through curriculum and instruction. Colorado Springs, CO: PEAK Parent Center.
EnglishF. (1992). Successful schools series: Vol. 4. Deciding what to teach and test: Developing, aligning, and auditing the curriculum. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.
7.
FarlowL., & SnellM. E. (1995). Making the most of student performance data. (AAMR Research to Practice Series). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
8.
HornerR. H., AlbinR. W., SpragueJ. R., & ToddA. W. (2000). Positive behavior support. In SnellM. E. & BrownF. (Eds.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (5th ed., pp. 207-244). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Publishing.
9.
JanneyR., & SnellM. E. (2000). Teachers' guides to inclusive practices: Modifying schoolwork. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
10.
KronbergR. (1999, March). Creating and nurturing inclusive school communities. Paper presented at the 5th Mid-West Regional Conference on Inclusive Education, Omaha, NE.
11.
LanceG. D., & WehmeyerM. L. (2001). Universal design checklist. Lawrence, KS: Beach Center on Disability, University of Kansas.
12.
OrkwisR., & McLaneK. (1998). A curriculum every student can use: Design principles for student access. ERIC/OSEP Topical Brief, Fall, 1998. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.
13.
Siegel-CauseyE., & BashinskiS. M. (1997). Enhancing initial communication and responsive-ness of learners with multiple disabilities: A tri-focus framework for partners. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 105-120.
14.
StainbackW., StainbackS., StefanichG., & AlperS. (1996). Learning in inclusive classrooms: What about the curriculum? In StainbackS. & StainbackW. (Eds.), Inclusion: A guide for educators (pp. 209-219). Baltimore: Brookes.
15.
SugaiG., & HornerR. H. (1994). Including stu-dents with severe behavior problems in general education settings: Assumptions, challenges, and solutions. In MarrJ., SugaiG., & TindalG. (Eds.), The Oregon Conference monograph 6 (pp. 102-120). Eugene: University of Oregon.
16.
TurnbullA. P., & TurnbullH. R. (2001). Extending a school-wide approach of positive behavior interventions and support to families and the community. Families, professionals, and exceptionality: Collaborating for empowerment (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
17.
Udvari-SolnerA. (1993). Curricular adaptations: Ac-commodating the instructional needs of diverse learners in the context of general education. Topeka, KS: Kan-sas State Board of Education.
18.
WarrenJ. S., EdmonsonH. M., TurnbullA. P., SailorW., WickhamD., & GriggsP. (2000). School-wide application of positive behavioral supports: Implementation and preliminary evaluation of PBS in an urban middle school. A manuscript submitted for publication.
19.
WehmeyerM. L., AgranM., & HughesC. (1998). Teaching self-determination to students with disabili-ties: Basic skills for successful transition. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
20.
WehmeyerM. L., LattinD., & AgranM. (2001). Achieving access to the general curriculum for students with mental retardation: A curriculum decision-making model. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36, 327-342.
21.
WehmeyerM. L., & SandsD. J. (1998). Making it happen: Student involvement in education planning and decision-making. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
22.
WehmeyerM. L., SandsD. J., KnowltonH. E., & KozleskiE. B. (2002). Teaching students with men-tal retardation: Accessing the general curriculum. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
23.
WehmeyerM. L., WickhamD., & SailorW. (2000). A whole school model of positive behavior interventions and supports and access to the general curriculum. An unpublished grant proposal.
