The dimension of consultation within the range of services that schools should make available to students with disabilities remains a timely topic. Over the past decade, the number of students with disabilities served in the regular class has increased 47 %from more than 1 million to more than 2 million students. Several sections of the 1997 Amendments of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act expressly advise the support of students with disabilities in addressing the regular education curriculum. Educators armed with a range of options for service delivery will tend to serve these students in a more precise, intense manner than those lacking alternatives. Thefield of education has drawn on other domainsto form consultative services that match the organizational setting of schools and the individual needs of students. This review of literature consists of an overview of consultation, a description of school-based consultation, a research synthesis of exemplary studies of school-based consultation, and concludes with possibilities for future research and implications for practice.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AffleckJ. Q., MadgeS., AdamsA., & LowenbraunS. (1988). Integrated classroom versus resource model: Academic viability and effectiveness. Exceptional Children, 54, 339–348.
2.
AldermanG. L., & GimpelG. A. (1996). The interaction between type of behavior problem and type of consultant: Teachers' preferences for professional assistance. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 7, 305–313.
3.
Assistance to States for the Education of Children with Disabilities, 34 C.F.R. Part 300 (1998).
4.
BakerJ. M., & ZigmondN. (1995). The meaning and practice of inclusion for students with learning disabilities: Themes and implications from the five cases. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 163–180.
5.
BanduraA. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
6.
BaroneS. G. (1995, March 1). The egalitarian virus. Education Week, 35.
7.
BauwensJ., & HourcadeJ. J. (1995). Cooperative teaching: Rebuilding the schoolhouse for all students. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
8.
BerganJ. R. (1977). Behavioral consultation. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
9.
BerganJ. R. (1995). Evolution of a problem-solving model of consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 111–123.
10.
BossardM. D., & GutkinT. B. (1983). The relationship of consultant skill and school organizational characteristics with teacher use of school-based consultation services. School Psychology Review, 12, 50–56.
11.
BoudahD. J., SchumacherJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (1997). Collaborative instruction: Is it an effective option for inclusion in secondary classrooms?Learning Disability Quarterly, 20, 293–316.
12.
BrownD., BlackburnJ. E., WyneM. D., & PowellW. C. (1979). Consultation: Strategy for improving education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
13.
CarlbergC., & KavaleK. (1980). The efficacy of special versus regular class placement for exceptional children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Special Education, 14, 295–309.
14.
ConoleyJ. C., & ConoleyC. W. (1982). School consultation: Guide to practice and training. New York: Pergamon Press.
15.
CrockettJ. B., & KauffmanJ. M. (1998). Classrooms for students with learning disabilities: Realities, dilemmas, and recommendations for service delivery. In Wong (Ed.), Learning about learning disabilities (2nd ed.) (pp. 489–525). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
16.
DeBuseM., & ShoemakerB. J. E. (1993). The changing role of TAG Teachers: An Oregon case study. Roeper Review, 16, 58–61.
17.
DettmerP. A., DyckN. T., & ThurstonL. P. (1996). Consultation, collaboration, and teamwork for students with special needs (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
18.
ErchulW. P. (1993). Question #2: Is collaborative consultation non-directive? Symposium: Questioning popular beliefs about collaborative consultation. Presented at the meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children, San Antonio, TX, April 5-9, 1993.
19.
FriendM. (1985). Training special educators to be consultants: Considerations for developing programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 8, 115–120.
20.
FriendM., & CookL. (1996). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (2nd ed.). White Plains, New York: Longman.
21.
FuchsD., FuchsL., & BahrM. W. (1990). Mainstream assistance teams: A scientific basis for the art of consultation. Exceptional Children, 57, 128–139.
22.
FullanM. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
23.
GoldR. F., & HollanderS. K. (1992). The status of consultant teacher services in special education on Long Island, New York: 1989-1990. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 3, 25–38.
24.
GreenwoodC. R. (1991). Longitudinal analysis of time, engagement, and achievement in at-risk versus non-risk students. Exceptional Children, 57, 521–535.
25.
GuralnikD. B. (Ed.). (1980). Webster's new world dictionary of the American language (2nd ed.). Simon and Schuster.
26.
HaightS. L. (1984). Special education teacher consultant: Idealism versus realism. Exceptional Children, 50, 507–515.
27.
HuefnerD. S. (1988). The consulting teacher model: Risks and opportunities. Exceptional Children, 54, 403–414.
28.
IdolL. (1989). The resource/consulting teacher: An integrated model of service delivery. Remedial and Special Education, 10, 38–48.
29.
IdolL., NevinA., & Paolucci-WhitcombP. (1995). The collaborative consultation model. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 347–361.
30.
Idol-MaestasL., & RitterS. (1985). A follow-up study of resource/consulting teachers: Factors that facilitate and inhibit teacher consultation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 8, 121–131.
IllbackR. J., & ZinsJ. E. (1984). Organizational interventions in educational settings. In MaherC. E., IllbackR. J., & ZinsJ. E. (Eds.), Organizational psychology in the schools (pp. 21–49). Springfield, IL: Thomas.
33.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 1997, 20 U.S.C. §§1400 et seq.
KargeB. D., McClureM., & PattonP. L. (1995). The success of collaboration resource programs for students with disabilities in grades 6 through 8. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 79–89.
36.
KratochwillT. R., & Van SomerenK. R. (1995). Barriers to treatment success in behavioral consultation: Current limitations and future directions. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 125–143.
37.
LipskyD. K., & GartnerA. (1998). Determining the 'true' definition of an inclusive classroom. Inclusive Education Programs, 5(9), 3.
38.
McLaughlinM. J. (1995). Defining special education: A response to Zigmond and Baker. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 200–208.
39.
MarksS. U., & GerstenR. (1998). Engagement and disengagement between special and general educators: An application of Miles and Huberman's cross-case analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 21, 34–56.
40.
MillerT. L., & SabatinoD. A. (1978). An evaluation of the teacher consultant model as an approach to mainstreaming. Exceptional Children, 45, 86–91.
41.
NeelR. S. (1981). How to put the consultant to work in consulting teaching. Behavioral Disorders, 6, 78–81.
42.
NevinA. I., ThousandJ. S., Paolucci-WhitcombP., & VillaR. (1990). Collaborative consultation: Empowering public school personnel to provide heterogeneous schooling for all-or who rang that bell?Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 1, 41–67.
43.
Paolucci-WhitcombP., & NevinA. (1985). Preparing consulting teachers through a collaborative approach between university faculty and field-based consulting teachers. Teacher Education and Special Education, 8, 132–143.
44.
PhillipsV., & McCulloughL. (1990). Consultation-based programming: Instituting the collaborative ethic in schools. Exceptional Children, 56, 291–304.
45.
PryzwanskyW. B. (1974). A reconsideration of the consultation model for delivery of school-based psychological services. Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 44, 579–583.
46.
PugachM. C. (1988). The consulting teacher in the context of educational reform. Exceptional Children, 55, 273–275.
RosenfieldS. A. (1987). Instructional consultation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
49.
ScheinE. H. (1978). The role of the consultant: Content expert or process facilitator?Personnel and Guidance Journal, 56, 339–343.
50.
SchulteA. C., OsborneS. S., & McKinneyJ. D. (1990). Academic outcomes for students with learning disabilities in consultation and resource programs. Exceptional Children, 57, 162–172.
51.
SchumakerJ. B., & DeshlerD. D. (1992). Validation of learning strategy interventions for students with LD: Results of programmatic research effort. In WongB. Y. L. (Ed.), Contemporary intervention research in learning disabilities: An international perspective (pp. 22–46). New York: Springer-Verlag.
52.
SchummJ. S., VaughnS., HaagerD., McDowellJ., RothleinL., & SaumellL. (1995). General education teacher planning: What can students with learning disabilities expect?Exceptional Children, 61, 335–352.
53.
SugaiG. M., & TindalG. A. (1993). Effective School Consultation: An interactive approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
54.
TharpR. G., & WetzelR. J. (1969). Behavioral modification in the natural environment. New York: Academic Press.
55.
ThousandJ. S., & VillaR. A. (1989). Enhancing success in heterogeneous schools. In StainbackS. & StainbackW. (Eds.), Educating all students in the mainstream of regular education (pp. 89–103). Baltimore: Brookes.
56.
TindalG., ShinnM. R., & Rodden-NordK. (1990). Contextually based school consultation: Influential variables. Exceptional Children, 56, 324–336.
57.
U. S. Department of Education. (1998). To assure the free appropriate public education of all children with disabilities. Twentieth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
58.
VillaR. A., ThousandJ. S., NevinA. I., & MalgeriC. (1996). Instilling collaboration for inclusive schooling as a way of doing business in public schools. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 169–181.
59.
VoltzD. L., ElliottR. N., & HarrisW. B. (1995). Promising practices in facilitating collaboration between resource room teachers and general education teachers. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 10, 129–136.
60.
WadeS. E., WelchM., & JensenJ. B. (1994). Teacher receptivity to collaboration: Levels of interest, types of concern, and school characteristics as variables contributing to successful implementation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 5, 177–209.
61.
Walther-ThomasC. S. (1997). Co-teaching experiences: The benefits and problems that teachers and principals report over time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 395–407.
62.
Walther-ThomasC. S., BryantM., & LandS. (1996). Planning for effective co-teaching: The key to successful inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 255–265.
63.
WestF. J., & IdolL. (1987). School consultation (Part I): An interdisciplinary perspective on theory, models, and research. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 388–408.
64.
WhittakerC. R., & TaylorL. S. (1995). Do resource room teachers have sufficient planning time?Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 6, 247–256.
65.
WoodM. (1998). Whose job is it anyway? Educational roles in inclusion. Exceptional Children, 64, 181–195.
