Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Although the benefits of inclusive education for students with and without disabilities are well documented, many schools continue to struggle with implementing inclusive practices. Rural schools in particular face unique challenges including shortages in personnel, training, and materials for special education. The purpose of this study was to explore differences between rural and non-rural schools in the delivery of special education and related services using a sample of 486 children from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study (ECLS-K) special education dataset. Results revealed that school location accounted for differences in: 1) the amount of time students with disabilities spent more in general education classrooms, and 2) the frequency of communication between special education professionals and families. Possible explanations for the differences and directions for future research are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bricker,

(2000). Inclusion: How the scene has changed. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20 (1), 14–19.

Cegelka,

& Alvarado,

J.L.

(2000). A best practices model for preparation of rural special education teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 19 (3), 15–29.

Cross,

A. F.

, Traub,

, Hutter-Pishgahi,

, & Shelton,

(2004). Elements of successful inclusion for children with significant disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24 (3), 169–183.

Diamond,

, Hestenes,

, Carpenter,

E.S.

, & Innes,

(1997). Relationships between enrollment in inclusive class and preschool children's ideas about people with Disabilities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 17 (4), 520–536.

Dunst,

(1999). Placing parent education in conceptual and empirical context. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 19 (3), 141–147.

Dunst,

C. J.

, Bruder,

M. B.

, Trivette,

C. M.

, Hamby,

, Raab,

, and McLean,

(2001). Characteristics and consequences of everyday natural learning opportunities. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 21 (2), 68–92.

Guralnick,

M. J.

, Connor,

R. T.

, Hammond,

, Gottman,

J. M.

, & Kinnish,

(1995). Immediate effects of mainstreamed settings on the social interactions and social integration of preschool children. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 100 (4), 359–377.

Jung,

L. A.

(2003). More is better: Maximizing natural learning opportunities. Young Exceptional Children. 6 (3), 21–27.

Lock,

(2001). Using web-based information to facilitate inclusion practices in rural communities. Rural Special Education Quarterly 20(4), 3–10.

10.

Ludlow,

(1998). Preparing special education personnel for rural schools: Current practices and future directions. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 14 (2), 57–75.

11.

McWilliam,

R.A.

(1995). Integration of therapy and consultative special education: A continuum in early intervention. Infants and Young Children, 7 (4), 29–38.

12.

Reeves,

(2003). Implementing the No Child Left Behind Act: Implications for rural schools and districts. Educational Policy Publications. Retrieved June 15, 2006, from http://www.ncrel.org/policy/pubs/html/implicate/

13.

Roper,

, & Dunst,

(2003). Communication intervention in natural learning environments: Guidelines for Practice. Infants and Young Children, 16 (3), 215–226.

14.

Rosenkoetter,

, Irwin,

, & Saceda,

(2004). Addressing personnel needs for rural areas. Teacher Education and Special Education (27)3, 276–291.

15.

Shelden,

M.L.

, & Rush,

(2001). The ten myths about providing early intervention services in natural environments. Infants and Young Children, 14 (1), 1–13.

16.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (Fall, 1998). Early Childhood Longitudinal Study, Kindergarten Class of 1998–1999.

Special Education Services in Rural Schools: A Study of the Kindergarten Population Using the ECLS-K

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References