In this qualitative comparative case study, we drew from institutional theory and cultural historical activity theory to explore how educators wrote, used, and conceptualized the role of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for students with specific learning disabilities within secondary inclusive settings. We found that students’ IEPs were responding to institutional pressures to educate students within inclusive settings. However, the content of the students’ IEPs offered limited guidance on the activity of providing students with special education supports and services. With this being said, the IEPs still played distinctive roles in each school’s unique activity system for educating students within inclusive classrooms. Our findings illuminate a dynamic interaction between institutional pressures and the activity of providing students with a special education.
AhearnE. (2006). Standards-based IEPs: Implemen-tation in selected states. Arlington, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
2.
BatemanB. C. (2011). Individual education programs for children with disabilities. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P. (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 91–106). New York, NY: Routledge.
3.
BergerP.LuckmannT. (1967). The social construction of reality. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
4.
BlackwellW. H.RossettiZ. S. (2014). The development of individualized education programs: Where have we been and where should we go now?SAGE Open, 4(2), 1-15.
5.
BlantonL. P.BovedaM.MunozL. R.PugachM. C. (2017). The affordances and constraints of special education initial teacher licensure policy for teacher preparation. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40, 77–91.
6.
BogdanR. C.BiklenS. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theories and methods (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
7.
Booher-JenningsJ. (2005). Below the bubble: “Educational triage” and the Texas accountability system. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 231–268.
8.
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.
9.
BrantlingerE.JimenezR.KlingnerJ.PugachM.RichardsonV. (2005). Qualitative studies in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 195–207.
10.
BrayL. E.RussellJ. L. (2016). Going off script: Structure and agency in individualized education program meetings. American Journal of Education, 122(3), 367-398.
11.
BrowderD. M.Ahlgrim-DelzellL.Courtade-LittleG.SnellM. (2005). General curriculum access. In SnellM.BrownF. (Eds.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (6th ed., pp. 489-525). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
12.
BrowderD. M.WakemanS. Y.FlowersC. (2006). Assessment of progress in the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Theory Into Practice, 45, 249–259.
13.
BrownellM. T.SindelarP. T.KielyM. T.DanielsonL. C. (2010). Special education teacher quality and preparation: Exposing foundations, constructing a new model. Exceptional Children, 76, 357–377.
14.
CampbellD. M.FyfeB. (1995, February). Reforming teacher education: The challenge of inclusive education. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New York, NY.
15.
ChristleC. A.YellM. L. (2010). Individualized education programs: Legal requirements and research findings. Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 18, 109–123.
16.
CoburnC. E. (2001). Collective sensemaking about reading: How teachers mediate reading policy in their professional communities. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 23, 145–170.
17.
CoburnC. E. (2004). Beyond decoupling: Rethinking the relationship between the institutional environment and the classroom. Sociology of Education, 77, 211–244.
18.
ColeM.EngeströmY. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1–46). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19.
DiekerL. A.MurawskiW. W. (2003). Co-teaching at the secondary level: Unique issues, current trends, and suggestions for success. The High School Journal, 86(4), 1–13.
20.
DiMaggioP.PowellW. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Collective rationality and institutional isomorphism in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48, 147–160.
21.
Dudley-MarlingC. (1985). Perceptions of the usefulness of the IEP by teachers of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children. Psychology in the Schools, 22, 65–67.
22.
EngeströmY. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133–156.
23.
FratturaE. M.TopinkaC. (2006). Theoretical underpinnings of separate educational programs: The social justice challenge continues. Education and Urban Society, 38, 327–344.
24.
FriendM. (1985). Training special educators to be consultants: Considerations for developing programs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 8, 115–120.
25.
FuchsD.FuchsL. S.SteckerP. M. (2010). The “blurring” of special education in a new continuum of general education placements and services. Exceptional Children, 76, 301–323.
26.
GeigerW. L. (2002). Requirements for conventional licensure of special education teachers (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. 460-563). Arlington, VA: ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education.
27.
GeigerW. L.MickelsonA.McKeownD.BartonJ.Kleinhammer-TramillJ.SteinbrecherT. (2014). Patterns of licensure for special education teachers. In SindelarP. T.McCrayE. D.BrownellM. T.Lignugaris/KraftB. (Eds.), Handbook of research on special education teacher preparation (pp. 30–46). New York, NY: Routledge.
28.
GilbertsG. H.Lignugaris-KraftB. (1997). Classroom management and instruction competencies for preparing elementary and special education teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13, 597–610.
29.
GoldR. L. (1958). Roles in sociological field observations. Social Forces, 36, 217–223.
30.
HillD. (2001). Equality, ideology and education policy. In HillD.ColeM. (Eds.), Schooling and equality: Fact, concept and policy (pp. 7-34). London, England: Kogan Page.
31.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, Amendments of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. (2004).
32.
KaptelininV.NardiB. A. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
LeavittH. J. (1965). Applied organizational change in industry: Structural, technological and humanistic approaches. In MarchJ. G. (Ed.), Handbook of organizations (pp. 1144–1170). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
34.
Lee-TarverA. (2006). Are individualized education plans a good thing? A survey of teachers’ perceptions of the utility of IEPs in regular education settings. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 33, 263–272.
35.
LekoM. M.BrownellM. T.SindelarP. T.KielyM. T. (2015). Envisioning the future of special education personnel preparation in a standards-based era. Exceptional Children, 82, 25–43.
36.
LipskyD. K.GartnerA. (1997). Inclusion and school reform: Transforming America’s classrooms. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
37.
LounsburyM. (2008). Institutional rationality and practice variation: New directions in the institutional analysis of practice. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 33, 349–361.
38.
LubienskiC. (2005). Public schools in marketized environments: Shifting incentives and unintended consequences of competition-based educational reforms. American Journal of Education, 111, 464–486.
39.
MargolisH.TruesdellL. A. (1987). Do special education teachers use IEPs to guide instruction?The Urban Review, 19, 151–159.
40.
MastropieriM. A.ScruggsT. E. (2001). Promoting inclusion in secondary classrooms. Learning Disability Quarterly, 24, 265–274.
41.
McLaughlinM. J. (2010). Evolving interpretations of educational equity and students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 76, 265–278.
42.
MenloveR. R.HudsonP. J.SuterD. (2001). A field of IEP dreams increasing general education teacher participation in the IEP development process. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33, 28–33.
43.
MeyerJ. W.RowanB. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363.
44.
No Child Left Behind Act, 20 U.S.C.S. § 6301 et seq. (2001).
45.
NorthD. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
46.
OgawaR. T.CrainR.LoomisM.BallT. (2008). CHAT-IT: Toward conceptualizing learning in the context of formal organizations. Educational Researcher, 37, 83–95.
47.
PierangeloR.GiulianiG. A. (2006). Learning disabilities: A practical approach to foundations, assessment, diagnosis, and teaching. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
48.
ReimanJ. W.BeckL.CoppolaT.EngilesA. (2010). Parents’ experiences with the IEP process: Considerations for improving practice. Eugene, OR: Center for Appropriate Dispute Resolution in Special Education.
49.
RogoffB.Baker-SennettJ.LacasaP.GoldsmithD. (1995). Development through participation in sociocultural activity. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1995(67), 45–65.
50.
RotterK. (2014). IEP use by general and special education teachers. SAGE Open, 4(2), 1-8.
51.
RowanB.MiskelC. (1999). Institutional theory and the study of educational organizations. In MurphyJ.LouisK. S. (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational administration (2nd ed., pp. 359–384). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
52.
RussellJ. L. (2011). From child’s garden to academic press: The role of shifting institutional logics in redefining kindergarten education. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 236–267.
53.
RussellJ. L.BrayL. E. (2013). Crafting coherence from complex policy messages: Educators’ perceptions of special education and standards-based accountability policies. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 21(12), 1-22.
54.
ScottW. R. (2013). Institutions and organizations: Ideas, interests, and identities (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
55.
ShentonA. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research projects. Education for Information, 22(2), 63–75.
56.
SimonJ. B. (2006). Perceptions of the IEP requirement. Teacher Education and Special Education, 29, 225–235.
57.
SleeR. (2001). Social justice and the changing directions in educational research: The case of inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 5, 167–177.
58.
SmithS. W. (1990). Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) in special education—From intent to acquiescence. Exceptional Children, 57, 6–14.
59.
SpillaneJ. P.PariseL. M.ShererJ. Z. (2011). Organizational routines as coupling mechanisms: Policy, school administration, and the technical core. American Educational Research Journal, 48, 586–619.
60.
SpillaneJ. P.ReiserB. J.ReimerT. (2002). Policy implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72, 387–431.
61.
StelitanoL.RussellJ. L.BrayL. E. (2017). Organizing for inclusion: Exploring the routines that shape student supports. Manuscript submitted for publication.
62.
SugaiG.HornerR. H. (2009). Responsiveness-to-intervention and school-wide positive behavior supports: Integration of multi-tiered systems approaches. Exceptionality, 17, 223–237.
63.
SnyderT.D.de BreyC.DillowS. A. (2016). Digest of Education Statistics 2015 (NCES 2016-014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
64.
WeissM. P.LloydJ. W. (2002). Congruence between roles and actions of secondary special educators in co-taught and special education settings. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 58–68.
65.
WinzerM. A. (2009). From integration to inclusion: A history of special education in the 20th century. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
66.
YellM. L.RogersD.RogersE. L. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a long, strange trip it’s been!Remedial and Special Education, 19, 219–228.
67.
YlirukaL.Karvinen-NiinikoskiS. (2013). How can we enhance productivity in social work? Dynamically reflective structures, dialogic leadership and the development of transformative expertise. Journal of Social Work Practice, 27, 191–206.
68.
ZigmondN.KlooA. (2011). General and special education are (and should be) different. In KauffmanJ. M.HallahanD. P (Eds.), Handbook of special education (pp. 160–172). New York, NY: Routledge.
