Educational Placement Of Students Research Articles

Educators’ Perceptions on the Involvement of Students With Complex Support Needs in PBIS: The Role of Educational Placement

Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) is an evidence-based practice that promotes positive academic and behavioral outcomes for all students and is intended to support the needs of all students across three tiers of support. However, research suggests students with complex support needs have limited access to Tier 1 PBIS. Teachers’ perceptions of the appropriateness of PBIS to meet the needs of students with complex support needs has been hypothesized to impact the extent to which educators provide access to Tier 1. Using data from a national survey of 644 educators, we sought to determine the extent to which educational placement of students with complex support needs impacted teacher perception of the importance of providing Tier 1 PBIS. Our results suggest educators across placements agree students with complex support needs should be involved in PBIS, including acknowledgment systems and response and data plans. Educators differed in their ideas of how to teach school-wide rules and expectations and how to document behavioral violations. We discuss implications of these findings for research and practice.

Identification and educational placement of students with intellectual disability in Ontario, Canada

BackgroundLittle is known about the identification and educational placement of students considered to have intellectual disability in the Canadian context and, specifically, the province of Ontario. AimsThe purpose of this study was to describe trends in the school-based identification of students with mild intellectual disability and developmental disability based on the Ontario criteria over a 14-year period, as well as current patterns characterizing classroom placement. MethodsUsing data provided by the Ontario Ministry of Education, a doubly multivariate analysis of variance and profile analysis were performed. ResultsFindings revealed a statistically significant decrease in the number of students identified with mild intellectual disability over time, and that students identified with developmental disability per the provincial criteria accessed their education in specialized settings at a significantly higher rate than their peers with mild intellectual disability. ConclusionsReasons for differences in the identification and placement of the two groups of students are explored relative to the research context.

Disrupting the System: How Social Systems Perpetuate Educational Segregation of Students with Extensive Support Needs

Education teams continue to place students with extensive support needs (ESN) in segregated settings despite nearly 50 years of research culminating in the conclusion that students with ESN have better outcomes when educated in general education contexts. This article uses Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory to explain how social systems influence the beliefs, attitudes, and decisions made by education team members about the educational placement of students with ESN. This article describes: (a) Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory to explain how each social system influences decisions made about the educational placement of students with ESN; (b) the history of educational segregation of students with disabilities; (c) macrosystems of education team members and how they perpetuate segregated placement decisions of students with ESN; and (d) actions to disrupt the education system and segregated placement decisions.

Being in the Right Place at the Right Time: Educational Placement of Students With Intellectual Disability by State and Year

Abstract Despite the longstanding federal mandate to place students with disabilities in general education classrooms to the maximum extent appropriate, most students with intellectual disability continue to spend most of their time in separate classrooms and schools. In this study, we describe longitudinal educational placement patterns in six states that represent the wide span of educational placement (i.e., Vermont, Kentucky, Kansas, Massachusetts, Illinois, and Montana). Surprisingly, some states are trending toward more restrictive placements, and the gap between the most and least inclusive states is continuing to widen over time. We offer constructive suggestions for appropriately applying the principle of least restrictive environment so that placement decisions are driven by student needs and not where students live.

Educational placement of students with autism spectrum disorder and its relation to socioeconomic status, intelligence, and diagnosis

Background: Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) have several options for placement within the education system. Placement options typically comprise inclusion, self-contained classrooms in a regular schools, or special education schools.Objectives: The current study reviewed 210 psychological records of Israeli students with ASD from 1994 to 2011 retrospectively, and sought to examine students' placement in relation to three factors: intelligence, diagnosis and socioeconomic status (SES). In addition, transition periods were examined to detect possible key periods for change in placement.Results: All three factors were related to educational placement. Specifically, students in special schools had a significantly lower mean intelligence score, and lower SES was associated with less inclusive placements. Additionally, the transition between 6th and 7th grade was found to be a key period for placement change, mainly from more inclusive placements to less inclusive ones.Conclusions: Implications for policy and practice are discussed.

Trends in the Educational Placement of Students With Intellectual Disability in the United States Over the Past 40 Years.

In 1975, federal law mandated that children with disabilities be educated in their least restrictive environment, or alongside peers without disabilities in general education classrooms to the maximum extent appropriate. More than 40 years later, I investigated how national trends in educational placement have changed over time for students with intellectual disability. Specifically, I examined the degree placements have trended toward less restrictive environments. I found historical trends of incremental progress toward less restrictive settings, but no evidence of such progress in recent years. Furthermore, most students were educated predominantly in segregated settings every year. I discuss how these findings relate to previous studies, as well as implications for individualized education program teams and advocates for educational inclusion.

Examining National Trends in Educational Placements for Students With Significant Disabilities

Using the least restrictive environments (LRE) data from annual Reports to Congress, this study examined national trends in placement between 2000 and 2014 for school-aged students considered to have significant disabilities from among the categories of autism (ASD), intellectual disability (ID), multiple disabilities (MD), and deaf-blindness (DB). Educational placement trends were calculated using a log ratio index, and students with significant disabilities were compared with groups of students from the other disability groups. Results confirmed that access to general education settings is lacking for this group of students. Implications for policies and practices as well as suggested future research are provided.

Teacher satisfaction at the educational placement of students with special educational needs

This study conducted a large-scale survey to investigate the satisfaction of Finnish primary school teachers toward the current educational placement of their students with special educational needs (SEN). Teachers were asked to recommend the most suitable educational placement for each of their SEN students from a pool of six alternatives: a mainstream classroom, part-time special education, a special classroom in the mainstream school, a special school, a state special school, or an institution. Data were obtained from 980 students representing 68 schools. The results showed that, in the majority of cases, teachers recommended a different level to the current level of placement for their SEN students. Teachers in the mainstream classrooms mostly recommended special classrooms, while teachers of the special education classrooms frequently recommended special schools, and teachers of the special schools often recommended state special schools or special education classrooms. A less restrictive environment was recommended for 20% and a more restrictive environment was recommended for 33% of the students. The results are interpreted in terms of organizational selection.

Educational Placement of Students With Autism

Typically, child characteristics such as IQ and severity of autism symptoms are thought to determine educational placement. The present study examines external factors, including state of residence and state funding formulas, to determine their potential influence on placement outcomes. Findings reveal that considerable variations exist among states in placing students with autism spectrum disorders in inclusive, mainstreaming, self-contained, and separate schools. This variation suggests that factors beyond child characteristics, such as IQ, play a major role in educational placement decisions. Furthermore, states in the Eastern United States tend to have more restrictive placement rates than states in the Western United States. State special education funding was found to have a minimal impact on placement outcomes. As a whole, it is unlikely that child characteristics alone determine placement outcomes.

An Analysis of Placement and Exit Patterns of Students with Emotional or Behavioral Disorders

The authors analyzed student data from the U.S. Department of Education's Annual Reports to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to assess patterns and trends in the educational placement of students with emotional or behavioral disorders (E/BD), as well as their means of school exit and the relationship between educational placement and school exit. The data indicate an increasing trend in educating students with E/BD in general education classrooms that mirrors a similar increase for all students with disabilities, although the overall rate of general class placement remains lower for students with E/BD (27%) than for students with other disabilities (50%). The link between placement and graduation or dropout rates was also explored, but these relationships are interpreted with extreme caution given that they are aggregations of state-level data. Suggestions are offered for future research and analysis of placement and exit patterns of students with E/BD.

Educating students with disabilities in the least restrictive environment

States that historically, students with disabilities in the public schools in the USA were subjected to discrimination in the form of segregation from non‐disabled students. Also reports that much of this discrimination has subsided in recent years owing to successful advocacy by parents and community organizations before the Congress of the United States and both the federal and state judiciary. Reveals that national legislation was created so as to protect the education rights of such students and the courts have provided tests for their integration into school systems. Notes that, currently, there is some concern that this advocacy has gone too far and that court decisions authorizing “full inclusion” misinterpret the full extent of the law. Examines the scope of education for disabled children and provides a legal analysis of the educational placement of students with disabilities in the “least restrictive environment”.

Trends in the Educational Placement of Students with Disabilities in New South Wales

This paper reports the results of an analysis of trends in the placement of students with intellectual, physical, sensory, or behavioural disabilities in New South Wales for the period 1986 to 1994. Although there was a general trend of movement of students from special schools to support classes, there were some major differences across disability groups. The results are discussed in relation to current special education policy in New South Wales and the philosophy of including students with a disability in regular schools and classes.

Regular Class or Resource Room for Students with Disabilities? A Direct Response to “Rich and Ross: A Mixed Message”

Regular Class or Resource Room for Students with Disabilities? A Direct Response Rich and Ross: A Mixed Message * We appreciate the clarify some of the issues raised in the analysis of our article Students' Time on Learning Tasks in Special Education (Rich & Ross, 1989), contained in Rich and Ross: A Mixed Message. If other readers had similar questions regarding our data and conclusions, then this forum is excellent one shed additional light on the primary implications of our article. Central the debate is the educational placement of students with disabilities, which continues be a priority concern for both regular and special education. Although several peripheral problems are alleged in the article, the major conflict in interpretation seems be that our data support the resource room, but that we are recommending the regular as the preferred placement for students with disabilities. This was not our conclusion. We did say that the resource room provided more allocated learning and that students demonstrated more on-task in that placement. We further stated (which was correctly identified) that the resource alternative seems to be organizationally designed maximize learning time (p. 513). This does not represent a position in favor of placement of students with disabilities in the regular or resource alternative, but that there are conditions within the resource setting that are associated with greater student on task. In consideration of this point, both regular education and segregated special classes should consider some instructional and organizational changes. Further, we do not believe that our conclusions are in contradiction Will (1986) regarding the regular education initiative. Will does question the effectiveness of pull-out programs, but her concluding thoughts are that success will depend on acceptance of the general applicability of special education techniques beyond the confines of the special education class (pp. 414-415). As a final point on the issue of regular or resource placement, we believe that converting special education a resource model is not the answer a complex problem. Though it may be true that the resource alternative, in this study, was statistically an island of learning opportunity for many students, there were also some students who demonstrated equally high rates of on-task behavior in the regular class. Therefore, we believe that the reviewers are correct in their belief that we need better understand the interaction between treatment factors and the characteristics of the students. This seems be especially true with regard some children with disabilities, who appear have been automatically excluded from the regular and resource room and were placed in segregated settings based on their categorical label (i.e., seriously emotionally disturbed and moderately mentally retarded). The willingness establish a data base and implement the concept of Aptitude X Treatment interaction (Cronbach & Snow, 1977), or even curriculum-based assessment, is sadly lacking in special and regular education. …

Characteristics of Programs for Children with Deaf-Blindness: Results of a National Survey

Specialized service programs for children and youth (ages 0 to 21) with deaf-blindness have received federal support since 1968. Currently, a combination of single state and multistate/regional programs serve students with dual sensory impairments. A national survey of program coordinators was conducted to provide a description of services. Respondents completed a 57-item questionnaire about their program's administrative structure, teacher certification requirements, technical assistance, eligibility determination, educational placement, curricula/instructional settings, transition, and unmet educational needs. Thirty-two surveys (a response rate of 59%) were returned and analyzed. Most coordinators indicated that they work only part time in the position and that technical assistance to practitioners and families constitutes a major part of their responsibilities. Educational placements for students with deaf-blindness include classrooms for persons with severe handicaps/sensory impairments, residential programs, and vocational programs. The majority of respondents noted that transition programs are in place in their service areas, but that individualized transition plans (ITPs) are not mandated. Services to families of preschool and elementary students were identified as an area needing further attention, and the lack of appropriate curricula materials was identified as a problem across age groups.

Communicative Competence Approaches to Language Proficiency Assessment: Research and Application

The focus of this volume is on those theoretical, psychometric and practical issues which pose a challenge to the measurement of language proficiency. The complexity and difficulty of defining communicative competence and identifying valid and appropriate approaches for its measurement among students with limited English skills is reflected both by the researchers and educators who contributed to the volume. In addition to, adding, highlighting, positing or negating current findings and perspectives regarding communicative competence, the perspectives represented in the volume, provide valuable information about the nature of children's language use, its assessment and the role of first and second language in academic achievement. The book is divided into two sections which demonstrate the need for continued multidisciplinary dialogue among researchers and practitioners. Approaches to Communicative Competence This part of the book centers on current perspectives and research. The individual chapters in their diversity, pose a challenge both for those attempting to use communicative competence to interpret the results of currently used language proficiency measures as well as for those attempting to develop valid language assessment instruments from a communicative competence perspective. Application The attempt to better understand communicative competence has resulted in a wide range of applied research within the context of bilingual and immersion education. The chapters, included here are representative of the research undertaken to explore practical and valid ways to assess language competencies and to define their role in the educational placement of students with limited English skills.

Initiating Early Field Experiences in Teacher Education Programs

Steinkellner applauds the trend toward early place ment of education students in the classroom, but cautions that careful planning on the part of the col leges and the school administrators is essential. Eleven points for consideration in developing a field program are offered below.