Suchergebnisse

This article offers a rationale for the contributions of qualitative research to evidence-based practice in special education. In it, I make the argument that qualitative research encompasses the ability to study significant problems of practice, engage with practitioners in the conduct of research studies, learn and change processes during a study, and provide expansive data sets that help clarify both independent and dependent variables. Qualitative methodologies can shape and advance important questions of educational practice and policy. The concern with the degree to which qualitative research can contribute to the research base may be a reflection of the degree to which our field as a whole adequately prepares its researchers to understand and engage in high-quality qualitative research that adheres to benchmarks for internal and external validity from inception through dissemination of results.

This article was recognized by the American Education Research Association, Special Interest Group, Systems Change: Best scholar-practitioner article on systemic change. Also designated by Sage Publications as an Urban Education Editor's Choice Publication. ; This is the author's accepted manuscript. The original publication is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042085909337595. ; This article explores the complexities of urban school improvement and systems change through the lens of educational equity policy initiatives. The authors situate urban schools within a critical context where contested identity politics, sociopolitical agendas, and economic stratification marginalize culturally and linguistically diverse students. The study uses the elements of a framework for systemic change and examines urban schools. Analyzing local educational change, the authors examine the interaction between structural reform, collective, community narratives about children, and their impacts on the urban schools. Along with lessons learned from school improvement and technical assistance activities, these perspectives look at how local-activity arenas respond to reform and how understanding the complexities of local practice could inform the next-generation policy initiatives. Without deep and shared understanding, the strategies employed to achieve short-term improvements will circumvent work on the changes required to shift students from the margins while simultaneously changing the mainstream conditions.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) data that states and U.S. territories report from the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) and discuss the status of the most restrictive special education placement settings for students with disabilities. In this analysis, we found that (a) states do not set rigorous improvement goals to reduce restrictive placements, (b) the percentage of students with disabilities placed in restrictive placements have remained essentially unchanged over the past decade, and (c) students with low-incidence (severe) disabilities are disproportionally placed in restrictive placements. These results suggest that segregated educational experiences continue for thousands of students with disabilities in spite of evidence that shows that opportunities to learn and develop are enhanced in more inclusive educational settings.

This is the author's accepted manuscript. The original publication is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/0091732X030001065. ; In theory, inclusive education is about all students and focuses on student presence, participation, acceptance, and achievement. In practice, inclusive education is multiplicity of discourses and practices. Historically, inclusive education is situated within waves of evolution. The first wave saw the establishment of general rights for children with disabilities, but some children—especially those with behavioral problems and severe intellectual disabilities—remained unrecognized outsiders in schools and school communities. Subsequent waves of inclusive education have had differential impacts in developed and developing countries. A review of primarily U.S. and British inclusive education research at the school and classroom levels identified four shortcomings: inclusive education theory has outpaced its practice; inclusive education research ignores the influences of globalization forces; inclusive education theorization lacks conceptual clarity; and a substantial gap between the views of learning that informs research conducted either at the classroom level or the school level. In addition, views of learning in classroom and school based studies rely on different theoretical stipulations. Lack of cross-fertilization between classroom- and school-based inclusive education research is a missed opportunity for enriching this emerging knowledge base. Recommended is a re-mediation in the relationship between researchers and their work with theories that offer a systematic understanding of the cultural and political nature of learning.

This is the author's accepted manuscript. The original publication is available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778114. ; This paper reports findings from an 18-month qualitative study that followed the experiences of nine teacher residents, their site professors, site coordinators, clinical teachers and principals in three professional learning schools. The study examined the tensions that emerged as teacher preparation theory intersected with the context-bound realities of daily life in schools and the political constraints that diminish possibilities for inclusive education. The paper addresses implications for teacher preparation programmes by reporting how teacher residents negotiated their understanding of and commitment for inclusive education through three themes: (a) critical reflection as an emergent practice, (b) whose learning, and (c) the trouble with behaviour. Interpreting these themes has implications for programmatic designs in teacher preparation.

A team from Schoolwide Integrated Framework for Transformation (SWIFT), a federally funded technical assistance project focused on creating cascading, aligned systems for inclusive education, conducted a series of focus groups and interviews with school administrators, general and special educators, and related service providers in six schools across the United States. Six themes merged from the study that highlighted the importance of defining inclusive education as well as building the capacity of people to understand and implement the components of a system of inclusive education. These themes suggest that leadership for inclusive education requires attention to the structures and processes used to signal that inclusive education is an undergirding principle of practice. Equally important is the development of relationships among students, teachers, and families that cement the structures. Networking, planning and organizing, using time and space strategically, and connecting schools with their communities were all aspects of capacity building. In addition, data revealed the importance of paying attention to the context of inclusive education within schools and in their surrounding communities. Further, enthusiastic support from and communication with families emerged as an important theme.