Placing Children in Special Education A Strategy for Equity (1982) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Effects of Special Education Placement on Educable Mentally Retarded Children
Effects of Special Education Placement on Educable Mentally Retarded Children
Pages 262-299
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 262... ...
94-142 a need to determine whether special education services can be effectively delivered in a less restrictive setting than self-contained classrooms~ for EMR children; whether regular classroom teachers can instruct children previously assigned to special education teachers; and whether children in the regular classroom are adversely affected when EMR students are placed in their classrooms. These questions, however, did not arise solely in response to current educational policy.
|
From page 263... ...
The literature on the consequences of special education for EMR children is voluminous, and this paper by necessity cannot be an exhaustive review of all relevant research. My approach has been to focus on representative, frequently cited, and, whenever possible, methodologically
|
From page 264... ...
The efficacy studies have been reviewed thoroughly (e.g., Cegelka and Tyler, 1970; Gardner, 1966; Guskin and Spicker, 1968; Hammons, 1972; Kaufman and Alberto, 1976; Kirk, 19642 MacMillan, 1971; MacMillan and Meyers, 1979; Meyers et al., 1980) , and their results are often too briefly summarized: The academic achievement of children in special classes was found to be lower than the achievement of children remaining in regular classrooms, whereas social adjustment was often lower for children remaining in regular classrooms.
|
From page 265... ...
To avoid these obvious problems, other sampling techniques have been adopted: matching EMR children in special classes with children on waiting lists for placement in special classes (e.g., Mullen and Itkin, 1961) or matching EMR children in special classes with children who attended schools in districts that did not have special education programs (e.g., Cassidy and Stanton, 1959; Johnson, 1961~.
|
From page 266... ...
To gain a more differentiated view of the effects of special education, a wide variety of outcome measures should be used, including naturalistic observations, descriptions of services provided, and more qualitative judgments of the experiences of EMR children in special and mainstreamed classes. INSTRUMENTATION The validity of the four instruments most commonly used to measure achievement in the efficacy studies- the Stanford Achievement Test, the Wide Range Achievement Test, the California Achievement Test, and the Metropolitan Achievement Test has been questioned for use in regular classes (Kaufman and Alberto, 1976~.
|
From page 267... ...
First, studies on the effectiveness of special education fail to delineate the treatment or curriculum that is being evaluated. One cannot assume that children educated in special classes share anything besides a common administrative arrangement.
|
From page 268... ...
For these reasons, studies that focus on the effects of special and regular classes without specifying the population under study and the actual classroom operations may fail to identify significant findings and relationships. RESEARCH IN THE POST-EFFICACY STUDY ERA: THE EFFECTS OF MAINSTREAMING The increased role of the judiciary in special education, the growing disenchantment with segregated special classes among influential educators (Dunn, 1968; Johnson, 1962)
|
From page 269... ...
(1975:40-41) formulated a definition of mainstreaming that has been widely adopted as a model by many special education researchers (e.g., Jones and Wilderson, 1976; MacMillan and Semmel, 19771: Mainstreaming refers to the temporal, instructional and social integration of eligible exceptional children with normal peers, based on an ongoing individually determined educational planning and programming process and requires clarification of responsibility among regular and special education administrative, instructional, and supportive personnel.
|
From page 270... ...
(1973) studied the progress of three EMR and three educationally handicapped children placed in regular thirdgrade classrooms.
|
From page 271... ...
The one-year follow-up study is more relevant to a discussion of mainstreaming. Teacher ratings of the 13 EMR students who were reintegrated into the regular programs were compared with those for nonhandicapped children in the regular classrooms.
|
From page 272... ...
in regular classrooms had slightly although not significantly higher reading, arithmetic, and basic social information achievement test scores than did the equivalent IQ group in the special classes. The opposite pattern was found for children with IQ scores lower than 80.
|
From page 273... ...
The regular students were chosen from the classrooms of the decertified students and were in the lower half of the class in achievement. Although the EMR students and the decertified students had similar IQ and achievement test scores at the time of the original placement in special classes, at the time of Recertification the EMR students had lower IQs (and therefore were not returned to the regular classroom)
|
From page 274... ...
(1972) measured the selfconcept of ability in children four times during their first year of special education.
|
From page 275... ...
The California Recertification study obtained information from student files on attendance and on whether the student had dropped out of or had graduated from school. They found that more decertified students than EMR students graduated from school in two of the eight districts studied.
|
From page 276... ...
Perhaps the only conclusion that can be reached at present is that mainstreaming does not necessarily lead to a lowered self-concept and that other school and home factors probably have more powerful effects on a child's adjustment than does the influence of classroom setting alone. SPECIAL EDUCATION PLACEMENT AND THE MINORITY CHILD As mentioned previously, controversy over special education placement stems in part from concern about the overrepresentation of minorities in EMR programs.
|
From page 277... ...
Although one goal of current mainstreaming efforts may be to decrease the disproportion of minorities in EMR programs, careful study is needed before one can conclude that any resultant reduction of disproportion necessarily implies that minority children are receiving a more appropriate education. EFFECTS OF MAINSTREAMING ON NoN-EMR CHILDREN Effects on Academic Achievement There has been almost no research on the effects of mainstreaming on non-EMR children's academic achievement, despite the fears of many critics that placing EMR children in regular classrooms will adversely affect the other children's learning.
|
From page 278... ...
For example, do children labeled mentally retarded have lower self-esteem? This is impossible to determine since those who are labeled are also in special classes and are treated differently by parents, peers, and teachers.
|
From page 279... ...
illustrates the influence of teachers' reactions on students' attitudes. Fourth-grade children in a rural town saw a videotape of either a positive or negative reaction from a teacher to the academic and social behaviors of a child labeled mentally retarded, learning
|
From page 280... ...
Social Acceptance of EMR Childre'' by Their Non-EMR Peers Numerous studies have established that mentally retarded children are less socially accepted than are nonretarded children by their nonretarded peers (Baldwin, 1958; Gottlieb, 1978; Hartup, 1970; Johnson, 19501. This consistent finding is a special case of the positive correlation that is found between IQ and social status, as measured by sociometric instruments (Dentler and Mackler, 1962; Hartup, 1970~.
|
From page 281... ...
If mainstreamed EMR children are disruptive or act bizarrely in the regular classroom, contact should lead to negative attitudes toward EMR children. Alternatively, the better-behaved EMR children may be those who are chosen for reintegration, and their behavior may be more conforming than those children remaining in the special classes (Gottlieb, 1975b)
|
From page 282... ...
Efforts have been made to alter the social skills and status of mentally retarded children. This research, recently reviewed by Gresham (1981)
|
From page 283... ...
In addition, there is considerable overlap in sociometric scores between EMR and non-EMR children (Gottlieb, 1981; Iano et al., 19741. It is important for research to focus on the types and quality of friendships and social networks that mentally retarded children may have rather than to simply rely on their sociometric position in class.
|
From page 284... ...
Despite expressed concern about the ability and willingness of regular classroom teachers to adapt and cope with handicapped children in their classrooms, little research has been directed toward understanding the effects of mainstreaming on teachers. The existing literature can be divided into two categories: survey studies on teachers' attitudes toward mainstreaming and the effects of labeling on teachers' expectations for EMR children.
|
From page 285... ...
Severance and Gasstrom (1977) found that subjects rated ability and task difficulty as more important causes of failure for mentally retarded children than for normal children, while effort was perceived as a more important cause of success for the mentally retarded children.
|
From page 286... ...
Similar low expectations by special education teachers for reading achievement in EMR students have been demonstrated (Heintz, 1974~. Mainstreamed children participating in Project PRIME sensed their teacher's low expectations (Velman, 1973, cited in Brophy and Good, 19741.
|
From page 287... ...
The authors also noted that the type of program adopted was based on the attitudes of the staff rather than on the behavior or abilities of the children. Thus, children attending totally integrated programs were not necessarily more advanced than children who attended resource rooms and were only partially integrated into regular classrooms.
|
From page 288... ...
The teachers in the schools that were mainstreamed initially had less negative attitudes toward mainstreaming (63 percent disapproved of placing handicapped children in regular classrooms with resource-room help) than did teachers in schools with self-contained classrooms (93 percent disapproved of mainstreaming)
|
From page 289... ...
They found no differences (between children who retained the EMR label and those who were later decertified) at initial time of placement into EMIT classes on IQ scores; grades in reading, mathematics, and citizenship in the regular classrooms before EMR placement; or in comments made by teachers or psychologists concerning adjustment problems.
|
From page 290... ...
Simply returning the child to the regular classroom without the aid of transitional programs or other supportive services is unlikely to result in effective mainstreaming. In almost all cases, these children had been in the regular classroom and had failed.
|
From page 291... ...
As suggested in previous sections, mainstreamed children may score higher on standardized achievement tests because the curricula used in regular classrooms are more likely to emphasize academic subjects than are programs in special classes. Research on the sociometric position of children in integrated classrooms lies within the third category of evidence indicating that segregated settings lead to more positive, or less negative, effects than do mainstreamed settings.
|
From page 292... ...
A number of programs, some of which are still in the experimental stages, provide encouraging examples of special education services delivered within a mainstreamed program. These include the Consulting Teacher Approach to Special Education used in many districts in Vermont (Christie et al., 1972; Fox et al., 1973; Knight et al., 1981)
|
From page 293... ...
1967 Improving the social acceptance of unpopular educable mentally retarded pupils in special classes. American Journal of Mental Deficiency 72:455-458.
|
From page 294... ...
S., and Garvin, J 1973 An introduction to a regular classroom approach for special education.
|
From page 295... ...
American Journal of Mental Deficiency 55:60-89. 1961 A Comparative Study of the Personal and Social Adjustment of Mentally Handicapped Children Placed in Special Classes with Mentally Handicapped Children who Remain in Regular Classes.
|
From page 296... ...
A 1976 Research on efficacy of special education for the mentally retarded.
|
From page 297... ...
L 1971 Special education for the mentally retarded: servant or savant?
|
From page 298... ...
M 1970 Maintaining social acceptance gains made by mentally retarded children.
|
From page 299... ...
E 1976 The Recertification of minority group EMR students in California: student achievement and adjustment.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.