Search results

Over nearly two decades the Supporting Effective Teaching project examined the characteristics of teachers that result in successful inclusion of students with disabilities in Canadian regular education classrooms. These studies revealed that teachers who rate high in adapting and calibrating instruction for students who have special needs are the most successful overall with all their students. In this chapter, we present an adaptation of the observation scale that we used to rate effective inclusive instructional practices. The adapted scale can be used both as a self-rating and as a third-party measurement scale of effective teaching practices. We link each element of the scale to the Universal Design for Learning framework. We discuss how challenges to effective practices are affected by teacher beliefs about ability and disability, collegial differences in beliefs and practices, and the focus set by the leadership in the school.

The gap between research and practice in special education places an artificial ceiling on the achievement of students with learning and behavioral disabilities. Evidence-based practices (EBPs) are instructional practices shown by bodies of sound research to be generally effective. They represent a possible means to address the research-to-practice gap by identifying, and subsequently implementing, the most effective instructional practices on the basis of reliable, scientific research. In this chapter, we provide a context for the subsequent chapters in this volume by (a) defining and describing EBPs, (b) recognizing some of important limitations to EBPs, (c) introducing a number of ongoing issues related to EBPs in the field of learning and behavioral disabilities that are addressed by chapter authors in this volume, and (d) briefly considering a few emerging issues related to EBPs that we believe will become increasingly prominent in the near future.

Growing appreciation for the potential impact of principals on their schools has stimulated a significant body of research concerning the principalship. While many aspects of the principalship have been the object of study, it is often difficult to determine the relationship among these studies and how these studies, as a whole, contribute to a better understanding of the principalship. It is also difficult to judge which aspects of the principalship would provide the most productive focus for subsequent research. The review reported in this article addressed both sets of difficulties by analysing a total of 135 empirical studies conducted between 1974 and 1988; 60 of these studies were reported between 1985 and 1988 and received more attention than the earlier 75. Results of the analysis identify aspects of the principalship about which much is known, approaches to research which appear to have exhausted their usefulness and areas in which further study seems likely to be of most value. One major conclusion from the analysis is that we know most about effective principal practices and least about how such practices develop.

Successful implementation of Response to Intervention frameworks in schools requires general and special education teachers to have well-integrated knowledge bases for providing instruction and intervention in reading and behavior. Implementation-focused approaches to changing teacher behavior, favored traditionally in special education, however, are unlikely to help teachers acquire such knowledge. In this chapter, we discuss the knowledge and practice that defines expert teachers in reading and behavior and how such expertise might be achieved through practice-focused approaches to initial teacher education and professional development.

Principals play a pivotal role in teachers’ professional growth, which impacts student outcomes. The purpose of this paper is to understand the perceptions principals have about effective elements of professional development (PD) and the role they play in facilitating the growth of teachers, and how this affects student learning.

Q methodology was utilized to investigate the subjective views of public school administrators about PD. A post sort survey was used to interpret demographic and perceptual data. The Q sorts were factor analyzed to reveal statistical correlations among the administrators. Focus group interviews representative of each emergent factor were then conducted with eight of the 34 principals who sorted the statements.

In total, 31 of the participants loaded on one of three factors. Though there were perceptional differences about which PD elements are effective, all of the principals expressed a desire to take an active role in teachers’ professional growth. These distinct viewpoints of PD included the themes of sustainability and collaboration.

School leaders are commonly named as the most important influence on teachers and their practices. PD is among the significant strategies that principals employ to impact teachers. Thus, studies that provide insights into how school leaders perceive PD are crucial to the in-service development of school teachers.

Research in general education has demonstrated that school principals have a substantial impact on the effectiveness of schools and related student achievement. This is not a direct impact, but rather relates to how principals indirectly impact student learning by improving the learning environment of a school and the practice of teachers. More specifically, the dimensions of principal practice that are most influential in improving schools and student achievement relate to establishing a shared vision, facilitating a high-quality learning environment for students, building the professional capacity of teachers, creating a supportive organization for learning, and connecting with external partners. Only in recent years has research begun to emerge related to the role of the principal in supporting improved achievement for students with disabilities in schools that are effective and inclusive. In this chapter, we review research related to what principals can do to facilitate the development of inclusive schools that are also effective in improving achievement for students with disabilities and other students who struggle to learn. After reviewing these dimensions of principal practice, we then provide a brief case study that illustrates how a principal in an effective inclusive school applied several of these practices, including staff collaboration, progress monitoring, and professional development to improve teacher practice and student outcomes.

Educators’ decisions regarding what instructional practices they use have significant consequences for the learning and life outcomes of their students. This is especially true for students with learning and behavioral disabilities, who require highly effective instruction to succeed in school and achieve their goals. In this volume of Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities chapter authors provide readers with accessible information on theory, critical elements, and research for instructional practices that are and are not supported by bodies of scientific research as effective in critical outcome areas. Educators can use this content to inform and enhance their instructional decision making. To contextualize subsequent chapters, in this introductory chapter we discuss the research-to-practice gap in special education, the importance of considering scientific research when making instructional decisions and considerations for interpreting and applying research findings on instructional practices. We conclude with a preview of the chapters in the volume.

Research over the last decade or so has made it clear that quality teachers matter to student achievement. What is less clear is the ways in which they matter and how we can prepare such high-quality teachers. Nowhere is this lack of clarity more evident than in special education, where we have few studies on teacher quality and even fewer studies on the type of preparation opportunities that would lead to high quality. Thus, it is difficult to make evidence-based decisions about how quality special education teachers should be defined and prepared. As a field, we have to turn to research in general education to provide a sense of some of the dimensions of teacher quality and effective teacher education. In this chapter, we provide a summary of the research on characteristics of highly qualified teachers and what we know from the research on teacher education and professional development that might foster these qualities, both in general and in special education. Part of our discussion centers on the concerns surrounding this body of research and the challenges of applying the findings to the field of special education. Although these challenges pose considerable problems, we are optimistic that potential solutions exist and can be reached through an alignment of initial teacher education and induction.

Leading inclusion is a complex field of practice that is framed in traditional conceptions of school administration. Leadership in inclusive schools is a constant struggle with fluctuating dimensions, often compounding difficulties for students with difference and disability. Nevertheless, inclusive school leadership remains an important component of successful practice of inclusive education, where all students with diverse abilities equally benefit. This chapter provides an introduction to different types of leadership practices that promote inclusive practices. A key focus of the chapter is to discuss the social theory of Bourdieu in relation to understanding and measuring what we consider as effective inclusive school leadership. This framework provides both theoretical and practical approaches in developing inclusive school leadership practices and ways effective inclusive leadership practices could be measured.

Writing performance is an international issue and, while the quality of instruction is key, features of the context shape classroom practice. The issues and solutions in terms of teacher practice to address underachievement need to be considered within such a context and the purpose of the chapter is to undertake such an analysis.

Data from five different research projects (national and regional) of the author and colleagues, and two studies of the author’s doctoral students, are synthesized to identify both common and specific elements of primary/elementary (years 1–8, ages 5–13) teacher practice in writing. These data provide an indication of the practices which appear to be the most powerful levers for developing writing and for accelerating student progress in the context in which the teachers work. These practices are discussed.

The identified practices are: (1) acquiring and applying deep knowledge of your writers; (2) making connections with, and validating, relevant cultural and linguistic funds of knowledge; (3) aligning learning goals in writing with appropriately designed writing tasks and ensuring that students understand what they are learning and why; (4) providing quality feedback; (5) scaffolding self-regulation in writers; (6) differentiating instruction (while maintaining high expectations) and (7) providing targeted and direct instruction at the point of need. A discussion and a description of writing-specific instantiations of these help to illustrate their nature and the overlaps and interconnections.

As much of the data are drawn from the practices of teachers deemed to be highly effective, classroom practices associated with these teachers can be targeted as a means to improve the quality of instruction more widely in the particular context.