1 / 19

Mixing It Up: Is Inclusion the Most Effective Instructional Delivery Model for Ninth Grade Students With Disabilities?

Mixing It Up: Is Inclusion the Most Effective Instructional Delivery Model for Ninth Grade Students With Disabilities?. Kim W. Cox, Principal Sharon M. Johnson, Assistant Principal Lorenzo T. Styles, Teacher Leader Miami Carol City Senior High School

tallis
Download Presentation

Mixing It Up: Is Inclusion the Most Effective Instructional Delivery Model for Ninth Grade Students With Disabilities?

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mixing It Up: Is Inclusion the Most Effective Instructional Delivery Model for Ninth Grade Students With Disabilities? Kim W. Cox, Principal Sharon M. Johnson, Assistant Principal Lorenzo T. Styles, Teacher Leader Miami Carol City Senior High School Superintendent’s Urban Principal Initiative 2005-2006

  2. Abstract of the Study To provide the continuum of instructional delivery models that Students With Disabilities (SWD) require to meet their special needs, the ninth grade students with disabilities at Miami Carol City Senior High School received English 1, Algebra 1, and/or Intensive Reading instruction in either a SWD-Inclusion Classroom, a SWD Non-Inclusion Classroom, or a Regular Education Only Classroom. The SWD-Inclusion Classroom Model had a class enrollment of approximately half regular education students, half Students With Disabilities, one regular education teacher and one Students With Disabilities Teacher. To determine the effectiveness of each model, several academic and social variables were compared and analyzed. The results of our research indicated that students with disabilities will benefit academically and socially from the inclusion classroom when students and parents are aware of the overall higher expectations of this instructional delivery model.

  3. Introduction Students with disabilities at Miami Carol City Senior High School appear to have poor achievement levels and low motivation to engage in learning. We suspect previous educational placements have labeled our special education students as disabled, isolating them from their non-disabled peers and this isolation has manifested itself in students’ low skill levels and learning deficits. In our efforts to help all students perform at or above grade level, we chose to look at our success with inclusion by examining the effectiveness of the two different instructional delivery models being used for students with disabilities.

  4. Background Miami Carol City Senior High School is located in the northwest section of Miami-Dade County on a campus on 29.4 acres in the newly established city of Miami Gardens. The “Home Of The Chiefs” opened in 1963 and is scheduled for a new state-of-the-art building in 2009. The median household income is $38,652, the employment rate is 11.1 percent and 14.3 percent of our families are living below the poverty level. Our faculty and staff consists of 191 full-time and 30 part-time school employees including 135 classroom teachers who serve the 2,652 students enrolled in grades nine through twelve. The student population is 86 percent African-American, 13 percent Hispanic and 1 percent White/Other. Thirteen percent of our students are enrolled in the Student with Disabilities program and 2.5 percent are Limited English Proficient.

  5. Research Questions • Will enrollment in the Students with Disabilities Inclusion Model improve the achievement levels of students with disabilities? • What factors contribute to the effectiveness of the Students with Disabilities Inclusion Model? • How does the Students With Disabilities Inclusion Model affect the attendance, classroom behavior and self-esteem of students with disabilities?

  6. Literature Review • The legal requirements of governing inclusion practices include the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (34 CFR 300.552) and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (34 CFR 104.34). • Inclusion designs mandated by court decisions are often based on legal compliance rather than program effectiveness (Forman and Rubiera, 2006). • Research limitations including the lack of proper control group, the lack of random assignment and the lack of adequate measurement have created extensive flaws in the body of inclusion research (Bass and Ries, 2006).

  7. Literature Review (Continued) • Even with a less distracting setting, smaller student/teacher ratio and providing individualized instruction, the research has failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of separate class placements for students with disabilities (Baker, Wang and Walberg, 1994/1995). • Local research indicates Students with Disabilities who have 80 percent or more regular classes outperformed Student with Disabilities with less than 80 percent regular classes at each of the eight grade levels between third through tenth grade (Forman and Rubiera, 2006). • The benefits for students with disabilities who are in inclusion settings are improved attitudes and self concept, greater social skills and increased opportunities to develop appropriate peer relationships (Florida Inclusion Network: Miami-Dade 2005).

  8. Methodology/Intervention June 2005 • Reviewed results of inclusion effort during 2004-2005 school year. • Determined need to reestablish inclusion program with beginning focus on incoming ninth graders. • Reviewed 2005 FCAT scores and grades of students with disabilities. • Determined three teams of teachers to teach English 1, Algebra 1, and Intensive Reading. • Reviewed IEPs to determine which students would be scheduled into SWD Inclusion and which students would be scheduled into SWD-Non Inclusion classes. July 2005 • Principal provided Inclusion Coach to support and assist teacher teams. • Provided orientation, initial training and materials in teacher collaboration to the three teacher teams.

  9. Methodology/Intervention (Continued) August 2005 through April 2006 • Conducted frequent administrative and support staff visits to SWD - Inclusion and SWD-Non Inclusion classrooms. • Conducted informal oral interviews with Students with Disabilities. • Reviewed available data from bi-weekly benchmark tests, district assessments and reports cards. • Surveyed inclusion of teachers, students and parents. May 2006 • Reviewed results of surveys received from teachers, students and parents. • Compared results of 2006 FCAT scores in Reading and Mathematics with 2005 FCAT scores in Reading and Mathematics. • Reviewed 2006 grades in SWD-Inclusion classes with 2005 grades in same subject areas.

  10. Data Collection Our data was gathered from district and state reports, student reports cards and student case management files. Student surveys were conducted by the inclusion coach. Parent surveys were sent home as a class assignment. Teachers completed their surveys independently.

  11. Grade 9 SWD BY EXCEPTIONALITY AND DIPLOMA OPTION

  12. Survey Data Analysis

  13. Data AnalysisGrade 9 SWD Achievement in FCAT Learning Gains from 2005-2006

  14. Data AnalysisGrade 9 SWD Achievement in Academic Grades by Subject Area 2005-2006

  15. Findings/Results • FCAT learning gains in Reading improved by an average of 167 points over 2005 for SWD Inclusion students, by an average of 196 points for SWD Non-Inclusion students and by an average of 229 points for students with disabilities enrolled in Regular Education Only classes. • FCAT learning gains in Mathematics improved by an average of 169 points over 2005 for SWD Inclusion students, improved by an average of 66 points for SWD Non-Inclusion students and decreased by an average of 44 points for students with disabilities enrolled in Regular Education Only classes. • Academic grades in 2006 for Language Arts/English 1 decreased from a 1.68 average in 2005 to a 0.63 average for SWD - Inclusion Students and decreased from 1.56 average in 2005 to a 0.68 average for SWD Non-Inclusion Students and decreased from a 2.29 average in 2005 to a 1.43 average for students with disabilities enrolled in Regular Education Only classes. • Academic grades in 2006 for Mathematics/Algebra 1 decreased from a 1.49 average in 2005 to a 0.47 average for SWD- Inclusion students, increased from a 0.67 in 2005 to a 1.8 average for SWD-Non Inclusion Students and decreased from 1.72 average in 2005 to a 0.73 average for students with disabilities enrolled in Regular Education Only classes. • The results of the Secondary Student Inclusion Survey indicate 70.3 percent of the English 1 Inclusion students, 35 percent of the Algebra 1 Inclusion students and 67 percent of the Reading Inclusion strongly agreed with the statement “I feel good about myself in this class”.

  16. Findings/Results (Continued) • The results of the Family Inclusion Survey indicate that while 63% of the parents strongly agree with the statement, “I feel that being in an inclusion class has been positive for my child”, 75% of the parents strongly agreed with the statement , “I feel children with disabilities would receive a better education in a special education classroom.” • The results of the Educator Inclusion Survey indicate 57% of the teachers strongly agree with the statement, “I feel that having other adults in the classroom is an asset”, and ”I feel that I benefited professionally and personally from working with a collaborative team”.

  17. Conclusions • An average increase of 167 points in Learning Gains were scored in Reading by students who participated in the SWD-Inclusion classes. • An average increase of 169 points in Learning Gains were scored in Mathematics by students who participated in the SWD-Inclusion classes. • Academic grades decreased approximately one letter grade from the previous school year in both Language Arts and Mathematics for students who participated in SWD-Inclusion classes. • The decrease in academic grades for students who participated in the SWD-Inclusion classes could be attributed to higher expectations overall in the inclusion classroom. The increase in academic grades for students who participated in the SWD Non-Inclusion classes could be attributed to the grade inflation that tends to occur when students are placed in a separate class for disabled students. • While students, parents and teachers all agreed when surveyed SWD-Inclusion classes increased student self-esteem and increased opportunities to develop appropriate peer relationships, there is great concern by all parties involved when the student fails the class, impacting the student’s grade point average and graduation requirements.

  18. Recommendations • As Students with Disabilities articulate from middle school, it is critical to review academic and attendance requirements with parents to determine the appropriate diploma option and delivery model of instruction. • Student attendance and increased higher expectations overall in the inclusion setting must be taken into consideration when analyzing the high failure rate in academic grades for students enrolled in SWD-Inclusion classes. • Administrative support in improving attendance of students and provisions for teachers to collaborate are critical to the success of inclusion classes. • Based on the varied needs of our Students with Disabilities, there is a need to continue to offer a continuum of instructional delivery models with the least restrictive learning environment as the goal for every student.

More Related