Senior Research

At the College of Saint Mary as a requirement for graduation I was assigned to write a research paper. I chose to investigate the amount of transitions in a special education student's day and if they correlated with adverse behavior. My research proved my hypothesis.

Abstract

This research has been conducted to correlate adverse behavior in special education students with the number of transitions they experience throughout the day. The problem stems from differing management styles between the regular education teacher and the special education teacher dealing with these students. I have surveyed and interviewed numerous special education teachers to investigate the frequency of transitions and the differing management styles between teachers. Through this research, the hypothesis has been proven and in fact, special education students’ behavior is impacted by differing management styles of educators during transition

Chapter 1: Introduction

Purpose

There are several different perspectives on the issues of guidance and classroom management in relation to the inclusive and pullout settings. The purpose of this study is to identify the effect on the resource student of differing guidance and classroom management styles during transitions, specifically between the regular education classroom and the special education classroom. This problem stems from both the curriculum and wide variances between regular education and special education and lack of transition between the two and the management styles of the educators.

Hypothesis

Special education students experiencing frequent transitions between classrooms with different management styles will exhibit adverse behaviors directly impacting the way they react to their environment and interact with peers and teachers.

Assumptions

It is assumed that:

· Teachers that participated in the study responded with honesty.

· Teachers know the proper definitions of classroom management, transitions, and behavior.

Operational Definitions

Behavior: defined as the manner in which one behaves the actions or reactions of a person in response to external or internal stimuli.
Transition: defined as passage from one form, state, style, or place to another.
Special Education: defined as a classroom or private instruction involving techniques, exercises, and subject matter designed for students whose learning needs cannot be met by a standard school curriculum.
Inclusive education is providing the support necessary so that the special education children can participate in a meaningful way in the ongoing regular classroom activities.

Chapter 2: Review of Literature

“Taking Time for Transitions: The Effects of Transitions in Guidance and Classroom Management between General Education Classrooms and Special Education Classrooms.”

Introduction

There are several different perspectives on the issues of Guidance and Classroom Management in relation to the inclusive and pullout settings. The international move towards inclusion of special needs children in to mainstreaming classrooms rather that educating them in an isolated environment has been a main concern raising, issues and interests for educators, policy makers and researchers in recent time (Chalmers, 1998). The purpose of this paper is review the discipline techniques in place for the special education student and to compare the effects of differing management styles has on both the included students and general education students. The inclusion of children with disabilities in general education classes provides an opportunity for teachers to identify classroom management policies and practices that promote diversity and community (Soodak, 2003). However, through these issues arise such as guidance and management differences between professionals, class disruptions, and the transition time for the special education students between classrooms.

The number of students with developmental disabilities being served in general education classes has steadily increased during the last decade (U.S. Departments of Education, 2001). Research has consistently shown that these students benefit educationally and socially when they are educated with their peers without disabilities. However, simply placing students in these settings does not assure that they will receive instruction that is tailored to their unique educational needs (Johnson, McDonnell, Holzwarth, and Hunter 2004). Nor does this inclusion model give educators management procedures that will be incorporated into the general classroom, as would curriculum.

For the purposes of this paper I will first define the issues, Special education can be defined as classes for students (as the handicapped) with special education needs. When looking at guidance and management in the inclusive or pullout setting the students with special needs that we will be focusing on will be students with learning disabilities or behavior disorders. At this time, these students are most prominently found in the inclusive setting. The inclusive setting being defined as a relation between two classes that exists when all members of the first are also members of the second, this being the special education classroom and the general education classroom. Mainstreaming is placing the special education student into the general education classroom. The difference between mainstreaming and inclusion is philosophical. In mainstreaming, children with disabilities had to “be ready” to be integrated into the mainstream. The emphasis was placed on helping the child with disabilities meet the existing expectations of the classroom. Often the child with disabilities was regarded as a visitor in the classroom and was actually assigned (according to school records) to a special education class. In inclusive education, children with disabilities are full-time members of the general education classroom. The emphasis in inclusive education is providing the support necessary so that the children can participate in a meaningful way in the ongoing classroom activities (Allen, Schwartz, Allen 2001).

In addition, we need to understand the purpose of “resource rooms” in relation to an inclusive classroom. The primary purpose of the resource concept is to provide educational resources to the exceptional student, his teachers and his parents. These resources make possible the exceptional student’s continued enrollment in the regular classroom (Drexler, K). It is specifically the transitions between these classrooms and the different management styles that will be the focus of this paper.

Also, there is some debate between the differences among guidance and classroom management and discipline. Classroom management, for the purposes of this paper will be looked upon as the measures a teacher takes to avoid students “acting out.” The goal of classroom management practices is to create a child friendly environment so the students behave. The goal for discipline is to help children learn to discipline themselves, this is a learning experience. Discipline is what you do to correct a situation where a child has inappropriate behavior (McNair, 2005). However, there is no simple conclusion to be drawn from the research or simple messages for parents and policy makers about child discipline practices. The research offers different findings depending on the particular focus of the work. Discipline in its broadest sense can mean positively educating and guiding as well as punishing. There is confusion in the public debate between discipline and punishment, partly as a result of research studies narrowly focusing on physical punishment rather than discipline (Henricson and Grey, 2001).

Problem

While the field of special education evolved to serve more students with increasingly complex needs, data on pullout special education programs for students with learning disabilities revealed results that were not satisfactory in terms of school achievement or long-term benefits (Carlson, 1997; Fuchs and Fuchs, 1995, Wagner and Shaver, 1993). Factors identified as barriers to student success are lower expectations, uninspiring and restricted curricula focused on rote or irrelevant tasks, disjointedness from general education curricula, and negative student attitudes resulting from school failure and stigmatizing segregation (Rea, 2002). It is these barrier factors that will stand as the initial frustration of the special education students to cause disruptive behaviors in the general education classroom. In addition to these barrier factors the attention must be turned to the fact that we are dealing with special education students that already have a preexisting issue related directly to their education. The problems stem both from the curriculum and wide variances between regular education and special education and lack of transition between the two and the management styles of the educators.

What has been found is that the foundation of the management system stays the same for all students, but an individual’s targeted behavior(s) may receive specific intervention(s) (Clair, 2003). It is those interventions that are causing disruptions in general education classrooms, be it from lack of implementation or the general educator’s perception of the behavior modification plan. Also, the special education teacher may not be aware of the individual classroom management system that does remain fluid for all students. This is precisely where the problem lies, between the regular education classroom and special education classroom. With the requirement for students with disabilities to be included in the regular classroom and be educated with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent appropriate, regular classroom teachers, as part of the IEP team, must now more than ever, think carefully and methodically about discipline strategies they may employ (Clair, 2003).

Students with disabilities often demonstrate delays in social development that parallel delays in their academic performance and achievement. Some students lack skills in initiating and sustaining positive social relationships and in appropriately interpreting social cues. They often exhibit more aggressive and negative verbal and nonverbal behaviors and may be either disruptive or withdrawn (Pavri, 2000). Helfin and Bullock (1999) surveyed special education and general education teacher’s attitudes toward inclusion specifically with students with emotional and or behavioral disorders. Their study found that the top (problems of inclusion reported by special education and general education teachers were: inadequate support and training, non-proportional ratios, teachers feeling unprepared to meet academic needs of students with disabilities, behavior management issues, and too much extra time making curriculum adaptations and collaborating (Olson, 2003). In these instances of inclusion and pullout programs offering special education students time in the general classroom, guidance and classroom management can be the largest factor of success for the special education students. The problem now is shifted to the teacher’s responsibility.

“The degree of time loss in the classroom will be closely tied to the teacher’s management skills. Some time loss to managerial needs inevitable in every classroom but the goal should be to keep lost time to a minimum. The best antidote for time loss is good classroom management. The teacher should strive to maintain a high level of student engagement through appropriate pacing sequencing of activities and assignment of tasks and materials, which are at an appropriate difficulty level for the students”(Goodman, 2000). “Transitions pose a special challenge for every teacher. As the complexity of the class program increases so does the number of transitions to be managed. Every transition has the potential for student disengagement and or class disruption. The management of transitions deserves the teacher’s attention; transitions that are managed well will do much to enhance the overall classroom program” (Goodman, 2002).

Maintaining appropriate classroom behavior can be a complex and difficult task. This task becomes more stressful when it involves students with disabilities. When students with disabilities display disruptive behavior, classroom teachers must carefully and methodically think about the discipline strategies they might employ. Although the disruptive behavior some of these students exhibit is similar to that of students without disabilities, the discipline strategies used to correct or redirect disruptive behavior can vary considerably (Daniels, 1998). Generally, classroom teachers use the same disciplinary practices to manage the disruptive behavior of students with disabilities that they use to manage the behavior of students without disabilities. Much of the undesirable behavior exhibited by both groups is similar in nature. The differences, however, may originate in the teacher's selection of the particular behavioral intervention (Daniels, 1998).

Offering effective instruction in both academic and social skills may contribute to prevention or early intervention of some behavior problems (Clair, 2003) during these transition times. Using behavior management techniques consistently and skillfully may also benefit. Research indicates that positive behavior supports that are based on reward of desirable behavior, nonviolent discipline of inappropriate behavior, effective instruction in academic and social skills, and correction of environmental conditions that foster inappropriate behavior will most likely effect positive change in a student’s behavior during transition times (Clair, 2003).

The student’s disengagement in the classroom during these transitions leads into management issues; this is true for both the exceptional learner and the general education classroom student. The issue of chronic disengagement is particularly problematic for students with exceptionalities who receive their educational services in inclusive classrooms. These students often demonstrate diverse cognitive abilities, evidence multiple and varied instructional needs, and perform academically above or below their same-age peer group (Friend Camp; Bursuck, 1999). Also, many students with differing types of exceptionalities function well below national normative levels in measures of cooperation, assertion, and self-control while demonstrating elevated scores for externalizing behavior problems, hyperactivity, and inattention (Gresham, MacMillan, Camp; Bocian, 1996). Combined, these educational characteristics render students with exceptionalities vulnerable to disengaging from tasks requiring independent work or during transitions (Rock, 2005). These disengagements are seen not only to cause behavior issues, but can take up valuable time that the student could be using to learn.

Effective Practices

One promising approach to educating children whose behavior impedes their own learning or the learning of others in a respectful and inclusive manner is called positive behavioral support (Soodak, 2003). Positive behavioral supports, which were introduced into special education in a revision of IDEA (1997), refer to the use of behavioral interventions and teaching strategies to achieve important and meaningful behavior change. Positive behavioral supports are based on the belief that problem behaviors are context-related and purposeful, and interventions should reflect an understanding of and respect for the student (Soodak, 2003). The intent is to be preventive, proactive, and educative (Koegel, Koegel, and Dunlap, 1996). Positive behavioral supports are an alternative to punishment and other traditional methods of behavior modification, which do not necessarily teach positive behaviors or create a climate of civility. Although teachers can and should use traditional methods to strengthen students’ positive behaviors by “catching them being good,” behavioral supports proactively modify contexts and teach students to use appropriate behaviors so the stage is set for them to do well (Soodak, 2003).

In addition to positive behavioral supports, other behavioral interventions have been proved to be effective for the transitional student. These strategies include: Creating a structured and predictable environment for the students (Connor, 1990), providing a warm socioemotional climate, having high expectations for the students, providing them with attention, and watching students with disabilities for signs of fatigue because most can become fatigued by straining to learn(Lewis and Doorlang, 1995) These interventions alone will not completely remove behavior disruptions from the classroom, however these along with others will promote successful behaviors from all students not just the exceptional learner.

According to Marzano, (2003) along with well-designed and clearly communicated rules and procedures, the teacher must acknowledge students' behavior, reinforcing acceptable behavior and providing negative consequences for unacceptable behavior. It has been found that teachers build effective relationships through such strategies as the following:

Using a wide variety of verbal and physical reactions to students' misbehavior, such as moving closer to offending students and using a physical cue, such as a finger to the lips, to point out inappropriate behavior.
Cuing the class about expected behaviors through prearranged signals, such as raising a hand to indicate that all students should take their seats.
Providing tangible recognition of appropriate behavior—with tokens or chips, for example.
Employing group contingency policies that hold the entire group responsible for behavioral expectations.
Employing home contingency techniques that involve rewards and sanctions at home.

Different styles of management work for different students. The classroom with different learners needs to encompass guidance strategies that are beneficial to all and that are conductive to positive growth and learning. Both general education teachers and special education teachers need to develop effective instructional and interpersonal skills to work with colleagues in the development and delivery of classroom based services for students with disabilities and general education students (Rea, 2002).

The focus from guidance and classroom management and the student’s misbehavior consequently turns to why the student is being disruptive. According to Daniels (1998), many factors initiate disruptive behavior, inappropriate curriculum and teaching strategies can contribute to student misbehavior as one example. However, in particular it is the transition, be it from classroom to classroom or subject-to-subject, that allows for the most observable and disruptive behaviors to manifest.

The effects of guidance and classroom management on special education students in addition to the transitions into general education classrooms are profound. The level of collaboration between teachers needs to be high with an emphasis on positive attitudes on both sides. The students with disabilities transitioning into the general classroom need to be made aware of expectations and understand their duties in both classrooms. This will only be a successful educational experience for the student if they understand the rules of the classroom and are made a part of daily activities. The inclusive movement has left many things to be determined by the teachers and the individual’s level of ability. This leads into where one of the most significant problems of inclusion can be seen, which is guidance and classroom management.

Research on the specific effects of differing management styles is lacking. This may be due to the ongoing revisions of IDEA, or possibly because the pullout movement has not been considered an adequate response to inclusion and the problems that lie within the mainstreaming special needs students. It is my intention to research the effects of differing management styles and place together the most effective strategies for special education students as well as the general education students participating in these classrooms. No two children learn the same and the same can be said with discipline in the classroom. Management must be unique to the students; my goal is to combine classroom management along with guidance to make the transitions from room to room or teacher to teacher less disruptive in the education process.

Chapter 3: Design of Study

Population

Nine public schools from four school districts were included in my study. Six schools were from an urban setting, and three from a suburban setting. The population of teachers that were surveyed were all certified special education teachers and have been employed for at least five years. I followed my interviews with an interview to further my study and to create more through research.

Limitations

There were several limitations that affected my study.

I encountered a limited population of special education teachers to distribute my survey and conduct my interview.
The length of time that I had to prepare a survey and interview, distribute and conduct my tools of research, and then collect and analyze the data provided.
The absence of student input on the actual effects of classroom management directly.
I was limited in the number of places that I could collect data.

Data Collection

In order to obtain statistical evidence to support my hypothesis, I chose to distribute a survey containing seven questions in which the teachers had three options to answer: Yes, No and Not applicable. The survey consisted of seven questions regarding transitions in special education students’ days, guidance and classroom management, and the impact of environment on special education students’ behavior. An interview was also conducted that consisted of five questions that were regarding discipline style, preparations for transitions in the students’ day, and the teacher’s opinions of how their management style differs from the regular education teacher’s management style.

Chapter 4: Analysis of Data

The initial survey consisted of seven multiple choice questions. The possible answers were: yes, no, and not applicable. The populations surveyed and interviewed were all special education teachers that have been in the field for at least five years. The interview consisted of five questions. The open ended interview questions allowed for teacher interpretation and opinion. This information was important to the study to further analyze the special education teacher’s philosophy regarding guidance and classroom management.

Survey Analysis:

Survey Questions 1-7

1. In your opinion, do special education students experience frequent transitions (including from classroom to classroom and subject to subject) during the day?

89% said yes
11% said no
0 responded not applicable

The time lost during transitions can be overwhelming. This data shows that 89% of special education teachers agree that special education students experience frequent transitions. This becomes an interruption in learning and can lead to “holes” if they are constantly in a state of transition. Research shows that our special education students need consistency in their day; however this becomes difficult when they are required to transition between subject and classroom numerous times throughout the day.

2. In your experience, do transitions specifically from classroom to classroom include differences in management styles from the teachers of those classrooms?

82% said yes
11% said no
7% said not applicable

When working with special education students, consistency is needed to create an environment in which they may feel comfortable and conducive to learning. When a student experiences frequent transitions involving differences in management styles the problem arises of expectations and boundaries. The special education student may not have the ability to differentiate expectations of teachers between classrooms thus creating frustration. Once the student reaches frustration level, any learning of content may be difficult.

3. Do management styles (ways of classroom management and discipline) of the teachers affect special education students’ behavior?

88% said yes
8% said no
4% said not applicable

“The degree of time loss in the classroom will be closely tied to the teacher’s management skills” (Goodman, 2000). The amount of time that a special education student spends in any given classroom is critical to their learning. When a teacher’s management style is affecting the special education student in an adverse way, the student’s learning will be directly impacted, thus creating another barrier in their education.

4. In your opinion, does classroom environment impact the special education students’ behavior?

89% said yes
0% said no
11% said not applicable

The classroom environment impacts special education students’ behavior in many ways. If a classroom is over stimulating to the student, the student will have difficulty staying on task. Over stimulating environments will induce adverse behavior in some special education students thus the student will be labeled with behavior disorders when in reality, it is the environment that is preventing the student to be able to concentrate.

5. In your opinion, does teacher demeanor (attitudes) affect the special education students’ behavior?

92% said yes
4% said no
4% said not applicable

Teacher demeanor affects all students. In addition to demeanor, it is important for the special education teachers to communicate with the general education teacher regarding concerns with the student and positive ways to modify behavior. Also, teacher demeanor can attribute unnecessary stress to the special education student therefore creating a stressful environment. Without proper education on effective inclusion strategies, teachers may experience unwanted stress with the special education student in the classroom. Continuing education on the teachers’ behalf can alleviate this stress.

6. In your opinion, do frequent transition (including classroom to classroom and subject to subject) throughout the day lead to adverse (unwanted or unfavorable) behaviors from the special education student?

70% said yes
15% said no
15% said not applicable

The focus from guidance and classroom management and the student’s misbehavior consequently turns to why the student is being disruptive. According to Daniels (1998), it is the transition in particular, be it from classroom to classroom or subject-to-subject, that allows for the most observable and disruptive behaviors to manifest.

7. In your opinion, do you find that your management style differs from the management styles of other teachers in regular education classrooms?

93% said yes
7% said no
0% said not applicable

There are several perspectives on guidance and classroom management in education among professionals. There is no proven single management style that is effective for all students at all times. Therefore, the issue of consistency is the issue when working with special education students along with the verbalization of expectations in all classes from all teachers is imperative. Teacher collaboration and communication will be essential in providing special education students consistent management between classrooms.

Through this survey, I was able to analyze how special education teachers view the impact of differing management styles on the special education student as well as other factors that impact behavior as well. Overall, the results were unanimous, in that the majority of the teachers found that management styles did impact behavior and that the guidance and classroom management styles of special educators does differ from the regular education classroom teachers.

Interview Analysis:

Interview Questions 1-5

1. In your opinion, how would you describe your discipline style? Responses included:

My students know what to expect from me.
I am consistent in my management style.
My discipline style is based on good choices rather that rules set in concrete.
I am strict in my management style, but fair to my students.

According to the majority of teachers interviewed, consistency and “good choices” are the main themes found in discipline styles of special education teachers. Through this the students know what to expect from the teacher and is able to form ownership in their education by making the choices that affect their learning.

2. How do you prepare your students for transitions? Responses included:

Social Stories
Visual Schedules
Clearly stating to the student the schedule and what will happen throughout the day.
If needed the students physically move symbols over to the “done” side of their schedule so they know what’s important.

According to the majority of teachers interviewed, preparation for transitions include tools for the students to manage, this is another way for the student to take ownership of learning. In using both visual and physical cues the student will have repetition needed to prepare themselves for transitions.

3. Do you feel that your management style differs from other teachers? How? Responses included:

My management style is more individualized.
I give my students opportunities of make choices rather than “forcing” forcing them to do something.
I never raise my voice to my students, in my opinion when teachers raise their voice to students; it just makes them feel unsuccessful.
I try to have a relaxed environment and encourage students to avoid frustration.

Individualized instruction as well as individualized discipline were the two most common responses from teachers when asked about the difference in discipline styles between educators. In special education this is a frequent occurrence, however the general classroom teacher may not have this as an option. Collaboration among professionals and school wide support were two suggestions from interviewees.

4. In your opinion, how can teachers better prepare students for transitions? Responses included:

Take time for transitions and have schedules up for all students to see. Allow special need students to share social stories with each other.
By giving students advance notice to change. Also, provide students who require one on one attention that attention during transitions.

Preparation is the key to successful transitions according to the majority of teachers interviewed. By preparing the special education student in advance of the transition to come, expectations and concerns will have an appropriate time to be discussed with the student. By doing this, the student will be better prepared and less resistant to the change.

5. In your opinion, how can teachers help make management of Special Education students more consistent? Responses included:

Classroom teachers and Special Education teachers need to communicate and collaborate.
Everyone needs to be in agreement with guidance and classroom management.
Teachers need to make time every week to communicate with each other and voice concerns with students.

Collaboration and communication were the two most common responses to this interview question. The bridge of trust and partnership must be present for effective collaboration between professionals. Communication will be imperative in voicing concerns with the students and collaboration on behavior modification plans for the student so they may participate in the general classroom in a meaningful way.

Interview results show that there is a wide variance between special education and the general education classroom.

Chapter 5: Discussion

Summary and Conclusion:

After analyzing the data received, it became apparent that differences in guidance and classroom management during transitions does impact the special education students behavior. The overwhelming unanimous responses from the special education teachers affirms the hypothesis of this study. Data results show that factors in transition including: environment, teacher demeanor, and frequency of transitions play essential parts in the success of transitions for the special education student.

Recommendations:

In completion of the study, it is apparent that further research needs to be conducted to identify the actual affects on the special education students. According to Rea both general education teachers and special education teachers need to develop effective instructional and interpersonal skills to work with colleagues in the development and delivery of classroom-based services for students with disabilities and general education students. Therefore, collaboration between teachers in regards to transition times and management practices is also recommended. In addition, behavior modification plans for students exhibiting extreme difficulty with transitions. Finally, it is recommended that the students have consistency in discipline and fluent transitions throughout the day.

Work Cited

Allen, K., Schwartz, I. Allen, E. (2001), The Exceptional Child: Inclusion in Early Childhood Education. Clifton Park, New York, Delmar Thompson Learning Inc.

Carlson, E. (1997). In-school and post-school outcomes of students declassified form special education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. College of William and Mary: Williamsburg, VA.

Chalmers, R. (1998). Selective Adaptation: How Teachers Manage Their Work in “Inclusive” Classrooms. Unpublished Doctor of Philosophy, University of Western Australia, Perth.

Clair, T. (2003). Behavioral Support, Intervention, and Discipline in Special Education. Oregon Department of Education, Office of Special Education: Salem, OR.

Connor, F. (1990). Physical Education for Children with Autism. Teaching Exceptional Children, 23(1), 30-33.

Daniels, V. (1998) How to Manage Disruptive Behavior in Inclusive Classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, Vol. 30, Number 4, Page 26.

Drexler, Katherine. (2005), The Purpose of Resource. Retrieved November 20, 2005, from http://www.stmary.k12.la.us/specialservices/resource.htm

Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (1999). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Fuchs, D., and Fuchs, L. (1995). What’s so “Special” about Special Education? Phi Delta Kappan, 76(7), 552-530

Gresham, F. M., MacMillan, D. L., & Bocian, K. M. (1996). Learning disabilities, low achievement, and mild mental retardation: More alike than different? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 29(6), 570-581.

Goodman, L. (2000) Time and Learning in the Special Education Classroom. New York, Survey Press.

Helfin, L.J., and Bullock, L.M. (1999). Inclusion of Students with Emotional Behavioral Disorders: A survey of teachers in general and special education. Preventing School Failure, 43(3). Retrieved September 18, 2002 from: http://web9.epnet.com/citation.asp

Henricson, C., and Grey, A. (2001), Understanding Discipline. A summary. National Family and Parenting Institute, London, England.

Johnson, J., Jesse, W., McDonnell, J., Holzwarth, V., Hunter, K. (2004) The Efficacy of Embedded Instruction for Students with Developmental Disabilities Enrolled in General Education Classes. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, Vol. 6, Number 4, Page 214.

Koegel, R.L., Koegel, L.K. and Dunlap, G. (1996) Positive Behavior Support: Including people with difficult behavior in the community. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

Lewis, R.B., and Doorlag, D.H. (1995). Teaching Special Student in the Mainstream. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill.

Marzano, R.J. & Marzano, J.S. (2003). The key to classroom management. Leadership, 61(1), 6-18.

McNair, Joseph D. (2005) Classroom Management and Communication. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from http://faculty.mdc.edu/jmcnair/EDG3410%20Topic%200utline/Classroom %20Management.htm

Olson, J. (20036). Special Education and General Education Teacher Attitudes Toward Inclusion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Wisconsin-Stout.

Pavri, S. and Luftig, R. (2000). The Social Face of Inclusive Education: Are Students with Learning Disabilities Really Included in the Classroom. Retrieved December 1, 2005, from http://www.ldonline.org/article.php?id=500&loc=97 LD OnLine.

Rea, P. (2002). Inclusive and Pullout Programs Unpublished doctoral dissertation. College of William and Mary: Williamsburg, VA

Rock,M. (2005). Use of Strategic Self-Monitoring to Enhance Academic Engagement, Productivity, and Accuracy of Students With and Without Disabilities. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, January 2005, Vol.7, Issue 1.

Soodak, Leslie C., Classroom Management in Inclusive Settings. Theory into Practice, Fall 2003, Vol. 42, Issue 4. Academic Search Elite

Wagner, M., and Shaver, D. (1993). The national Longitudinal Transition Study of Special Education Students: Report on procedures for the first wave of data collection. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

Appendices:

Permission to Conduct Survey

Surveys

Interview Responses

Power Point Presentation

· Data

· Graphs