Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

studied in relation to special education. Although special education has a range of curricula types (see Bigge, 1988; Sabornie & deBettencourt, 1997), this particular study chose to focus on functional curricula. Functional curriculum has lost favor and declined in its use in practice due to recent federal policy pushing inclusion, yet it still remains an important option for secondary students with disabilities (Bigge, Stump, Spagna, & Silberman, 1999; Patton, Cronin, & Bassett, 1997; Polloway, Patton, Smith, & Roderique, 1991). Functional curricula represent curriculum models created to teach functional life skills, or in o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> skills necessary to live, work, and have fun in an inclusive community (Brown et al., 1979; Falvey, 1989; Snell & Browder, 1987). Functional curricula resulted from <strong>the</strong> belief that what was occurring in schools failed to reflect <strong>the</strong> skills necessary for post-school success (Retish, Hitchings, Horvath, Schmalle, 1991). Components of a functional or life management curriculum supported in <strong>the</strong> literature include <strong>the</strong> functional applications of core subject areas (academics), vocational education, community access, daily living, financial, independent living, transportation, social/relationships, and selfdetermination (Patton, Cronin, & Jairrels, 1997). In recognition that students with disabilities are not well prepared for adult life, <strong>the</strong>re has been a growing number of authors calling for implementation of a functional curriculum (Bouck, 2004; Cronin, 1996; Dever & Knapczyk, 1997; Patton et al., 2000). Unfortunately a functional curricula approach is an underresearched area in <strong>the</strong> field of secondary special education. This includes its components, enactment, and its influence on post-school outcomes. Although some researchers and practitioners feel that a functional curriculum is only appropriate for students with severe disabilities (see Clark, 1994), o<strong>the</strong>rs (e.g., Patton et al.) have argued that all students with disabilities need a functional curriculum, particularly at <strong>the</strong> secondary level. Billingsley and Alberston (1999) suggested that special education students’ quality of life is dependent on <strong>the</strong> acquisition of functional skills. Research Study This research sought to understand <strong>the</strong> factors affecting <strong>the</strong> enactment of a functional curriculum in two rural secondary self-contained cross-categorical programs. This article represents one aspect of a larger study of <strong>the</strong> enactment of a functional curriculum in <strong>the</strong>se two settings. The study sought to answer <strong>the</strong> question, what is <strong>the</strong> nature of <strong>the</strong> influence of factors on <strong>the</strong> enactment of a functional curriculum when factors are hypo<strong>the</strong>sized as policy/legislation, community, school, teachers, students, and curriculum materials? Factors influencing <strong>the</strong> implementation of a functional curriculum in secondary special education classrooms are important to investigate as little current research exists on <strong>the</strong> use of a functional curriculum at <strong>the</strong> secondary level for students with disabilities educated in cross-categorical programs. Yet, a functional curriculum represents an essential option as it is not only used in practice but also desired by practitioners and parents. Research has shown that both groups have expressed concern that a functional curriculum will be replaced by a more academically focused curriculum without enough research on a functional approach to educating secondary students with disabilities (Bouck, 2004; Olson, 2004; Patton et al., 2000). Finally, knowing how well secondary schools prepare students with disabilities for <strong>the</strong>ir life and work roles should be central to curriculum implementation, particularly for secondary students with disabilities (Eisenman, 2001; Rabren, Dunn, & Chambers, 2002). However before <strong>the</strong> field can advocate for implementing a particular curriculum, research should be conducted to determine what <strong>the</strong> implementation of different curricula options look like in <strong>the</strong>se classrooms and also what factors affect that implementation. This study undertakes this process for functional curricula. Method Participants 296 / Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities-September 2008 Teachers. One teacher from each of two districts participated in <strong>the</strong> project. Both teachers started <strong>the</strong>ir respective self-contained cross-categorical program and had been
teaching in each program for five years. One teacher, Paula, had been a non-traditional teacher education student, returning to college for her teaching certificate after 25 years in <strong>the</strong> business world. The o<strong>the</strong>r teacher, Katie, had been a traditional teacher education candidate. Katie had focused her preparation on secondary special education while Paula had prepared herself for elementary special education. Teachers were selected because <strong>the</strong>y both stated <strong>the</strong>y taught a functional curriculum to students educated in a cross-categorical selfcontained secondary program, <strong>the</strong> study’s target population. Both teachers and <strong>the</strong>ir schools were also located in <strong>the</strong> same county, which was an intentional decision to minimize factors related to county services as well as geographical variables. Finally, <strong>the</strong> schools were selected because <strong>the</strong>y were comparable in characteristics and each teacher was <strong>the</strong> only teacher in <strong>the</strong> school teaching a selfcontained classroom, which differed from <strong>the</strong> resource room program at each school. Students. Seven of Katie’s 14 students participated in <strong>the</strong> study (i.e., observations, interviews, and file reviews): one senior, two juniors, two sophomores, and two freshmen. Three of <strong>the</strong> students were diagnosed as having a learning disability, two as having a cognitive impairment (mild), one as Autistically impaired, and one as o<strong>the</strong>rwise health impaired. The average IQ across <strong>the</strong> participating students was 77.6. One of Katie’s students was female, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r six were male. Paula had eight of her nine students participate: one senior, three juniors, and four freshmen. Four of her students were female and four male. The average IQ of Paula’s students was 68.5, and her students’ were diagnosed as a learning disability (3), having mild mental impairment (3), moderate mental impairment (1) and emotional impairment (1). All students in both classes had utilized special education services since early elementary; <strong>the</strong> majority attended each district’s pre-primary program (PPI, now known as early childhood developmental delay program). Paraprofessionals. Each school had two paraprofessionals that worked with students in <strong>the</strong> program, although <strong>the</strong>y were not necessarily in <strong>the</strong> room simultaneously. In River Bend High School, one paraprofessional worked in <strong>the</strong> morning and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r worked in <strong>the</strong> afternoon. In <strong>the</strong> second school, Harborville, one paraprofessional was assigned to <strong>the</strong> program while <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r was assigned to two students in <strong>the</strong> program with Autism and followed <strong>the</strong>m into general education classes. Each program also had a transition/job coach that served all of <strong>the</strong> students. Setting Two high schools in <strong>the</strong> state of Michigan were utilized for this project. One high school, Harborville, had a student count of 622 and was located in a rural community. The school had a special education rate of 14.1% and 10.3% of its students were considered economically disadvantaged. The school was relatively racially and ethnically homogeneous (97.1% Caucasian) (Standard & Poor’s, 2004). Purposeful sampling was used to select <strong>the</strong> second school, a rural school within <strong>the</strong> same county that also utilized a functional curriculum within <strong>the</strong>ir high school self-contained cross-categorical program. River Bend High School had a student count of 807, 11.8% special education rate, and 16.9% of its population considered economically disadvantaged. It was also a relatively racially and ethnically homogeneous school district (96% Caucasian) (Standard & Poor’s). Procedure Data were collected through multiple means in an effort to triangulate (Stake, 1995). Classroom observations were performed and each site was observed for an entire school day two days a week for three months (see Bogdan & Biklen, 2003). A total of 85 hours was spent at Harborville and 70 hours spent at River Bend. During <strong>the</strong> classroom observations <strong>the</strong> researcher took fieldnotes and observed <strong>the</strong> events within <strong>the</strong> classroom. Decisions about what to observe and when were based on purposeful sampling (Patton, 1980), such that observations were selected to present <strong>the</strong> most likely opportunity to understand and gain insight into <strong>the</strong> case. For example, Fridays at River Bend were game or movie day. Thus, Friday was not selected as a consistent day to observe at River Bend High School. The researcher also worked with both teachers to Factors and Functional Curriculum / 297
Page 1 and 2: Education and Training in Developme
Page 7 and 8: Self-Determination in Relation to H
Page 9 and 10: ticipants (a) believed the<
Page 11 and 12: Field notes were used to document <
Page 13 and 14: ling information, medical history a
Page 15 and 16: Home. Jack lived with his mo<strong
Page 17 and 18: we felt strongly that we needed inf
Page 19 and 20: literature, mostly to do with <stro
Page 21 and 22: tion? The national consumer survey.
Page 23: Figure 1. Proposed intersection of
Page 27 and 28: also used to support and challenge
Page 29 and 30: Despite Paula’s description of an
Page 31 and 32: The paraprofessionals at Harborvill
Page 33 and 34: Figure 2. Resultant intersection of
Page 35 and 36: learning opportunities relevant to
Page 37 and 38: Bouck, E. C. (2005). Service delive
Page 39 and 40: Thirty Year Review of Safety Skill
Page 41 and 42: TABLE 1 Safety Skill Studies Refere
Page 43 and 44: TABLE 1—(Continued) Reference Par
Page 45 and 46: found differences only in efficienc
Page 47 and 48: skill for integrating persons with
Page 49 and 50: treatment of a burn) may take sever
Page 51 and 52: created video programs to teach stu
Page 53 and 54: and on-schedule behavior and decrea
Page 55 and 56: TABLE 1—(Continued) Author(s) Mor
Page 57 and 58: trums, aggression) in a four-year-o
Page 59 and 60: (Quill, 1995). Furthe</stro
Page 61 and 62: following picture prompt training.
Page 63 and 64: medication, for example anticonvuls
Page 65 and 66: TABLE 1 Number of Facilities That U
Page 67 and 68: Snoezelen on a variety of behaviors
Page 69 and 70: Kapell, D., Nightingale, B., Rodrig
Page 71 and 72: ity being on the c
Page 73 and 74: communication turns (i.e., initiati
Page 75 and 76:
Definitions of Target Behaviors and
Page 77 and 78:
student gave the p
Page 79 and 80:
Figure 2. Bob’s performance data.
Page 81 and 82:
contact increased 41% from baseline
Page 83 and 84:
Figure 5. Eric’s performance data
Page 85 and 86:
Figure 6. Jen’s performance data.
Page 87 and 88:
to students with severe disabilitie
Page 89 and 90:
The use of arm splints has been suc
Page 91 and 92:
Figure 1. Intervention results for
Page 93 and 94:
sions, he engaged in hand mouthing
Page 95 and 96:
Effects of a Reciprocal Questioning
Page 97 and 98:
4-45). Because the
Page 99 and 100:
TABLE 2 Codes of Student Question G
Page 101 and 102:
TABLE 3 Examples of Elements of a S
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 2. Self-monitoring checklist
Page 105 and 106:
TABLE 4 Example Question Words, Thi
Page 107 and 108:
Figure 4. Frequency of prompted and
Page 109 and 110:
Figure 5. Frequency of unprompted s
Page 111 and 112:
their children to
Page 113 and 114:
and lack of random selection makes
Page 115 and 116:
prehension-monitoring activities. C
Page 117 and 118:
all three participants who passed b
Page 119 and 120:
TABLE 2 Leisure Activities Used in
Page 121 and 122:
papers were removed and the
Page 123 and 124:
was 68% (range 42% to 83%). In <str
Page 125 and 126:
Teaching Test-taking Strategies to
Page 127 and 128:
ing experiences beginning at <stron
Page 129 and 130:
short essay question. Items were ei
Page 131 and 132:
plication of the t
Page 133 and 134:
Figure 2. Percent correct on <stron
Page 135 and 136:
aseline probes, data were highly va
show all

Download the Journal (PDF) - Division on Autism and ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?