Session Information
04 SES 06 A, Effective Provision: Models
Paper Session
Contribution
This study consisted of a comparative analysis of two instructional approaches for students with learning disabilities in Belgium (Communauté française) : co-teaching in inclusive setting and solo-teaching in a self-contained special education classroom with high ratio of speech therapy. Of primary interest here were the indicators that enabled us to compare the two models and to measure their effect on the students outcomes in reading/writing and mathematics and the school attendance.We characterised and compared the populations in the two sub-samples (inclusion and special education), ensued with an analysis of the resources attributed to each instructional approaches and finally proposed a comparison of the students’ outcomes to external testing and their attendance.
In the process of building school integration, a comparative analysis responds to the “fundamental” premise of segregational special education which argues that its specific organisation, in contrast with general education, is more effective in meeting the needs of students with learning disabilities. Three significant meta-analyses (Calberg and Kavale, 1980; Wang and Baker, 1986; Baker, 1994) have examined and compared the social integration and academic achievement of integrated students and students in special education. The statistical results emanating from these three mega-analyses all favour integration, reporting that learning disabled students integrated into regular classes not only do better academically but are also more socially integrated than are their special education peers. Size effects vary from .08 to .44 for academic achievement, and on social factors, these fluctuate between .11 and .28, with an average of .195. Positive results were also reported for more severe handicaps and significant disabilities. More recent studies on students with learning disabilities highlight the importance of differentiated education models that promote integration. Moore & al. (1998) observed that these students do benefit from integration/inclusion, despite the continuous need for adapted and individualised services. In a study on at-risk students (learning and/or behavioural disabilities), Saint-Laurent & al. (1998) compared a pull-in inclusion program and a pull-out resource class and their effect on achievement and observed a positive impact on writing achievement for included students and on reading and math for regular students. The authors also observed that the integrated students did not receive a lesser amount of specialised services compared to the learning disabled students. Wang (1997), who studied the implementation in Pennsylvania of several inclusion models, concurred as to their benefits on learning for both integrated and regular students, as a decrease of 42% was observed in the number of cases referred to special education services. Positive results in terms of behaviour were also obtained by both the integrated and regular students. Moreover, teachers were positively influenced by this implementation. Rea & al. (2002) compared two integrative models for students with learning disabilities: compared to the other groups, the outcomes of the included students were superior in first language, mathematics, and science. These authors also examined the social integration of these students, reporting less negative behaviours and greater class attendance. Murawski and Swanson (2001) concluded that insufficient data prevented a clear determination, as only six out of the 99 studies reviewed met the meta-analysis selection criteria. The latter demonstrated a moderately significant size-effect (+.40).
Method
Expected Outcomes
References
[1] C. Carlberg and K.A. Kavale, “The efficacy of special versus regular class placement for exceptional children: A meta-analysis”, Journal of Special Education, n° 14, 1980, pp. 296-309. [2] M.C. Wang and E. Baker, “Mainstreaming programs: Design features and effects”, Journal of Special Education, vol. 19, 1986, pp. 503-521. [3] Baker, E.T., Meta-analytic Evidence for Non-inclusive Educational Practices: Does Educational Research Support Current Pratice for Special-needs Students. Thesis. Philadelphia: Temple University, 1994. [4] Moore C., Gilbreath D. and Maiuri F., Educating Students with Disabilities in General Education Classrooms: A Summary of the Research. Oregon : Université de l’Oregon. http://interact.uoregon.edu/wrrc/AKInclusion.html, 1998. [5] L. Saint-Laurent, J. Dionne, J. Giasson, E. Royer, C. Simard and B. Piérard, “Academic achievement effects of an in-class service model on students with and without disabilities”, Exceptional Children, vol. 64, n°2, 1998, pp. 239-253. [6] M.C. Wang, Serving Students with Special Needs through Inclusive Education Approaches, ERIC, ED 419 076, Philadelphie : Mid-Atlantic Laboratory for Students Succes, 1997. [7] P. Rea, V.L. McLaughin and C. Walter-Thomas “Outcomes for students with learning disabilities in inclusive and pullout programs”, Exceptionnal Children, vol. 68, n°2, 2002, pp. 203-223. [8] W.W. Murawski and H.L. Swanson, “A Meta-Analysis of Co-Teaching Research: Where Are the data?”, Remedial and Special Education, vol. 22, n°5, 2001, pp. 258-267. [9] P. Tremblay. “Évaluation de la validité et de l’efficacité interne de l’enseignement spécialisé primaire de type 8 en Wallonie”. Éducation – Formation – n° e-286, 2007, pp. 9-21. [10] Communauté française de Belgique, Les indicateurs de l’enseignement. ETNIC – Services des Statistiques de la Communauté française. Bruxelles : Communauté française de Belgique, 2008. [11] G.E. Zuriff, “The Myths of Learning disabilities”, Public Affairs Quaterly, vol. 10, n°4, 2006, pp. 395-405.
Search the ECER Programme
- Search for keywords and phrases in "Text Search"
- Restrict in which part of the abstracts to search in "Where to search"
- Search for authors and in the respective field.
- For planning your conference attendance you may want to use the conference app, which will be issued some weeks before the conference
- If you are a session chair, best look up your chairing duties in the conference system (Conftool) or the app.