ERIC ED469281: The Educational Context and Outcomes for High School Students with Disabilities: Overview of the Study and Findings. Research Report.

26 Pages·2002·0.38 MB·English

by  ERIC

DOCUMENT RESUME
ED 469 281
EC 309 207
AUTHOR
Schumaker, Jean B.; Deshler, Donald D.; Lenz, B. Keith;
Bulgren, Janis A.; Davis, Betsy; Grossen, Bonnie; Marquis,
Janet
The Educational Context and Outcomes for High School Students
TITLE
with Disabilities: Overview of the Study and Findings.
Research Report.
INSTITUTION
Kansas Univ., Lawrence. Inst. for Academic Access.
SPONS AGENCY
Special Education Programs (ED/OSERS), Washington, DC.
REPORT NO
RR-1
PUB DATE 2002-00-00
NOTE
25p.
CONTRACT
84.324S
PUB TYPE Reports
Research (143)
EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage.
DESCRIPTORS
Academic Achievement; *Disabilities; Educational Environment;
Educational Research; Environmental Influences; High Schools;
*Inclusive Schools; *Outcomes of Education; *Regular and
Special Education Relationship; Special Classes; *Student
Placement; Teacher Attitudes; *Theory Practice Relationship
ABSTRACT
This research report discusses findings from descriptive
studies that investigated the context and outcomes of educational programs
for students with disabilities who were expected to receive standard high-
school diplomas. The nine high schools included three in urban areas, three
in suburban areas, and three in rural areas. Principals, special education
administrators and teachers, general educators, students, and parents
supplied information through interviews and/or questionnaires. Special and
general education teachers were observed as they were teaching and students
with disabilities were observed as they were being taught. Data were gathered
on the instructional methods and materials being used. Results indicated that
in only one of the schools was there a vision, policies, and standard
procedures for educating students with disabilities within the general
education curriculum and this was the only school utilizing research-based
methods to teach students the strategies they needed to succeed. This school
received the highest satisfaction ratings from general education teachers and
students with disabilities. Most of the other schools were educating students
with disabilities within subject-area courses taught by special education
teachers in the special education classroom or in low-track courses designed
for low-achievers. Students were not achieving and had low grade-point
averages. (Contains 10 references.)
(Author/CR)
Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made
from the original document.
,te forAcademic Access
Research Report #1
The educational context and outcomes for
high school students with disabilities:
Overview of the study and findings
Jean B. Schumaker, Donald D. Deshler,
B. Keith Lenz, Janis A. Bulgren, Betsy Davis,
Bonnie Grossen, and Janet Marquis
(
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Office of Educational Research and Improvement
EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION
CENTER (ERIC)
X
This document has been reproduced as
received from the person or organization
originating it.
Minor changes have been made to
improve reproduction quality.
Points of view or opinions stated in this
document do not necessarily represent
official OERI position cr policy.
2002
O
I D EA s
that
Work
U.S. Office of Special
Education Programs
Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Education,
Office of Special Education Programs
Grant # 84.324S
AVAILABLE
2
BEST COPY
Overview
Abstract
This research report is a summary of a series of descriptive studies that have been
completed on nine high schools in four states.. Three of the schools were located in urban
areas,
three were located in suburban areas, and three were in rural areas. The purpose of the studies
was to describe the context and outcomes of educational programs for students with disabilities
who were expected to receive standard high-school diplomas and the outcomes of those
programs. Principals, special education administrators and teachers, general education teachers,
students, and parents all supplied information through interviews and/or questionnaires. Special
and general education teachers were observed as they were teaching and students with
disabilities were observed as they were being taught. Data were gathered on the instructional
methods and materials being used. Results indicated that in only one of the schools was there a
vision, policies, and standard procedures for educating students with disabilities within the
general education curriculum and this was the only school utilizing research-based methods to
teach students the strategies they need to succeed. This school received the highest satisfaction
ratings from general education teachers and students with disabilities. In general, most of the
other schools were educating students with disabilities within subject-area courses taught by
special education teachers in the special education classroom or in low-track courses designed
for low-achievers. Technology and research-based programs were not being used to educate
these students. As a result, students with disabilities are not achieving, and their grade-point
averages in core courses are low. Satisfaction ratings of all consumers are relatively low with
few ratings falling in the "satisfied range."
1
Overview
Introduction
preparing adolescents
schools has been abysmal relative to
The record of American high
contextual demands of secondary
successfully to the academic and
with disabilities to respond
National Longitudinal Transition
underscored by the findings of the
schools. This poor record is
of
that a disproportionate number
Hebbeler, 1993) which reported
Study (Wagner, Blackorby, &
(compared to 25% of the general
(38%) dropped out of school
students with disabilities
of other
also evidenced a broad array
of school, these students
population). Prior to dropping out
of absenteeism; (b) lower
problems including: (a) higher rates
performance and adjustment
general population (Wagner
failure rates than those in the
grade-point averages; (c) higher course
social
higher rates of inappropriate
of poor self-esteem; and (e)
et al., 1993); (d) feelings
of these individuals
Predictably, only a small minority
behaviors (Schumaker, 1992).
al., 1993). In
post-secondary education (Wagner et
(approximately 25%) were found to pursue a
in high
with disabilities to succeed
have not prepared students
short, American high schools
globalization of commerce and
demanding expectations of the
school, let alone to face the
transformation of the workplace
of technology, and the dramatic
industry, the dramatic growth
1999; Rifkin, 1996).
itself (Martin, 1999; Oliver,
and the very nature of work
host of emerging trends
of circumstances appears, a
As discouraging as the above state
Foremost among these
adolescents with disabilities.
the situation even further for
may exacerbate
meet
including those with disabilities,
expectation that all learners,
trends are: (a) the increased
(Erickson, Ysseldyke,
professional organizations
adopted by states and
the curriculum standards
the pressure to include
Research Council, 1997); (b)
Thurlow, & Elliot, 1998; National
day as
for as much of the school
general education classroom
adolescents with disabilities in the
growing
and information and the
(c) the explosion of knowledge
possible (Wagner et al., 1993);
thinking skills with their content-
merely acquire but integrate
expectation that all students not
1998); and (d) the
activities (Kameenui & Carnine,
in authentic problem-solving
area knowledge
be
for students with disabilities
P.L. 105-17 that programming
clear expectations set forth in
the general education curriculum
of successfully mastering
outcome-based within the context
1997).
(Turnbull, Rainbolt, & Buchele-Ash,
how high schools might
research is available related to
Unfortunately, although some
the ways
is known with regard to
& Schumaker, 2001) little
address these challenges (Bulgren
who might be expected to earn
serving students with disabilities
that high schools are currently
of a
investigation, which was comprised
Thus, the purpose of this
standard high school diplomas.
served in their
disabilities are currently being
describe how students with
series of studies, was to
the rigorous
was to describe
of those services. Another purpose
high schools and the outcomes
high school
in order to earn standard
which they have to succeed
general education courses in
for this series of studies.
of the methods and results
diplomas. Below is a summary
4
Overview
Methods
Settings
Nine public high schools serving grades 9 through 12 participated. Three types of high
schools participated. Three (hereafter referred to as "urban high schools") represented schools
located in high-density areas (i.e., urban/metropolitan areas populated by more than 150,000
people) and in which more than 50% of the student population is comprised of "students living in
poverty." "Students living in poverty" were defined for the purposes of this study as students
who had applied for and received free or reduced-cost lunch benefits. Three of the high schools
(hereafter referred to as "rural high schools") represented schools located in low-density
population areas (i.e., towns of fewer than 10,000 people and fewer than 150 people per square
mile) and in which more than 10% of the student population was comprised of students living in
poverty. Three of the high schools (hereafter referred to as "suburban high schools") represented
schools that were located in towns having a population of more than 45,000 people and fewer
than 150,000 people and in which fewer than 10% of the student population was comprised of
students living in poverty.
Three of the high schools (one urban, one rural, and one suburban) were located in
Kansas. Three of the high schools (one urban, one rural, and one suburban) were located in the
state of Washington. Two schools (one rural, one urban) were located in California. One school
(suburban) was located in Oregon.
The student populations in the urban schools ranged in size from 1,031 to 3,508 students,
while in the rural schools the populations ranged in size from 330 to 693 students. The student
populations in the suburban schools ranged in size from 931 to 1,691 students.
The percentage of students with disabilities in the nine schools ranged from 3.9% in a
suburban school to 14.8% in an urban school. Six of the schools had Caucasian majorities,
ranging from 67% to 95% of the student population. One school had a Latino/Hispanic majority;
one school had an African-American majority; and one had an Armenian majority.
Within these high school, students were observed in three settings. One setting in which
they were observed was the special education class setting. This was defined as any classroom or
space in which a SWD was receiving services to assist him/her to succeed in general education
courses. Students were also observed in general education classrooms in which rigorous ninth-
grade general education courses were being taught. A rigorous general education course was
defined as a math, English, social studies/history, science, or foreign language course that a
student must pass in order to earn a standard high-school diploma, that contributes credits toward
a standard high-school diploma (as in the case of a foreign language course), that has been
designed for helping students meet state standards, and that was being taught by a teacher who
has credentials in the subject area. The specific rigorous courses targeted for this investigation
35
Overview
English, biology,
taught to ninth graders: algebra I, ninth-grade
were five courses typically
classes such
also observed in settings before and after
history, and Spanish I. Some students were
observed in both special
and school-entry areas. Teachers were
as the hallways, lunch rooms,
classrooms.
education classrooms and in general education
Subjects
targeted in this project were students
Students. The students with disabilities (SWDs)
emotional
having a disability (e.g., a learning disability,
who had been formally classified as
disability, visual disability, hearing disability,
disorder/disturbance, behavioral disorder, physical
addition, they were students who
impairment) according to state guidelines. In
or other health
above or
rigorous general education course as defined
had either been enrolled in one or more
have
teachers as students who could successfully
who were judged by their special education
had had the
general education course successfully if they
been enrolled in one or more rigorous
standard high-
students who were expected to earn
appropriate instructional support. These were
of
teachers. Hereafter, this will be the only type
school diplomas by their special education
student with disabilities referred to in this report.
they were
students with disabilities were enrolled,
In general education classes where no
had each
"At-risk (AR) students" were students who
replaced in the study by "at-risk students."
who were
required course in a previous semester or
earned more than one failing grade in a
time of the
education course as defined above at the
already failing at least one rigorous general
having a
who had not been formally classified as
study. In addition, they were also students
disability.
normally achieving (NA) students. These
A third group of students who participated were
classes as participating
enrolled in the same ninth-grade English
were students who were
least a "C" grade in the course. They were
students with disabilities and who were earning at
gender and grade level.
matched to the students with disabilities by
of the
informed about the purpose and procedures
All students and their parents were
participate
forms indicating their willingness to
investigation and asked to sign informed consent
their child to participate.
or their permission for
their sons
who had signed consent forms for
Parents. Participating parents were parents
in the investigation.
or daughters to participate
teaching
teachers were teachers who were
Teachers. The participating general education
Spanish I) to
(algebra I, English, history, biology,
the targeted general education courses
students.
students with disabilities and/or at-risk
heterogeneous classes of students, including
teach
teach their subject area (e.g., certified to
These were teachers who were certified to
education
forms to participate. The special
algebra) and who volunteered and signed consent
Overview
with
special education services to students
teachers were teachers who were providing
participate.
volunteered and signed consent forms to
disabilities as defined above. They also
of each school participated.
School administrators. The principal
individual who had been designated as the person
Special education administrators. An
had an
education program in the school and who
responsible for administering the special
the special education administrator.
office/classroom in the school participated as
Measurement
be
constructed based on the research questions to
Measurement instruments were initially
in secondary
Advisory Board, comprised of experts
addressed in the investigation. Then, an
input. In
drafts of the instruments and provided
education and special education, reviewed
and
Tollefson, experts in the fields of measurement
addition, Drs. Janet Marquis and Nona
in
Revisions were made in the instruments
statistical analysis, reviewed the instruments.
piloted with 3-4 individuals to
feedback. Each survey instrument was
response to the experts'
Observation
and to identify any confusing items.
determine the time required for administration
independent scorers could use them
classrooms to determine whether
systems were used in a few
described below; they
needed. The final instruments are
reliably. Again, revisions were made as
instrument or the person who was
the informant who responded to the
are grouped according to
available in a
Copies of all instruments will be
observed through the use of the instrument.
the meeting on April
29th.
notebook on the Display Table during
called the
three forms. On the first form,
Student instruments. Students completed
they agreed or
7-point Likert-type scale, how much
Student Survey, students indicated, using a
"I don't want to do
their attitudes about learning (e.g.,
disagreed with each item. Items related to
that I am asked to
academic skills (e.g., "For the things
the hard work in a challenging class.");
successful."); beliefs (e.g., "I
that I have good skills to be
do in my high school classes, I feel
students in the school
and relationships with adults and
believe I can get better as a learner.");
total of 37
least one adult in this school."). There was a
(e.g., "I have a close relationship with at
items on the survey.
Satisfaction Form, students rated their
On the second form, called the Student
that they were
for each item with "1" indicating
satisfaction using a 7-point Likert-type scale
Satisfied." Two forms
that they were "Completely
"Completely Dissatisfied" and "7" indicating
students. The
SWDs and one for normally achieving
of this questionnaire were used, one for
with how their
for SWDs related to their satisfaction
items on the Student Satisfaction Form
how their special
succeed in general education classes,
special education teachers help them
teachers are preparing
how their special education
education teachers and parents communicate,
required academic courses
graduation, how the teachers of their
them for life after high-school
those academic courses, and
and outcomes associated with
help them learn, their comfort with
Overview
also asked to list three skills that they have
their overall high school experience. They were
in succeeding in required courses, and three
learned in high school that have been very useful
in required courses.
things they need to learn to get better grades
for normally achieving students were the
The items on the Student Satisfaction Form
changed slightly.
Satisfaction Form for SWDs except the wording was
same as the items on the
special
indicate how satisfied they were with how the
For example, the SWDs were asked to
assignments for required courses, whereas the
education teacher was helping them complete
indicate how satisfied they were with how the
normally achieving students were asked to
helping them complete assignments for
teachers of their required academic classes were
required courses.
Form, was used to gather personal
The third form, called the Student Demographics
receive
their age, race, sex, and whether they
information about the participating students such as
responded by
There were 11 items on the form. Students
free or reduced-price lunches at school.
several
and by indicating the best answer among
filling in the blank on about half of the items
of the items.
answers for the other half
Survey
tests. The Multilevel Academic
Students with disabilities were administered two
achievement
provide a standard measure of student
Test (MAST) was administered in order to
yields achievement scores in
different participating schools. This test
across students in the
describe
grade-level achievement scores were utilized to
reading and math. Percentile scores and
subtest of the WAIS-Ill (or the WISC-R, as
the students. Additionally, the vocabulary
obtain a measure of student ability across
appropriate for age) was administered in order to
students.
utilized from this test to describe the
students in the different schools. Raw scores were
using three observation systems. First, SWDs
In addition, the students were observed
Support Class Observation
special education classes using the Student
were observed in their
sheet and a
recording system comprised of a recording
System. This system was a time-sample
behavior
sheet, the observer recorded the student's
behavioral code. In columns on the recording
instruction during 10-second intervals.
and other factors associated with the ongoing
few
recorded the target student's behavior using a
Specifically, in the first column, the observer
whether or
the observer placed tallies indicating
words or a phrase. In the remaining columns,
during
noninstructional, whether or not the instruction
not a given behavior was instructional or
the
of academic response the student made,
that interval was research-based, the type
student, the
student, the materials being used by the
instructional approach being used with the
by the
included, and the sensory modalities used
instructional grouping in which the student was
the student was
of students and teachers with whom
student. The observer also noted the number
interacting during the interval.
Overview
enrolled in a
Second, SWDs (or at-risk students, if no students with disabilities were
classes using the Student General
given class) were observed in rigorous general education
the observation system used
Education Class Observation System. This system was similar to
time-sample recording system
in special education settings to observe students in that it was a
the recording sheet, the
comprised of a recording sheet and a behavioral code. In columns on
associated with the ongoing
observer recorded the student's behavior and other factors
first column, the observer recorded the
instruction during 10-second intervals. Specifically, in the
phrase. In the remaining columns, the observer
target student's, behavior using a few words or a
involved in an instructional or
placed tallies indicating whether or not the student was
the instruction during that interval
noninstructional activity during the interval, whether or not
used by the
of academic response the student made, the materials
was research-based, the type
included, and the sensory modalities
student, the instructional grouping in which the student was
used by the student.
observed throughout a whole school
Third, SWDs and typically-achieving students were
This system was comprised of three
day using the Case Study Observational System.
used to record the student's behavior in
observation forms. The Class Observation Form was
student had with the teacher and other
relation to class activities, the number of contacts the
began work after the class period
students, the number of minutes lapsed before the student
location, accommodations made for the
began, the student's mood/demeanor, the student's seat
used in every class in which the student
student, and the homework assignment. This form was
observed
attended during the day he/she was scheduled to be
was enrolled and which the student
of the students did not attend all the
(since some of the schools used block scheduling, some
observed).
classes in which they were enrolled on the day they were
the student before school,
The Non-Class Observation Form was used to observe
school grounds. Again, the student's
between classes, during lunch, and after school while on
teachers and students were recorded.
demeanor and behavior as well as the contacts made with
which contained eight open-
In all the students' classes, the Class Discription Form,
in sentence form, what had
ended items was used. The observer used this form to report,
asked the observer to provide a
transpired during the class period. For example, the first item
observer to describe the relationship
general description of the lesson, the fourth item asked the
item asked the observer to describe
between the target student and other students, and the sixth
the general outcome of the class for the target student.
also interviewed. The
The students who were followed for a whole school day were
asked orally of all the
Interview Protocol included 13 open-ended questions that were
orally, and their responses were tape
participating students individually. The students responded
In general, the questions focused
recorded and then recorded verbatim in writing by the observer.
Overview
the students were asked to explain how
reaction to the school day. For example,
on the student's
during the day, what
what was the best thing that happened
the day had been typical or unusual,
and what were their plans after
things that had happened during the day,
were the discouraging
school.
discuss their answers to oral questions in
Additionally, the same students were asked to
grouped together,
students with disabilities in a school were
small focus groups. Participating
for these
students in a school were grouped together
and participating typically achieving
students with
Protocols contained 12 questions for the
discussions. The Student Focus Group
between
achieving students. The only difference
disabilities and 11 questions for the typically
question, "In light of the
students with disabilities were asked the
the two protocols was that the
school?," and the
difficult is it to be successful in this
fact that you have a disability, how
the work load
Other questions related to such topics as
normally achieving students were not.
of the teachers, and
worries about school, the helpfulness
that they were carrying, their biggest
barriers to their success in school.
records using
students were gathered from school
Finally, data related to the participating
for
versions of the form were created, one
Student Information Form. Two
a form called the
gather standardized
achieving students. The form was used to
the SWDs and one for the typically
the semester grades earned by
in which the student was enrolled,
test scores, the names of classes
expelled, the number of
student was absent, suspended, or
the student, the number of days the
of high school, and scores on state competency
disciplinary actions incurred during each year
the typically achieving
between the version for the SWDs and
exams. The only difference
the scores earned on
the version for the SWDs to record
students was that there was a place on
the students'
aptitude tests and information about
individually administered achievement and
disabilities.
forms of this
the Parent Satisfaction Form. Two
Parent instruments. Parents completed
.
of
students with disabilities and one for parents
questionnaire were used: one for parents of
With the
parallel, consisting of 56 items each.
typically achieving students. The two forms were
grouped in
the items on both were similar. Items were
exception of a few wording differences,
relationship
the parents' satisfaction with their
eight major sections relating to such factors as
school, the
helping their children succeed in high
with school personnel, the ways teachers were
high school, and their children's
their children prepare for life after
ways teachers were helping
asked to rate
majority of the items, the parents were
enrollment in required classes. For the large
Dissatisfied) to
scale ranging from "1" (Completely
their satisfaction on a 7-point Likert-type
either to indicate their
the items, the parents were asked
"7" (Completely Satisfied). For three of
of "Yes" or "No."
7-point scale or to indicate an answer
agreement with a statement on a
J.0
8