Andrea D. Jasper

Fix It With TAPE: Repurposing Technology to Be Assistive Technology for Students With High-Incidence Disabilities

This article discusses how practitioners can repurpose technology—common and socially desirable technology in particular—to be assistive technology for students with high-incidence disabilities. The authors provide a framework for practitioners to consider technology for repurposing: TAPE (Transportable, Available, Practical, Engaging) and offers practitioners 6 examples of such technology that can serve as assistive technology for students with high-incidence disabilities who struggle with various academic (e.g., literacy, note-taking) and socioemotional development.

Best Practices in Teacher Training and Professional Development for Including Learners with Low-Incidence Disabilities

Abstract A shift from a medical model to a social model of including learners with disabilities has occurred over the past 25 years (Stella, Forlin, & Lan, 2007). This shift has impacted both preservice teacher preparation and in-service teacher professional development. This chapter utilizes a conceptual framework built on the work of Forlin and colleagues (Forlin, Loreman, Sharma, & Earle, 2009; Sharma, Forlin, Loreman, & Earle, 2006; Stella et al., 2007) to guide teacher preparation and professional development. This conceptual framework provides a model for (1) addressing attitudes and perceptions; (2) increasing knowledge of disability policies, laws, and evidence-based practices for providing instruction in inclusive settings; (3) and increasing experiences with individuals with disabilities, including experiences within inclusive settings. In addition, the framework incorporates aspects of the context within which inclusion is to occur. Implications include recommendations for teacher training and professional development to improve inclusive education for learners with LID.

Utilizing Middle School Common Planning Time to Support Inclusive Environments.

In common planning time (CPT), middle school educators have an opportunity to share their experience and expertise during a designated period. Common planning time is especially beneficial in the collaborative process in which special and general educators can address the needs of students with exceptionalities. This column provides an outline on the possible implementation and the virtual experience of CPT and also offers information on how special education topics can be incorporated within CPT.

Re-examining Evidence Based Practice in Special Education: A Discussion

Abstract The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) recently released updated standards regarding how to determine whether any particular intervention may be deemed an evidence-based practice (EBP)...

Examining Self-Monitoring Interventions for Academic Support of Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders

Abstract Researchers have found that English teachers in the United States of America (USA) perceive providing writing instruction to students with emotional behavioral disorders (EBD) as a difficu...

Utilizing the PPET Mnemonic to Guide Classroom-Level PBIS for Students With or at Risk for EBD Across Classroom Settings:

In this article, the authors discuss how the emphasis on classroom-level Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports strategies can establish a foundation for an efficient classroom management program and be utilized as a resource. The strategies described are physical classroom, procedures and rules, explicit timing, and transition (PETT mnemonic). Each strategy can be particularly useful in assisting novice and veteran teachers provide instruction to students with emotional and behavioral disorders within inclusive or self-contained classrooms.

Special Educators and Data Recording: What's Delayed Recording Got to Do With It?.

This study examined the effects of delayed recording on the accuracy of data recorded by special educators serving students with high- or low-incidence disabilities. A multi-element design was used to compare the accuracy of data recorded across three conditions: (a) immediately after a student’s target behavior occurred, (b) immediately after the conclusion of the instructional lesson, and (c) 3 hr after the conclusion of the instructional lesson. Results indicated special educators achieved higher levels of agreement recording data immediately after a student’s target behavior occurred and immediately after the conclusion of the instructional lesson.

Numbered Heads Together as a Tier 1 Instructional Strategy in Multitiered Systems of Support

Federal mandates (Individuals With Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 2004; No Child Left Behind Act, 2001) require teachers to accommodate students with more diverse academic and behavioral needs in inclusive general educational settings. To assist general educators in meeting this instructional challenge, multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) such as response to intervention (RtI) and positive behavior interventions and supports (PBIS) were established in schools nationwide. There is still a need, however, for classroom-based interventions with empirical support that are feasible to implement in whole-class settings and acceptable to teachers and students. Here, Numbered Heads Together (NHT), an alternative questioning strategy, is offered as a potentially effective Tier 1 intervention that can be used to improve student performance in general education classrooms. Extant research findings are described, procedures for using NHT in classroom settings are discussed, and future directions for research and practice are offered.

Data Recording in the Classroom–It can be done

M s. Jackson is a second year seventh grade middle school educator teaching in a selfcontained setting for students with emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). In her classroom, Ms. Jackson begins preparing for the day by ensuring resources and materials are available for students and, if necessary, adapting these materials to ensure students’ learning needs are met. As the day progresses, more lessons are taught in various subjects and her students attend specialized classes (i.e., physical education, art, music) taught by other educators. During these times, Ms. Jackson tries to grade assignments, collaborate with general educators, contact parents, record data, conduct scheduled Individualized Education Program (IEP) meetings, and/or meet with paraeducators. Often, the school day ends before Ms. Jackson is able to accomplish all of her responsibilities including recording data on her students’ academic and behavioral performance. Prior to starting her career as an educator, she did not foresee recording and maintaining data for the students that she would be teaching as an issue. Although Ms. Jackson enjoys working with her students, she now finds herself overwhelmed with recording and maintaining consistent data for all of her students. In addition, Ms. Jackson is receiving pressure from her building principal in regard to her students’ academic performance. Her principal is concerned with the selection of appropriate interventions that Ms. Jackson uses with her students to increase positive behavioral outcomes. In the professional development growth plan, the building principal recommended that Ms. Jackson revisit her data recording methods to ensure appropriate behavioral and academic interventions are in place and that progress monitoring is taking place. Recording, storing, and analyzing student behavioral data often proves cumbersome for many beginning special educators due to the variety of roles each must perform throughout the day (Salvia & Ysseldyke, 2004). Nevertheless, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA; 2004) requires the use of a functional behavioral assessment (FBA) to evaluate the behavioral needs of students with disabilities when inappropriate behaviors negatively impact a student’s ability to learn required content. Special educators are now expected to not only provide direct, specialized support, but also monitor student progress, record data, and collaborate with school personnel and parents each school day (Yell, Meadows, Drasgow, & Shriner, 2013). One major complaint of both beginning and experienced special educators is the amount of time invested in completing paperwork (e.g., progress monitoring, IEP forms, grading; Salvia & Ysseldyke; Sandall, Schwartz, & Lacroix, 2004). In fact, many report they simply need more time (Conderman & Katsiyannis, 2002; Whitaker, 2003). Vannest and Hagen-Burke (2010) examined time usage during special educators’ instructional day. They found that (a) 45% of the time was dedicated to delivering instruction, providing instructional support, and completing forms for IEP meetings; (b) 45% was spent supervising and disciplining students, consulting with other educators, attending general meetings, and planning instructional lessons; and (c) 10% involved instructing students in nonacademic areas (i.e., functional skills), assessing student performance (i.e., recording and examining data), and attending IEP meetings. Findings from this study demonstrate that special educators often record and assess data under significant time constraints. Due to the time constraints experienced by many special educators, data recording methods need to be quick and easy, and not interfere with other responsibilities, such as teaching and paperwork. In this article, a summary of practical data recording methods available to special educators is provided. These data recording methods can be used to develop a comprehensive FBA or collect data within Responsiveness to Intervention (RTI) and Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports (PBIS) frameworks.