Stanley F. Vasa

WHO ARE THE CHILDREN WITH ATTENTION DEFICIT-HYPERACTIVITY DISORDER? A SCHOOL-BASED SURVEY:

Attention Deficit-Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) is one of the most frequently diagnosed and thoroughly researched disorders of childhood; however, little is known about ADHD in the school setting. We examined demographic data, disability categories, placement, academic achievement, and educational treatment of children clinically diagnosed as having ADHD among a group of 14,229 students in a public school district. Of 136 students with ADHD, over half (n = 77) were receiving special education services: Forty were identified as behaviorally disordered, 22 as learning disabled, 7 as mildly mentally retarded, 1 as other health impaired, and 1 as orthopedically handicapped. The most common special education placement for students with ADHD was the general education classroom plus resource support (n = 50). Mathematics and reading achievement scores varied greatly. Over 90% of the students with ADHD were taking medication. Behavior modification, consultation, one-to-one instruction, and modified assignment format were used significantly more often with students with ADHD who were receiving special education services than students with ADHD who were not receiving special education services. Implications for research and practice are presented.

Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder as a Disability Category: A Critique:

Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has generated a great deal of interest recently among the special education profession. Various groups have advocated making ADHD a separate disability category under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. As a result, children with this disorder would be eligible for special education services. Proponents argue that at least 50% of students with ADHD currently are not receiving special education services they require under existing categories. The argument for considering ADHD as a disability category rests on the assumption that it is a valid psychiatric disorder and is characterized by academic difficulties. We challenge the validity of these assumptions and examine social and cultural factors we believe fuel the perceived need for ADHD as a new disability category.

Prevalence and Predictors of Substance Use A Comparison Between Adolescents With and Without Learning Disabilities

A considerable body of literature has accumulated that examines patterns of substance use and abuse among adolescents attending general education classes. However, much less information exists on the prevalence and predictors of substance use among adolescents with learning disabilities. One purpose of this study was to determine the comparative prevalence of tobacco, alcohol, and marijuana use among a sample of 123 students with learning disabilities (91 male and 32 female, mean age = 14.37 years) and 138 nondisabled students (77 male and 61 female, mean age = 13.71 years). A second purpose was to determine whether two psychosocial variables (self-esteem and type of behavior problem) or severity of drinking problem best predicted use of tobacco and marijuana. Students were administered the Self-Esteem Inventory (SEI)-School form (Coopersmith, 1987) and the Adolescent Drinking Index (ADD (Harrell & Wirtz, 1989); their teachers completed the Revised Behavior Problem Checklist (RBPC) (Quay & Peterson, 1987). Tobacco and marijuana use were proportionally higher for adolescents with learning disabilities; no differences emerged for alcohol use between groups. A discriminant function analysis revealed that scores on the SEI and subscale scores of the RBPC did not reliably predict tobacco or marijuana use for either group. ADI scores were reliable predictors of marijuana use for students with learning disabilities and tobacco use for both groups.

How Paraeducators Learn on the Web.

Many schools and districts employ paraeducators to provide direct services to students with disabilities (Harrington & Mitchelson, 1986). When these paraprofessionals receive adequate training and supervision, they can help meet a range of needs in special education programs. Despite admonition in the literature, many schools are not providing training for paraeducators (Blalock, 1991). To address this issue, a teacher preparation program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln developed a paraeducator training program that provided support from a central site while being delivered in cooperation with local and intermediate educational agencies at local school sites (Steckelberg & Vasa, 1997). Using the World Wide Web (WWW) for both content and communication was a key element in making this cooperative approach work. It allowed us to create a framework that provided a systematic approach, support for the school and the paraeducator, and accountability for learning outcomes.

A Web-based Training Model for Preparing Teachers to Supervise Paraeducators

Paraeducators have been widely used to expand services provided in special education programs (Giangreco, Broer, & Edelman, 2002; Giangreco, Edelman, Luiselli, & MacFarland, 1997). The effectiveness of paraprofessionals depends heavily on their preparation and supervision (Gerber, Finn, Achilles, & BoydZaharias, 2001). Training and supervision are carried out primarily by teachers, yet traditionally teacher education programs have not adequately prepared teachers for this responsibility (Drecktrah, 2000; May & Marozas, 1986; Wallace, Shin, Bartholomay, & Stahl, 2001). In 1999, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln was funded by a Project of National Significance from the Office of Special Education Programs at the U.S. Department of Education to develop and field test a model for training teachers to effectively supervise paraeducators. The project created competency-based, accessible, and systematic training materials that could be delivered via the Web (http://para.unl.edu). The training materials were designed to be used either as a stand-alone self-study package or as an adjunct to additional face-to-face instruction in a traditional course.

Current Trends in the Training and Utilization of Paraprofessionals in Speech and Language Programs: A Report on an Eleven-State Survey.

Administrators of programs for children with communicative disorders in 11 midwestern states were surveyed to assess trends in the training and utilization of paraprofessionals. Topics included: (a...

Programming alternatives for educating the gifted in rural schools

(1980). Programming alternatives for educating the gifted in rural schools. Roeper Review: Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 22-24.

Teachers' use and perceptions of sociometric techniques

Childrens friendships and peer relationships play important roles in their development. The assessment of childrens social skills and the measurement of social relationships among groups of children through the use of sociometrics have been much discussed and researched. In this article, use of sociometric measures by 187 teachers is discussed briefly, and the results of a statewide survey examining teacher use of sociometrics are provided. Specifically, the purposes of the study were to ascertain the reasons for using sociometrics, types of sociometric methods employed, and patterns of use and development of sociometrics. Results of the survey indicated that 41% of teachers used sociometric techniques in the classroom most commonly for grouping students for academic instruction, arranging classroom seating, and forming study teams. Sociograms and peer nominations were the most commonly used sociometric techniques.

Light's Retention Scale: Does It Have Content Validity?.

The content validity of the Lights Retention Scale (LRS) was examined by assessing the use of selected retention criteria from the scale. Results indicated that several criteria were not typically considered in retention decisions and the remaining criteria varied widely in their use. Suggestions for limitations on use of the LRS were included.

Insurance Practices and Handicapped Children

cept of the person being labeled. 1 Additionally, there appears to be influences on significant other perceptions of the learningdisabled person as well. Although these influences probably exist, they are often difficult to measure. Other more concrete events, however, that have an impact on &dquo;labeled&dquo; students are observable and measurable. In discussing the practical problems faced by a family of a &dquo;special education&dquo; child, H. B. Robinson and N. M. Robinson emphasized the financial con-