This research addressed two questions about instruction to enhance the social competence of students with disabilities: (a) How adequate were individualized education program (IEP) statements of present level of functioning and goals related to peer interactions? and (b) How appropriate to pupil peer interaction needs and how extensive was instruction? Data sources included IEPs; observations of pupils and teachers in content area, special area, and special education settings; and interviews. Analysis indicated that the IEP accurately characterized peer interactions, but that instructional practices to foster peer interaction were not appropriate, and were provided only to a limited extent. General education settings were somewhat more likely than special education settings to foster peer interaction, providing support for claims that inclusion fosters social integration.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BryantN. D., GeizheiserL. M., & MeyersJ. (1987). Student-Level Observation of Beginning Reading-Albany Revision [Computer program]. New Lebanon, NY: Bryant Computer-Craft.*
2.
FiedlerJ. F., & KnightR. R. (1986). Congruence between assessed needs and IEP goals of identified behaviorally disabled students.Behavioral Disorders, 12, 22–27.
3.
FoxC. L. (1989). Peer acceptance of learning disabled children in the regular classroom.Exceptional Children, 56, 50–59.
4.
GiangrecoM. F., EdelmanS. W., LuiselliT. E., & MacFarlandS. Z. C. (1997). Helping or hovering: Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities.Exceptional Children, 64, 7–18.
5.
GlaserB. (1978). Theoretical sensitivity: Advances in the methodology of grounded theory.Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.*
6.
GreshamF. M. (1992). Social skills and learning disabilities: Causal, concomitant, or correlational?School Psychology Review, 21, 348–360.
7.
GuralnickM. J., & GroomJ. M. (1988). Peer interactions in mainstreamed and specialized classrooms. A comparative analysis.Exceptional Children, 54, 415–525.
8.
HallenbeckB. A., & KauffmanJ. M. (1995). How does observational learning affect the behavior of students with emotional or behavioral disorders? A review of research.Journal of Special Education, 29, 45–71.
9.
JellisonJ. A., BrooksB. H., & HuckA. M. (1984). Structuring small groups and music reinforcement to facilitate positive interactions and acceptance of severely handicapped students in the regular music classroom.Journal of Research in Music Education, 32, 243–264.
10.
LincolnY. S., & GubaE. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.*
11.
LynchE. C., & BeareP. L. (1990). The quality of IEP objectives and their relevance to instruction of students with mental retardation and behavioral disorders.Remedial and Special Education, 11(2), 48–55.
12.
MaddenN. A., & SlavinR. E. (1983). Mainstreaming students with mild handicaps: Academic and social outcomes.Review of Educational Research, 53, 519–569.
13.
MellardD. F., & HazelJ. S. (1992). Social competencies as a pathway to successful life transitions.Learning Disability Quarterly, 15, 251–271.
14.
PhelanP., YuH. C., & DavidsonA. L. (1994). Navigating the psycho-social pressures of adolescents: The voices and experiences of high school youth.American Educational Research Journal, 31, 415–447.
15.
PruzekR. M. (1988). Latent variable methods for analyzing rep grid structures. In MancusoJ., & ShawM. L. G. (Eds.), Cognition and personal structure: Computer access and analysis (pp. 279–301). New York: Praeger Press.*
16.
PruzekR. M., & LepakG. (1992). Weighted structural regressions: A broad class of adaptive methods for improving linear prediction.Multivariate Behavioral Research, 27, 95–129.
17.
ReiherT. C. (1992). Identified deficits and their congruence to the IEP for behaviorally disordered students.Behavioral Disorders, 17, 167–177.
18.
SalisburyC. L., GallucciC., PalombaroM. M., & PeckC. A. (1995). Strategies that promote social relations among elementary students with and without severe disabilities in inclusive schools.Exceptional Children, 62, 125–137.
19.
SchenckS. J. (1980). The diagnostic/instructional link in individualized education programs.Journal of Special Education, 14, 337–345.
20.
Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills. (1992). Learning a living: A blue print for high performance.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor.
21.
SmithS. W. (1990). Comparison of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) of students with behavioral disorders and learning disabilities.Journal of Special Education, 24, 85–100.
22.
StanleyS. O., & GreenwoodC. R. (1981). CISSAR-Code for Instructional Structure and Student Academic Response, Observers ManualKansas City, KS: Juniper Gardens Children's Project.*
23.
StrainP. S., & OdomS. L. (1986). Peer social initiations: Effective intervention for social skills development of exceptional children.Exceptional Children, 52, 543–551.
24.
U.S. Department of Education. (1994). Sixteenth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service Number ED 373 531)
25.
Van DykeR., StallingsM. A., & ColleyK. (1995). How to build an inclusive school community.Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 475–479.
26.
VaughnS., & HaagerD. (1994). Social competence as a multifaceted construct: How do students with learning disabilities fare?Learning Disability Quarterly, 17, 253–266.
27.
WasserJ. D., & BreslerL. (1996). Working in the interpretive zone: Conceptualizing collaboration in qualitative research terms.Educational Researcher, 25(5), 5–15.
28.
WessonC. L., & DenoS. L. (1989). An analysis of long-term instructional plans in reading for elementary resource room students.Remedial and Special Education, 10, 21–28.
29.
YsseldykeJ. E., & ChristensonS. L. (1987). The Instructional Environment Scale.Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.*
