As the NCLB deadline for having all students proficient in reading and math approaches, schools are becoming increasingly anxious to promote success on high stakes tests for their students with disabilities. Embedded in a larger study of the potential effect of governance structures on the achievement of students with disabilities, this study examines how Indiana’s high-performing special education planning districts are able to promote achievement on the part of students with disabilities. Four themes are found in high-performing districts: ownership of student performance, teacher self-efficacy, child centeredness, and belongingness of special education staff.
Brennan, J.P., II., & Brennan, K.B. (1999). How the M.A.P. Club changed perceptions of students with special needs. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 18(2), 5-9.
2.
Brigharm, N., Morocco, C.C., Clay, K., & Zigmond, N. ( 2006). What makes a high school a good high school for students with disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice , 21(3), 184-190.
3.
Brody, L.E., & Mills, C.J. ( 1997). Gifted children with learning disabilities: A review of the issues. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(3), 282-296.
4.
Cole, C. ( 2006). What is the impact of NCLB on the inclusion of students with disabilities? Education Policy Brief, 4(11), 1-12.
5.
Cook, B., Tankersley, M., Cook, L., & Landrum, T. ( 2000). Teachers’ attitudes toward their included students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 115-135.
6.
Dukes, C., & Lamar-Dukes, P. (2006). Special education: An integral part of small schools in high schools. The High School Journal , 89(3), 1-9.
7.
Hipp, K.K., Stoll, L., Bolam, R., Wallace, M., McMahon, A., Thomas, S., et al. (2003). An international perspective on the development of learning communities (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED478734). Chicago: American Educational Research Association .
8.
Indiana Department of Education. (2005). School data. Retrieved November 2, 2007, from http://www.doe.state.in.us/htmls/education.html
9.
Janney, R., & Snell, M. ( 2006). Modifying school work in inclusive classrooms. Theory Into Practice, 45(3), 215-223.
10.
Johnson, D. ( 2006). Listening to the views of those involved in the inclusion of pupils with Down’s syndrome into mainstream schools. Support for Learning, 21(1), 24-29.
11.
Jordan, J. ( 2007). Fears over changes in special education. Rhode Island News. Retrieved May 24, 2007, from http://www.projo.com/news/content/special_education_regs_21_03-2107_TQ4UGAK.3720c27.html
12.
Kosena, J. ( 2007). PSD in balancing act: Funding for special needs not constant . The Coloradoan. Retrieved May 24, 2007, from http://www.coloradoan.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070522/NEWS01/705220326/1002
13.
Murray, C., & Pianta, R.C. ( 2007). The importance of teacher-student relationships for adolescents with high incidence disabilities, Theory Into Practice, 46(2), 105-112.
14.
Newell, R.J., & Van Ryzin, M.J. (2007). Growing hope as a determinant of school effectiveness. Kappan, 88(6), 465-471.
15.
Osterman, K.F. ( 1998, April). Student community within the school context: A research synthesis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
16.
Plucker, J., Spradlin, T., Eckes, S., Ochoa, T., Toutkoushian, R., Michael, B., et al. (2006). Special education service delivery in Indiana . Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.
17.
Plucker, J., Spradlin, T., Toutkoushian, R., Michael, B., Hansen, J., Zapf, J., et al. (2007). Special education service delivery in Indiana: Year 2 study. Bloomington: Indiana University Center for Evaluation and Education Policy.
18.
Rouse, M., & Florian, L. ( 1996). Effective inclusive schools: A study in two countries . Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 71-85.
19.
Stoll, L. ( 1999). Realising our potential: Understanding and developing capacity for lasting improvement. School Effectiveness in School Improvement, 10(4), 503-532.
20.
Swaminathan, R. ( 2004). It’s my place: Student perspectives on urban school effectiveness. School Effectiveness in School Improvement , 15(1), 33-63.
21.
Talbott, E., & Fleming, J. ( 2003). The role of social contexts and special education in the mental health problems of urban adolescents. Journal of Special Education, 37(2), 111-124.
22.
Tschannen-Moran, M., & Barr, M. ( 2004). Fostering student learning: The relationship of collective teacher efficacy in student achievement. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 3(3), 189-209.
23.
U.S. Department of Education. (2005). Spellings announces new special education guidelines, details workable, "common sense" policy to help states implement no child left behind. Retrieved April 22, 2006, from http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2005/05/05102005.html
24.
Voltz, D., & Damiano-Lantz, M. (1993). Developing ownership in learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 25(4), 18-22.
25.
Yin, R. ( 2003). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
