Abstract: We compared two approaches for supporting the social participation of students with severe disabilities in general education classrooms. Three students with severe disabilities were studied in four different general education classrooms. Dependent measures included the Kennedy active engagement of students with severe disabilities and their nondisabled peers and the social interactions that peers had with the students. We compared direct assistance from a special education instructional aide with peer support supervised by a special education instructional aide. Our results indicate that the peer support program produced more frequent and longer social interactions for all three students. Also, peers without disabilities demonstrated a more frequent and greater variety of social support behaviors to students with disabilities. Some improvements in the active engagement of students with disabilities and their peers were observed in the peer support condition. Our results suggest that peer support may be preferred to direct support by an instructional aide for students with severe disabilities in general education classrooms.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baer, D.M. (1993). Policy and procedure, as always. In R. A. Gable & S. F. Warren (Eds.), Strategies for teaching students with mild to severe retardation (pp. 329-341). Baltimore: Brookes.
2.
Barlow, D.H., & Hersen, M. (1984). Single case experimental designs (2nd ed.). New York: Pergamon Press.
3.
Breen, C.G. (1990). Setting up and managing peer support networks . In C. G. Breen, C. H. Kennedy, & T. G. Haring (Eds.), Methods for facilitating the inclusion of students with disabilities in integrated school and community contexts (pp. 54-105). Santa Barbara: University of California, Graduate School of Education.
4.
Carr, E.G., & Durand, V.M. (1985). Reducing behavior problems through functional communication training. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 18, 111-126.
5.
Cushing, L.S., & Kennedy, C.H. (1997). Academic effects of providing peer support in general education classrooms on students without disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 30, 139-152.
6.
Cushing, L.S., Kennedy, C.H., Shukla, S., Davis, J., & Meyer, K.A. (1997). Disentangling the effects of curriculum revision and social grouping within cooperative learning arrangements. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 231-240.
7.
Dineen, J.P., Clark, H.B., & Risley, T.R. (1977). Peer tutoring among elementary students: Educational benefits to the tutor. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis , 10, 231-238.
8.
Egel, A.L., Richman, G., & Koegel, R.L. (1981). Normal peer models and autistic children's learning . Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 14, 3-12.
9.
Fisher, D., McGregor, G., & Roach, V. (1996). A framework for evaluating state and local policies on inclusion. Issue Brief: Consortium on Inclusive Schooling Practices, 1(12), 1-9.
10.
Fryxell, D., & Kennedy, C.H. (1995). Placement along the continuum of services and its impact on students' social relationships. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 259-269.
11.
Gaylord-Ross, R., Haring, T.G., Breen, C.G., & Pitts-Conway, V. (1982). The training and generalization of social interaction skills with autistic youth. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 17, 229-248.
12.
Gaylord-Ross, R., & Pitts-Conway, V. (1984). Social behavior development in integrated secondary autistic programs. In N. Certo, N. Haring, & R. York (Eds.), Public school integration of severely handicapped students: Rational issues and progressive alternatives (pp. 197-219). Baltimore: Brookes.
13.
Gerber, M.M. (1995). Inclusion at the high-water mark? Some thoughts on Zigmond and Baker's case studies of inclusive educational programs. The Journal of Special Education, 29, 181-191.
14.
Giangreco, M.F., Edelman, S.W., Luiselli, T.E., & MacFarland, S.Z.C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7-19.
15.
Guralnick, M.J. (1990). Major accomplishments and future directions in early childhood mainstreaming. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 10(2), 1-17.
16.
Harris, V.M., & Sherman, J.A. (1973). Effects of peer tutoring and consequences on the math performance of elementary classroom students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 587-597.
17.
Hunt, P., & Goetz, L. (1997). Research on inclusive education: Programs, practices, and outcomes. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 3-29.
18.
Hunt, P., Staub, D., Alwell, M., & Goetz, L. (1994). Achievement by all students within the context of cooperative learning groups. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 290-301.
19.
Idstein, P. (1993). Swimming against the mainstream. Phi Delta Kappan,75, 336-340.
20.
Jones, K.H., & Bender, W.N. (1993). Utilization of paraprofessionals in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education , 14(1), 7-14.
21.
Kellegrew, D.H. (1995). Integrated preschool placements for children with disabilities. In R. L. Koegel & L. K. Koegel (Eds.), Teaching children with autism (pp. 127-146). Baltimore: Brookes.
22.
Kennedy, C.H., Cushing, L.S., & Itkonen, T. (1997). General education participation improves the social contacts and friendship networks of students with severe disabilities. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 7, 167-189.
23.
Kennedy, C.H., & Itkonen, T. (1994). Some effects of regular class participation on the social contacts and social networks of high school students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 1-10.
24.
Kennedy, C.H., & Shukla, S. (1995). Social interaction research for people with autism as a set of past, current, and emerging propositions. Behavioral Disorders, 21, 21-35.
25.
Kennedy, C.H., Shukla, S., & Fryxell, D. (1997). Comparing the effects of educational placement on the social relationships of intermediate school students with severe disabilities . Exceptional Children, 64, 31-47.
26.
Kotkin, R.A. (1995). The Irvine paraprofessional program: Using paraprofessionals in serving students with ADHD. Intervention in School and Clinic, 30, 235-240.
27.
Leitenberg, H. (1973). The use of single-case methodology in psychotherapy research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 82, 87-101.
28.
National Association of State Boards of Education. (1995). Winning ways: Creating inclusive schools, classrooms, and communities. Alexandria, VA: Author.
29.
Odom, S.L., McConnell, S.R., & McEvoy, M.A. (1992). Peer-related social competence and its significance for young children with disabilities. In S. L. Odom, S. R. McConnell, & M. A. McEvoy (Eds.), Social competence of young children with disabilities (pp. 3-36). Baltimore: Brookes.
30.
Odom, S.L., & McEvoy, M.A. (1988). Integration of young children with handicaps and normally developing children. In S. L. Odom & M. B. Karnes (Eds.), Early intervention for infants and children with handicaps: An empirical analysis (pp. 241-268). Baltimore: Brookes.
31.
Pickett, A.L. (1989). Restructuring the schools: The role of paraprofessionals . Washington, DC: National Education Association.
Rotholz, D.A. (1987). Current considerations on the use of one-to-one instruction with autistic students: Review and recommendations. Education and Treatment of Children, 10, 271-278.
34.
Rubin, P., & Long, R.M. (1994, Spring). Who is teaching our children? Implications of the use of aides in Chapter 1. Education Research ServiceSpectrum, 12, 28-34.
35.
Shukla, S., Kennedy, C.H., & Cushing, L.S. (1998). Component analysis of peer support strategies: Adult influence on the participation of peers without disabilities. Journal of BehavioralEducation, 8, 397-413.
36.
Strain, P.S. (1990). LRE for preschool children with handicaps: What we know, what we should be doing. Journal of Early Intervention , 14, 291-296.
37.
Strain, P.S., Goldstein, H., & Kohler, F.W. (in press). Peer-mediated interventions for children with autism. In E. Hibbs & P. Jenson (Eds.), Psychosocial treatment research for children and youth with autism. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
38.
Werts, M.G., Caldwell, N.K., & Wolery, M. (1996). The effects of fluent peer models on the observational learning of response chains by students with disabilities. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 29, 53-66.
39.
York, J., & Tundidor, M. (1995). Issues raised in the name of inclusion: Perspectives of educators, parents, and students. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 20, 31-44.
