The level of engagement that general education teachers have with students with disabilities in their classrooms has been identified in the literature as a key factor effecting the success of inclusive educational experiences. This study describes differences in teacher engagement identified within two approaches to providing paraprofessional supports in general education classrooms; program-based and one-on-one. Findings were based on the observed and reported experiences of 103 school personnel (e.g., teachers, special educators, paraprofessionals, administrators) from four schools (Grades K-12). The study describes characteristics of teacher engagement and disengagement, the involvement of special educators, and phenomena associated with teacher disengagement when one-on-one paraprofessional service delivery was used. The discussion presents implications of these data for school improvement.
BogdanR.BiklenS. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2.
BrownL.FarringtonK.KnightT.RossC.ZieglerM. (1999). Fewer paraprofessionals and more teachers and therapists in educational programs for students with significant disabilities. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 249–252.
3.
DowningJ.RyndakD.ClarkD. (2000). Paraeducators in inclusive classrooms: Their own perspective. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 171–181.
4.
DoyleM. B. (1997). The paraprofessionals guide to the inclusive classroom: Working as a team. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
5.
GiangrecoM. F.BroerS. M.EdelmanS. W. (1999). The tip of the iceberg: Determining whether paraprofessional support is needed for students with disabilities in general education settings. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 280–290.
6.
GiangrecoM. F.CichoskiKellyE.BackusL.EdelmanS.BroerS.CichoskiKellyC.SpinneyP. (1999, March). Developing a shared understanding: Paraeducator supports for students with disabilities in general education. TASH Newsletter, 25 (1), 21–23.
7.
GiangrecoM. F.DennisR.CloningerC.EdelmanS.SchattmanR. (1993). “I've counted Jon”: Transformational experiences of teachers educating students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 59, 359–372.
8.
GiangrecoM. F.EdelmanS.LuiselliT. E.MacFarlandS. Z. C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7–18.
9.
Hamre-NietupskiS.HendricksonJ.NietupskiJ.Shokoohi-YektaM. (1994). Regular educators' perceptions of facilitating friendships of students with moderate, severe, or profound disabilities with nondisabled peers. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 29, 102–117.
10.
HuntP.GoetzL. (1997). Research on inclusive education programs, practices, and outcomes for students with severe disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 31, 3–29.
11.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997. Pub. L. No. 105–17, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq., 111 Stat. 37 (1997).
12.
JonesK. H.BenderW. N. (1993). Utilization of paraprofessionals in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 7–14.
13.
KnosterT.VillaR.ThousandJ. (2000). A framework for thinking about systems change. In VillaR.ThousandJ. (Eds.), Restructuring for caring and effective education (2nd ed., pp. 93–128). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
14.
KozleskiE. B.JacksonL. (1993). Taylor's story: Full inclusion in her neighborhood elementary school. Exceptionality, 4, 153–175.
15.
MarksS. U.SchraderC.LevineM. (1999). Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings: Helping, hovering, or holding their own?Exceptional Children, 65, 315–328.
16.
McGregorG.VogelsbergR. T. (1998). Inclusive schooling practices: Pedagogical and research foundations: A synthesis of the literature that informs best practices about inclusive schooling. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
17.
OlsonM. R.ChalmersL.HooverJ. H. (1997). Attitudes and attributes of general education teachers identified as effective inclusionists. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 28–35.
PickettA. L. (1999). Strengthening and supporting teacher/ provider-paraeducator teams: Guidelines for paraeducator roles, supervision, and preparation. New York: National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals in Education and Related Services, Graduate Center, City University of New York.
20.
PickettA. L.GerlachK. (1997). Supervising paraeducators in school settings: A team approach. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
21.
SalisburyC.PalombaroM.HollowoodT. (1993). On the nature and change of an inclusive elementary school. Journal of The Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 18, 75–84.
22.
WadsworthD. E.KnightD. (1996). Paraprofessionals: The bridge to successful full inclusion. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31, 166–171.
23.
WelchM.RichardsG.OkadaT.RichardsJ.PrescottS. (1995). A consultation and paraprofessional pull-in system of service delivery: A report on student outcomes and teacher satisfaction. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 16–28.
24.
WertsM. G.WoleryM.SnyderE. D.CaldwellN. K.SalisburyC. L. (1996). Supports and resources associated with inclusive schooling: Perceptions of elementary school teachers about need and availability. Journal of Special Education, 30, 187–203.
25.
WoleryM.WertsM. G.CaldwellN. K.SnyderE. D.LiskowskiL. (1995). Experienced teachers' perceptions of resources and supports for inclusion. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 30, 15–26.
26.
York-BarrJ.SchultzT.DoyleM. B.KronbergR.CrossettS. (1996). Inclusive schooling in St. Cloud. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 92–105.
27.
YoungB.SimpsonR.MylesB. S.KampsD. M. (1997). An examination of paraprofessional involvement in supporting students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12, 31–48.
