Ảnh hưởng của giảng dạy kết hợp đến kết quả học tập học sinh khuyết tật cấp 2 (Walden University)

Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2018 Effect of Coteaching on the Achievement of Middle School Students With Disabilities Calandra C. Holmes Walden University Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.edu/dissertations Part of the Education Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact ScholarWorks@waldenu.

Walden University College of Education This is to certify that the doctoral study by Calandra Holmes has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Mary Hallums, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty Dr. Peter Kiriakidis, Committee Member, Education Faculty Dr.

Beate Baltes, University Reviewer, Education Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph. Walden University 2018 Abstract Effect of Coteaching on the Achievement of Middle School Students With Disabilities by Calandra C. Holmes EdS, University of Sarasota, 2002 MSW, Valdosta State University, 1997 BS, Valdosta State University, 1995 Project Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Walden University December 2018 Abstract From 2014 to 2015, full inclusion through coteaching practices (2 or more professionals providing instruction in the same classroom environment) was implemented at a rural southeastern middle school in Georgia to improve the low academic achievement of students with disabilities (SWDs). The problem is that 8th-grade SWDs score low on the reading and mathematics sections of the Standardized Assessment for Reading and Mathematics (STAR).

The purpose of this quantitative quasi-experimental study was to examine the effect of coteaching on the achievement of 8th-grade SWDs in reading and mathematics as measured by the STAR. Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development was the theoretical framework for this study because cognitive development can be enhanced with adult guidance and peer collaboration. The research questions focused on the difference in STAR gain scores between the coteaching SWDs participants and the SWDs with no coteaching. The sample was 96 8th-grade SWDs.

A t test was used to compare the reading and mathematics gain scores between the academic years 2012- 2014 (without inclusion/coteaching),46 SWDs and 2015-2017 (with inclusion/ coteaching), 50 SWDs. Results showed that there were significant differences in the STAR performance after coteaching implementation in reading and mathematics, p =. This study may lead to positive social change by providing data to the local educational agency leaders, administrators, teachers, and the educational community to make informed decisions about the implementation of coteaching practices, to enhance instructional practices and teaching strategies, and to improve the academic achievement of SWDs allowing them the opportunity to become college and career ready, thus enhancing their postsecondary options. Effect of Coteaching on the Achievement of Students With Disabilities by Calandra C.

Holmes EdS, University of Sarasota, 2002 MSW, Valdosta State University, 1997 BS, Valdosta State University, 1995 Project Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Walden University August 2018 Dedication This degree is not mine alone, it is dedicated to the Lord Jesus Christ because without him I can do nothing and the many people who prayed for me, encouraged me, and pushed me to achieve this goal. I would like to thank my mother, Bettye Drayton-Williams, who refused to allow me to give up when I became discouraged. Thank you for reminding me of Jeremiah 29:11: ‘For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the Lord, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end’. I thank God for giving me to YOU! To my brother, Avery and my sister, Ina, my sister-in-law, Marsha and my brother-in-law, Johnny, thank you for your love, understanding, patience and support on this journey.

To my nieces and nephews: Xzadrian, Avia, Isaiah, Tyler, Averi and Trinity, you all are my motivation, knowing you all are watching pushes me to greatness. I pray that this serves an example that with God, all things are possible. I love each of you and always remember, put God first, hold tight to your dreams, do what is right, work hard and reach for the stars! To my aunt, uncle and cousins, thank you for your prayers and support as I worked to reach my goal. To my entire family, thank you for establishing the foundation, setting a tone of expectancy; never letting me be anything less than my potential would allow me to be.

I am the young woman that I am because of each of you and for that I am forever grateful. To my friend (you know you are are), thank you for being simply who you are in my life. To the Allen Chapel AME Church Family, thank you for being the village that surrounded me with prayers, love and encouragement. WE DID IT! Dedicated with much love to my father; the late Joseph Bobby Holmes; my maternal grandparents; the late Hance and Ethel Pope and my paternal grandparents; the late Rev.

Aaron and Lillian Holmes. Acknowledgments I thank God for providing me this opportunity and taking care of me through this Doctoral journey. If it were not for his grace, I would not be here. I would like to acknowledge each of my professors at Walden University, who assisted in this process.

I would like to say, “Thank you” to my chair, Dr. Mary Hallums for your words of wisdom, encouragement, mentoring, support, advice, countless hours of reading drafts, time and tutelage that you provided for me and to me during this journey. Thank you for your vote of confidence in my ability to finish the race and for only allowing me to speak positivity and greatness in my life. I am forever grateful and humbled for God placing a professional woman such as you in my life; I am a firm believer that “People come into your life for a reason, a season or a lifetime” and you came into my life for a reason, but your kindness will forever be carved in my life, may God continue to bless you abundantly! To my methodologist, Dr.

Peter Kiriakidis, “Thank you” for your expertise and guidance as I worked through the methodological process of quantitative research. Mary Okada, thank you for your patience and support as I asked many questions during advisement. To my URR, Dr. Beate Baltes, thank you for your time in revising and editing to assist me in getting to this point of completion! I greatly appreciate each of you and your efforts in assisting me in this endeavor.

Table of Contents List of Tables. iv List of Figures .v Section 1: The Problem .4 Definition of Terms.5 Significance of the Study .6 Research Questions and Hypotheses .7 Review of the Literature .8 Theoretical Foundation……………………………………………………………9 The Move Toward Inclusion .13 Advantages and Disadvantages of Inclusion .17 Benefits and Challenges of Coteaching .24 Section 2: The Methodology.26 Research Design and Approach .26 Setting and Sample .26 Instrumentation and Materials .28 i Data Collection and Analysis.29 Assumptions, Limitations, Scope, and Delimitations .31 Protection of Participants’ Rights .32 Data Analysis Results .33 Section 3: The Project .42 Review of the Literature .57 Project Evaluation Plan .62 Section 4: Reflections and Conclusions.64 Project Strengths and Limitations .64 Recommendations for Alternative Approaches .64 Scholarship, Project Development and Evaluation, and Leadership and Change .65 Reflection on Importance of the Work .67 Implications, Applications, and Directions for Future Research .71 Appendix A: The Project .95 Appendix B: Sample Letter to Superintendent .133 ii Appendix C: Sample Letter to Principal .135 Appendix D: Data Use Agreement .137 iii List of Tables Table 1: Demographics of Total Population and Sample. 28 Table 2: Mean Gains for STAR Reading Scores for Control and Treatment Groups. 35 Table 3: Mean Gains for STAR Mathematics Scores for Control and Treatment Groups.

36 Table 4: Leverne’s Test for Equality of Variances………………………………………38 iv List of Figures Figure 1. STAR Reading Mean Performance. STAR Mathematics Mean Performance .37 v 1 Section 1: The Problem Introduction The path of public education to accountability began during the mid-1960s (Ludlow, 2012). According to Ludlow (2012), the history of public education for students with disabilities (SWDs) can be viewed as an evolving cycle from exclusion (i., not allowed to attend school) to segregation (i., allowed to attend school in separate buildings/facilities) to physical inclusion (separate resource rooms/self-contained classrooms in a general education environment) to social inclusion (peer socialization in elective/nonacademic classes such as art, physical education, music) and finally to instructional inclusion (access to the curriculum in the general education classroom.

Inclusion is the process used to ensure that SWDs in the general education classroom receive high quality instruction using the general education curriculum and support to access the content curriculum (Alquraini & Gut, 2012). Within instructional inclusive education settings, SWDs access the general education curriculum with their peers by way of their individualized education plan (Aron & Loprest, 2012). The onset of this historical shift began with the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EAHCA) in 1975, which established a precedence that guaranteed a free, appropriate public education (FAPE) for all students regardless of the exceptionality or severity of the disability. This passage also known as PL-94- 142 brought students with either moderate or severe disabilities into the public school environment and started the transference of placing SWDs in the general education setting (Mackey, 2014).

According to the U. Department of Education (2011), the goal became to ensure equal access to public education and the same curriculum for all SWDs and improve the academic 2 achievement of this group of students. More recently, The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) and the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA) along with Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) have brought much attention to the academic achievement of SWDs as compared to their general education peers (U. Department of Education, 2015).

Consequently, many school districts implemented coteaching practices along with physical, social, and instructional inclusive education, which work collectively, to fulfill the required mandates (Friend, Cook, Hurley-Chamberlain, & Shamberger, 2010) for SWDs. Collaborative coteaching occurs in instructional inclusion classrooms to ensure that all students are taught the same content and are exposed to the same educational standards (Morin, 2014). According to Friend (2008), coteaching is defined as, a partnership between a general education teacher and a special education teacher which requires collaborative planning, instructing and assessing students. The coteaching team is responsible for the delivery of instruction and accountable for the learning of all students (Friend, 2008).

The Local Problem The problem was the low academic achievement of 8th-grade SWDs in a rural southeastern school district in Georgia, in the years 2012 to 2014, students were not meeting the academic performance targets of the STAR reading and mathematics assessments (Georgia Department of Education [GaDOE], 2015). In both content areas, SWDs have improved their scores, but have not made significant growth as compared to the state performance targets. Coteaching has become a common occurrence in schools since administrators and teachers understand the value of two educators sharing the responsibility for student learning (Nierengarten & Hughes, 2010). The local district had not examined any achievement data to 3 determine whether a difference exists between the reading and mathematics scores prior to and after the implementation of inclusion through coteaching.

To respond to this accountability measure, many school districts throughout the United States have implemented inclusive education through coteaching instructional practices, which is viewed as the viable practice for conquering both obstacles (Kloo & Zigmond, 2008). The overall goal of this educational practice is to establish a learning environment whereby all students have the possibility to learn and participate in classrooms that offer the opportunity for challenges, as well as, successes (Mackey, 2014).