Because many websites claim to provide information about evidence-based practices (EBPs), consumers must know the information and practices are based upon quality research. Practitioners may intend to locate trustworthy online sources providing EBPs, but if those sources are not easy to navigate and lack implementation resources (i.e., are accessible), then practitioners may be more likely to access less trustworthy sources for instructional strategies and materials. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate websites, identified as trust or trust with caution, to determine whether they demonstrate a level of usefulness for practitioners. Thirty websites, classified as trust and trust with caution, were reviewed for usefulness and results indicated 14 (46.7%) websites were found to be useful, nine (30%) websites were categorized as somewhat useful, and seven (23.3%) websites were determined to be not useful. Suggestions for future research and implications for practice are provided.

This qualitative study was conducted in 3 school systems in East Tennessee by interviewing special education directors, school principals, and teachers. The purpose of this study was to identify administrators who are successful in meeting the needs of special education students and determine characteristics they possess that facilitate success. The grounded theory study employed purposeful sampling and the snowball sampling method. It also included the use of a pilot study to refine the interview protocol. This study includes the characteristics of effective principals as perceived by the special education directors, principals, and teachers. Although some variety of conclusions existed within and among the three groups, this study fulfilled that purpose by identifying several characteristics of principals who are effective in meeting needs of special education students. These characteristics include: having direct contact with special education students, taking responsibility for special education students, serving as an instructional leader, building relationships with parents, and having a high degree of competency in addressing the needs of special education students, providing services, and helping develop programs that meet the needs of children with disabilities. This study is significant because it provides direction and specific information to administrators and teachers on the characteristics of effective administrations regarding students with disabilities that they can use to improve their leadership skills and guide their employment decisions.

The purpose of this study was to compare postsecondary institutions in North Carolina including state universities, private colleges and universities, and community colleges in regard to the number of students with disabilities, assistive technology availability, funding ratios for assistive technology, frequency of professional development training, legislative understanding, and other support factors for students with disabilities. This comparison was accomplished through quantitative and case summarization and analysis research methodologies. Data were collected through case summarizations and the administration of surveys sent to 110 coordinators of students with disabilities services at the 15 state universities, 37 private colleges and universities, and 58 community colleges within North Carolina. The response rate was 65.5% (N =72). Findings suggest there were no significant differences among coordinators' perceptions of legislative issues, student responsibility, institutional responsibility, consideration of context in which accommodations are used, and the impact of accommodations on other faculty and students and the institution. However, there were significant differences between the three types of institutions regarding assistive technology, funding for assistive technology, and services available to students who have disabilities. The findings also included that students who self-report disabilities attend private colleges and universities at a greater percentage than attend state universities or community colleges in North Carolina.

No description available.

Students with disabilities at the postsecondary level face a number of different barriers to accommodation use. Past research has shown that students with disabilities that use accommodations obtain greater academic achievement and higher graduation rates. Limited research has been conducted to identify barriers to accommodation use, and the research that has been conducted has not sampled a population that was specifically identified as having faced barriers to accommodation use. By interviewing students with disabilities, who had been identified as having faced barriers, this study identified seven themes. Four of the identified themes were considered complex as they contained sub-themes, while the other three themes were more straightforward and contained no sub-themes. The four complex themes were Desire for Self-Sufficiency, Desire to Avoid Negative Social Reactions, Insufficient Knowledge, and Quality and Usefulness of DSS and Accommodations. The three straightforward themes were Negative Experiences with Professors, Fear of Future Ramifications, and Accommodations are Not Needed. It is hoped that the findings of this study help both disability support service providers and students with disabilities in making better and more informed decisions regarding barriers to accommodation use.

<p>  </p> <p><strong>Abstract</strong></p> <p><br></p> <p>Students with mild disabilities are often taught in an integrated class setting where they are provided additional support and accommodations while remaining in general education classes with their non-disabled peers. These students often have high-incidence disabilities (e.g. learning disabilities, emotional disabilities, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, and some other health impairments), and have a unique set of characteristics that create challenges for academic and social growth (Stelitano et al., 2019; Trainor et al., 2016). Recent research has shown that exposure to social emotional learning and the 16 Habits of Mind has been beneficial for students with mild disabilities, however teachers are struggling to implement these ideologies in addition to their traditional responsibilities (Jones et al., 2017; Dyson et al., 2019; Cueso & Harrison, 2012). The 16 Habits of Mind are a set of 16 problem-solving, life-related skills that promote personal growth and success (Costa & Kallick, 2000). </p> <p><br></p> <p>The present study was conducted as a requirement of a master’s degree in special education. There are two sub projects: administrating an anonymous survey through Qualtrics and developing an instruction manual. The purpose of the study was to determine teachers’ understanding and experience of social emotional learning and the 16 Habits of Mind and to identify obstacles that prevent teachers from implementing such practices in their classrooms. Twenty-eight licensed teachers recruited from a Title I, public, high school answered the 13 survey questions. The analysis of the results addressed three research questions, (1) What understanding and experience do teachers have about social emotional learning for high school students with mild disabilities?, (2) What understanding and experience do teachers have about using the 16 Habits of Mind with high school students with mild disabilities?, and (3) What kinds of supports (e.g. administrative, district-level, building-level, online resources) are in place to help teachers implement social emotional learning for students with mild disabilities? </p> <p><br></p> <p>Results from the study show that teachers occasionally implemented social emotional learning, and they are confident in their ability to do so, but there were factors that limited regular implementation. Teachers were concerned with the time requirement of social emotional learning, and the support available within their building when navigating sensitive subjects. Many participating teachers had heard of Costa and Kallick’s (2000) 16 Habits of Mind and teach many of the concepts informally through daily practices and routines. A majority of teachers reported teaching three habits formally and often within their classrooms: Striving for Accuracy (50%; N=24), Questioning and Posing Problems (60.87%; N=23), and Applying Past Knowledge to New Situations (54.17%; N=24). When asked to identify which habits were most influential to student success, 20% (N=19) of teachers identified persistence as most important. Teachers’ testimonies showed that using the 16 Habits of Mind as a tool to drive social emotional learning could be beneficial, but, they expressed concerns about being able to blend concepts with existing curriculum without neglecting instruction time.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Using the survey results, a handbook was created to support teachers in implementing the 16 Habits of Mind, as a tool for social emotional learning, into their classroom. The handbook contains the following sections: Students with Mild Disabilities, Social Emotional Learning, The Habits of Mind, Implementation Suggestions, and a detailed outline for each habit. For each of the 16 habits the outline included the following items: Objectives, Relevant Vocabulary, Definition, Application to Learning, Quote, Daily Practices, 1-3 Mini-Lesson Plans, and Journal/Discussion Questions. The hope is that the handbook will provide a resource for teachers, so they feel more comfortable integrating the 16 Habits of Mind into daily curriculum without compromising instruction time. For teachers that would like to go above and beyond, the mini-lesson plans provide activities that can deepen student understanding of the habit and only require 5-15 minutes of class time. In order to develop a handbook that would be most effective for teacher use, it was reviewed by university faculty and licensed special education teachers. After review minor adjustments were made for teacher use and benefit.  </p>

The purpose of this research study was to investigate perceptions and activities of disability support program administrators in Florida community colleges regarding program administration and evaluation. The study further sought to document if any relationships existed between selected organizational and staffing characteristics and the program's ability to follow an established set of standards for program administration and evaluation. A total of 25 disability support administrators (89.3% response rate) completed a phone survey designed for this study. The study revealed that there were many inconsistencies among the higher education disability support programs in regard to programming, staffing and data collecting activities. The common denominator for determining the extent of data collection being performed within the responding community colleges appeared to be the Florida Department of Education, specifically the criteria requested annually by the Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education. At all of the institutions surveyed, data collection activities were concentrated on numerical student data and did not consistently include program evaluation information. Finally, administrator training in program evaluation was positively associated with the responding disability support program's ability to participate in program evaluation activities. This study concluded with discussion of proposed recommendations for disability support administrators in the Florida community colleges.

For refugee children with disabilities, international agencies largely provide humanitarian assistance, including education. However, the obstacles associated with refugee existence can impede progress in the movement towards educating children with disabilities in inclusive settings. Perceptions of inclusive education in schools operated by the Jordan field of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East were explored through multiple embedded case studies. Each of the three schools examined included a student with a special educational need. The researcher also investigated strategies and supports provided by education stakeholders to students with special educational needs in inclusive classrooms. The study was framed by four research questions aligned to a theoretical model of inclusive education and guided by propositions. Findings from interviews, classroom observations, and document reviews, suggest that all stakeholders believe education for students with special educational needs is a human right. However, perceptions of inclusion differed based on several factors including the student’s level of need and the disability, the teacher’s self-efficacy and feeling of preparedness towards meeting the needs of students, and the impact of overcrowded classrooms and limited instructional time. In comparing results between stakeholders, differences existed in perceptions of benefits and challenges associated with inclusive education.

The purpose of this exploratory study was to determine what competencies urban directors of special education perceived to be essential for newly appointed urban special education administrators. Two research questions and two null hypotheses were generated to investigate the underlying factors in competencies perceived by urban special education directors to be essential for newly appointed special education administrators and to investigate the relationship between years of experience as a director of special education and these underlying factors. A factor analysis revealed that there were three underlying factors reported to be essential for newly appointed special education administrators. A multiple regression analysis indicated that the relationship between the years of experience as a director of special education and the underlying factors (Management, Instruction and Change; Supervision of Faculty; and Team Building Skills) was not statistically significant. A post hoc test was conducted to further detect differences in years of experience as an urban director of special education and the underlying factors. The results were sufficient to reject the null hypotheses in both cases.

Because many general education teachers feel unprepared to provide students with disabilities with appropriate instruction, changes to teacher education programs are needed (Burdette, 2007; Smith et al., 2010). Teacher education programs need to integrate content regarding instructional methods for teaching and accommodating students with disabilities in secondary, general education classrooms (Burdette, 2007; Smith et al., 2010). The results of the research should provide insight (1) to determine if integrating instruction on UDL into preservice SGE students' instructional methods courses will increase students' knowledge of UDL and (2) to determine if integrating instruction on Universal Design for Learning (UDL) will affect how secondary social studies (SS) students design lesson plans, particularly, content delivery and student assessment, in regards to the three principles of UDL. The research design was a quantitative, quasi-experimental design. The participants in the research study were students enrolled in four content specific SGE instructional methods courses: Social Studies (SS), Language Arts (LA), Mathematics (M) and Science (S). Research question one's data were analyzed both within content area, Wilcxon test for matched pairs, and between content areas, Mann-Whitney U test for independent samples. The results from research question one indicated a significant difference (p < .05). between pre and post UDL Knowledge test scores within the SGE SS participants. Within the other three SGE content areas, M, LA, and S, subjects' UDL Knowledge pre to posttest scores did not significantly change. When each content area's difference score for the UDL knowledge pre and posttest were calculated and compared between content areas, only the SS and S pairing demonstrated a statistically significant difference score (p < .05). Data from research question two indicated no statistically significant difference (p > .05) between pre and post intervention UDL lesson plan rubric scores. The study provides impetus for future research regarding effective delivery of UDL content in teacher preparation programs. The study also provides suggestions for future researchers who may be interested in designing a similar research study. Finally, the study provides teacher education leadership with questions regarding how the three principles of UDL planning, instruction, and assessment align with the current teacher and student educational evaluation practice of standardized assessments.