March 2017 – Special Educator e-Journal

Update from the U.S. Department of Education
Buzz from the Hub
Exploring a Critical Issue in Special Education: Teacher Preparation and Retention. By Phenelope Gonzalez
Addressing the Lack of Advocacy in Research for Low-incidence Disabilities and Dwarfism from a Proud Parent of a Little Person: A Literature Review. By Jennifer Freesland
Differentiated Instruction in Special Education. By Christy Olivares
Concerns Regarding Multicultural Education and Special Education. By Rebekah Rickels
Special Education Legal Alert. By Perry A. Zirkel
Latest Employment Opportunities Posted on NASET

Acknowledgements
Download a PDF Version of This Issue

Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) was signed by President Obama on December 10, 2015, and represents good news for our nation’s schools. This bipartisan measure reauthorizes the 50-year-old Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), the nation’s national education law and longstanding commitment to equal opportunity for all students.

The new law builds on key areas of progress in recent years, made possible by the efforts of educators, communities, parents, and students across the country.

For example, today, high school graduation rates are at all-time highs. Dropout rates are at historic lows. And more students are going to college than ever before. These achievements provide a firm foundation for further work to expand educational opportunity and improve student outcomes under ESSA.

The previous version of the law, the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, was enacted in 2002. NCLB represented a significant step forward for our nation’s children in many respects, particularly as it shined a light on where students were making progress and where they needed additional support, regardless of race, income, zip code, disability, home language, or background. The law was scheduled for revision in 2007, and, over time, NCLB’s prescriptive requirements became increasingly unworkable for schools and educators. Recognizing this fact, in 2010, the Obama administration joined a call from educators and families to create a better law that focused on the clear goal of fully preparing all students for success in college and careers.

Congress has now responded to that call.

ESSA Highlights

President Obama signs the Every Student Succeeds Act into law on December 10, 2015.

ESSA includes provisions that will help to ensure success for students and schools. Below are just a few. The law:

Advances equity by upholding critical protections for America’s disadvantaged and high-need students.
Requires—for the first time—that all students in America be taught to high academic standards that will prepare them to succeed in college and careers.
Ensures that vital information is provided to educators, families, students, and communities through annual statewide assessments that measure students’ progress toward those high standards.
Helps to support and grow local innovations—including evidence-based and place-based interventions developed by local leaders and educators—consistent with our Investing in Innovation and Promise Neighborhoods
Sustains and expands this administration’s historic investments in increasing access to high-quality preschool.
Maintains an expectation that there will be accountability and action to effect positive change in our lowest-performing schools, where groups of students are not making progress, and where graduation rates are low over extended periods of time.

History of ESEA

The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was signed into law in 1965 by President Lyndon Baines Johnson, who believed that “full educational opportunity” should be “our first national goal.” From its inception, ESEA was a civil rights law.

ESEA offered new grants to districts serving low-income students, federal grants for textbooks and library books, funding for special education centers, and scholarships for low-income college students. Additionally, the law provided federal grants to state educational agencies to improve the quality of elementary and secondary education.

NCLB and Accountability

NCLB put in place measures that exposed achievement gaps among traditionally underserved students and their peers and spurred an important national dialogue on education improvement. This focus on accountability has been critical in ensuring a quality education for all children, yet also revealed challenges in the effective implementation of this goal.

Parents, educators, and elected officials across the country recognized that a strong, updated law was necessary to expand opportunity to all students; support schools, teachers, and principals; and to strengthen our education system and economy.

To top

To access everything below in this section from Buzz from the Hub, visit:

http://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/buzz-feb2017-no1/

http://www.parentcenterhub.org/repository/buzz-jan2017/

New from the CPIR

One-Stop List of Recent Guidances from the U.S. Department of Education
Looking for a one-stop list to the guidance and resource packages that have come out of the U.S. Department of Education in 2016 and 2017? (It’s been amazing, hasn’t it?) Here you go! CPIR is pleased to offer this list by topic. Disproportionality is definitely on the list!

CPIR Stakeholders’ Guide to the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA)
States have a lot of decisions to make about how they will implement ESSA, the nation’s general education law, and the voices of parents of children with disabilities are critical to the discussion. The Stakeholder Guide (new from CPIR) provides Parent Center staff and their advocacy partners with an understanding of key provisions in ESSA so that they may become meaningfully involved in how the law is now planned and implemented by the states.

Resources on Disproportionality

5 Things to Know About Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Special Education
Here’s a crash-course intro to disproportionality in special education and why it is so concerning.

What are Success Gaps?
This short video (2-1/2 minutes) defines and gives examples of success gaps in education. Great for sharing with parents participating in your Center’s advocacy to reduce significant disproportionality.

Success Gaps Toolkit
The Success Gaps Toolkit is part of a package of resources that includes materials that a school or district can use to (1) conduct a root cause analysis of why there are gaps in achievement between groups of students, and (2) make a plan for reducing success gaps. Share it with your LEA, SEA, and individual schools.

Parent Engagement Toolkit
This toolkit is a resource for all organizations and community leaders interested in bringing the parent voice into the planning process and the development of local and state action plans addressing the dropout crisis.

CPIR Resources on ESSA

Webinar | ESSA and the Assessment of Students with Disabilities
Our January 5th webinar featured an excellent presentation by Sheryl Lazarus (of the National Center on Educational Outcomes) on the history of including students with disabilities in state assessments and how it has improved outcomes for our students. Did you miss it? No problem. You can still listen, download the presentations, and connect with ESSA resources in your state.

Phenenlope Gonzalez

Abstract

Special education teachers have a high retention rate than general education teachers. Over the past couple of years these educators have demands from their schools and districts that lead to high stress and anxiety to low motivation which results in job displeasure and retention. These educators that chose to continue on the path of special education must become fully aware of the demands of the position prior to committing to the position. School districts and administration should continue to implement a mentor to rookie teachers throughout their first five years of teaching. As well as providing support to these teachers inside and outside the classroom.

Introduction

There is an expression that says that certain people are not born but they are made. Some believe that they were born to become teachers, for others they made a decided to take on teaching as a second or third career. Many special education teachers are not born or make a decision whether or not to be a special education teacher they choose the path of becoming one.

Special education teachers are now being recruited due to their high retention rates. Despite the fact that these teacher choose the special education field and display a deep desire for this field of teaching there are many factors that contribute to their retention. These factors include job dissatisfaction, high stress and low motivation (Major, 2012). These factors can be attributed to administration not fully describing all the job requirements and demands of the position. Another factor is not having a teacher or administrative mentor to guide rookie teachers throughout their first five years in the classroom. And finally lack of support from administration and their school districts in professional developments and classroom assistance.

Retention and its Importance

The student population that special education teachers serve ranges from mild to significant cognitive disabilities, emotional and behavioral disabilities and any other disabilities in between. It is critical for a special education teacher to be fully informed of the ranges of disabilities of students so they can have a better understanding of the demands of their classroom.

Before one becomes a teacher they must complete field experience hours under their undergraduate programs. During these years future teachers are exposed to all areas of special education instruction. There are three types of ways to facilitate student learning for special needs students. Special education classroom delivery instruction methods that educators must become aware of are differentiated instruction, practical instruction and inclusion instruction. (Morewood & Condo, 2012). Special education teachers are then more aware of the case load of instruction they would most likely relate more to when it comes to looking for a teaching position. When a teacher takes the position of a teaching instructor that they are not familiar with this is when retention takes place. This is why professional preparation is imperative for future educators because it affects the retention rates.

Special education teachers that teach students with emotional and behavior challenges hold the most retention of exceptional student education (ESE) teachers. (Major, 2012). This is due to a lack of skills and experience with these students. Stress is then induced with the work load. All ESE teachers are required to maintain and develop individualized education plans (IEP) for every ESE student. In their IEP’s teachers are required to develop goals and benchmarks each student must master during that school year. Modifications and accommodations are then required by the teachers to use during instructional delivery. If a teacher is not fully trained and guided during the process of an IEP and how to manifest the strategies in the classroom it can create a cycle of stress for the teacher and the students as well.

Aside from professional preparation attrition can also come in these forms for ESE teacher, working conditions, role conflicts and administration and colleague assistance (DeMik, 2008). In the article Experiencing Attrition of Special Education the teachers in the study stated that the working conditions such as the paper work of an ESE teacher in reference to the IEP’s, behavior plans, and transition plans cause a great amount of stress When it comes time to writing lesson plans, school required meetings, take a break and even eating lunch (DeMik, 2008) affects the working conditions of a special education teacher.

Special education teachers battle with role conflicts in the work place that leads to retention. The ESE teachers in the study mentioned how they struggle to collaborate with general education teachers especially when it comes to collaborating for their inclusion students. The teachers also felt that they receive professional support from their administration but not emotional support. Also when it comes to high stakes testing ESE students are required to participate which reflects the teachers, this also brings along stressors that lead to retention.

Solutions to Lower Teacher Retention

There is never a perfect or a single solution to minimize the retention of special education teachers. However there are multiple strategies and suggestions by scholarly educators that suggest a decrease in retention. First and foremost professional preparation and awareness to the upcoming and future ESE teachers during the undergraduate years, administrative support and mentorship.

Professional Preparation

During those critical years as an undergraduate student, future special education teachers must have an individual understanding of content knowledge, curricular knowledge and instructional knowledge of a special education classroom. (Morewood & Condo, 2012). This is why field experience hours are so critical, so that the future teacher become familiar with their line of work. During the years of college these future teachers need to become knowledgeable on the fundamental laws of special needs education. Successful teachers are categorized by the way they display their knowledge during and throughout instruction. Knowledge of for practice, in practice and of practice (Morewood & Condo, 2012). These future ESE teachers can develop their instructional practice not just during field experience hours but in many other ways. Becoming a substitute teacher is one way to get exposure, volunteering or working in afterschool sites, volunteering at community centers etc.

Administrative support

Many studies have indicated when there is a positive school climate and supportive administration there is less retention (Cancio, PhD1, Albrecht , & Jones , 2014). This is the role of a principal in any school. Administration sets the tone for their teachers and other instructional staff. They create instructional leadership that assists them and in return creates a collaborative environments for their school. Administrations role is to be supportive and listen to their teachers. In the study mentioned in article Combating the Attrition of Teachers of Students With EBD: What Can Administrators Do? , teachers mentioned that their principal’s awareness, care, understanding and availability are major factors for them when it comes to retention (Cancio, PhD1, Albrecht , & Jones , 2014).

These educators continued to mention professional development opportunities are extremely important to their professional growth and they wish to be supported by an administration that provides these training opportunities and resources. Staff acknowledgment is also important to reduce retention rates for ESE teachers. A simple verbal praise or a pat on the back from time to time can be motivating for these teachers (Cancio, PhD1, Albrecht , & Jones , 2014).

Mentoring

The final strategy for reducing the retention rates in special education teachers is mentoring. Peer mentoring has proven to be effective when teachers who have more years of experience to those rookie teachers who have five years of less in the field. A beginning teacher is paired with a mastery teacher (Wasburn, Wasburn-Moses, & Davis , 2012). The more experienced teacher mentors the beginning teacher supporting and assessing their teaching skills.

These mentorships between the experienced teacher and rookie teacher is to bridge the gap for these new teachers on issues that rookie teachers feel they need guidance. These beginning teachers mentioned issues such as seclusion, confusion over new job tasks and responsibilities and lack of support (Wasburn, Wasburn-Moses, & Davis , 2012). The mentor teachers also give suggestions and recommendations to the beginning teachers of professional developments they should attend and participate in order to grow professionally. They follow up with their mentees periodically in order to assist and give suggestions on daily teacher tasks such as completing lesson plans, classroom organization and one on one guidance during high stakes testing.

Conclusion

In education there is never a perfect solution for any of the many issues that surround those that have chosen a career in education. For special education, the journey may come with many challenges that differ ESE teaching from general education teaching. What is certain is that educators are needed, educators that believe in the power of teaching and making a difference. If the focus is placed on the common goal, being educators then the suggested solutions can make a difference for those beginning and future special education teachers.

References

U.S. Department of Education. (2014, October 29). Building a Legacy: IDEA 2004. Retrieved from ED.gov: idea.ed.gov/explore/home

Wasatch School District . (2014, October 30). Video Surveillance Policy. Retrieved from Wasatch School District: www.wasatch.edu/cms/lib/UT01000315/Centricity/Domain/2/Article_III_Video_Surveillance_Policy.pdf

Alicia F. Saunders, K. S. (2013). Solving the Common Core Equation: Teaching Mathematics CCSS to Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 24-33.

An Overview of Related Services Under IDEA. (2013, 12 1). Retrieved from Education.com: www.education.com/print/Ref_Related_Services/

ASCD. (n.d.). The Common Core State Standards Initiative. Retrieved from ASCD.org: www.ascd.org/ASCD/pdf/siteASCD/policy/CommonCoreStds.pdf

Baker, L., Dreher, M. J., Shiplet, A. K., Beall, L. C., Voelker, A. N., Garrett, A. J., . . . Finger-Elam, M. (2011). Children’s comprehension of informational text: Reading, engaging, and learning. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 197-227.

Beecher, M., & Sweeny, S. M. (2008). Closing the Achievement gap with curriculum enrichment and differentiation: One school’s story. Journal of Advanced Academics, 502-530.

Behrent, M. (2011). In Defense of Public Education. Retrieved from New Politics: newopol.org/content/defense-public-education

Belva C. Collins, J. K. (2010). Teaching Core Content with Real-Life Applications to Secondary Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 52-59.

Blaska, J. K. (1996). Using children’s literature to learn about disabilities and illness. Moorehead, MN: Practical Press.

Bodrova, D. J. (2012, January). Play and Children’s Learning. Retrieved from National Association for the Education of Young Children : www.naeyc.org/files/yc/file/201201/Leong_Make_Believe_Play_Jan2012.pdf

Brown, J. (2013, January 22). National dropout, graduation rates improve, study shows. Retrieved from USATODAY.com: www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/22/education-high-school-dropout-rate/1855233/

Bush, T. (2007). Educational leadership and management: theory, policy, and practice. South African Journal of Education, 391-406.

Butrymowicz, S. (2010, September 1). National crisis: Not much training for some special-ed teachers. Retrieved from The Hechinger Report, Independent Educational News: hechingerreport.org/content/national-crisis-not-much-training-for-some-special-ed-teachers_4189/

Cancio, PhD1, E., Albrecht , S., & Jones , B. (2014). Combating the Attrition of Teachers of Students With. Intervention in School and Clinic 2014, Vol. 49(5), 306-312.

Carolan, J., & Guinn, A. (2007). Differentiation: lessons from master teachers. Educational Leadership, 64(5), 44-47. Retrieved 12 04, 2016, from www.ascd.org/premium-publications/books/110058e4/chapters/Differentiation@-Lessons-from-Master-Teachers.aspx

Caruana, V. (2015). Accessing the Common Core Standards for Students with Learning Disabilities: Strategies for Writing Standards-Based IEP Goals. Preventing School Failure, 237-243.

Collins, B. C., Karl, J., Riggs, L., Galloway, C. C., & Hager, K. D. (2010). Teaching Core Content with Real-Life Applications to secondary Students with Moderate to severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(1), 52-59.

Constable, S., Grossi, B., Moniz, A., & Ryan , L. (2013). Meeting the Common Core State Standards for Students with Autism the Challenge for Educators. Teaching Exceptional Children , 45(3), 6-13.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2010, Oct). What we can learn from Finland’s successful school reform. Retrieved from National Education Association: www.nea.org/home40991.htm

Darrow, A.-A. (2014). Applying Common Core Standards to Students with Disabilities in Music. General Music Today, 33-35.

DeMik, S. A. (2008). Experiencing Attrition of Special. Valparaiso University.

Development, T. O. (2012, March 13). OECD calls for new approach to tackle teacher shortage. Retrieved from OECD: better policies for better lives: www.oecd.org/newsroom/oecdcallsfornewapproachtotackleteachershortage.htm

D’Orio, W. (2013). Finland is #1!,Finland’s education success has the rest of the world looking north for answers. Retrieved from Administrator Magazine: Curriculum: www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp

Dr. Moira Konrad, D. S. (2014). Setting Clear Learning Targets to Guide Instruction for All Students. Intervention in School and Clinic, 76-85.

Dr. Sarah J. Watt, J. R. (2016). Teaching Algebra to Students with Learning Disabilities: Where Have We Come and Where Should We Go? . Journal of Learning Disabilities, 437-447.

Duncan, A., & Posny, A. (2010, Nov). Thirty-Five Years of Educating Children With Disabilities Through IDEA. Retrieved from ED.gov: www2.ed.gov.print/about/offices/list.osers/idea35/history/index.html

Edutopia: Finland’s Formula for School Success (Edcation Everywhere Series). (2012, January 24). Retrieved from Edutopia.org: www.edutopia.org/reduction-everywhere-international-finland-video

English, J. (2013, Oct 24). US Teacher Gets Finnish Lesson in Optimizing Student Potential, Part 2. Retrieved from Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) : oecdinsights.org/2013/09/24/us-teacher-gets-finnish-lesson-in-optimizing-student-poetential-part-2/

Essex, N. L. (2008). School Law adn he Public Schools: A Practical Guide for Educational Leaders. Boston: Pearson.

Finland, T. T. (2008). Teacher Education in Finland. Helsinki: Forssan Kirjapaino.

Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2010, July 20). The Special Education Referral, Assessment, Eligiblity, Planning, and Placement Process. Retrieved from Education.com: www.education.com/reference/article/special-education-referral-assessment/

Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a Culture of Change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Gale Encyclopedia of Education: special Education: Preparation of Teachers. (2013, 11 23). Retrieved from Answers.com: www.answers.com/topic/special-education-preparation-of-teachers

Gray, J. (2008, 12). The implementation of differentiated instruction for learning disabled students included in general education elementary classrooms. La Verne, California, United States.

Hancock, L. (2011, September). Smithsonian Magazine. Retrieved from Smithsonian.com: www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/Why-Are-Finlands-Schools-Successful.html

Hayes, G., Gardere, L., Abowd, G., & Truong, K. (2008). CareLog: A Selective Archiving Tool for Behavior Management in Schools. CHIP 2008 Proceedings-Tools for Education, (pp. 685-694). Florence .

Heavey, S. (2013, Nov 6). U.S. Poverty rate remains high even counting government aid. Retrieved from Business & Financial News, Breaking US & International News/ Reuters.com: www.reuters.com/assets/print?aid=USBRE9A513820131106

Hesselbein, F., & Shinseki, G. E. (2004). Be-Know-Do: Leadership the Army Way. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hilyard, V. M. (2004, Fall). Teachers’ understanding and use of differentiated instruction in the classroom. Saint Louis, Missouri, United States.

History: twenty Five Years of Progress in Educating Children With Disabilities through IDEA. (n.d.). Retrieved from U. S. Office of Special Education Programs: www.ed.gov/offices/osers/osep

Huff Post. (2012, 01 27). Best Education in the World: Finland, South Korea Top Country Rankings, U.S. Rated Average. Huff Post.

IES. (2013, 04 11). Fast Facts. Retrieved from National Center for Educational Statistics: nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64

Irma Suovirta, R. H. (2013, November 15). Statistics Finland: Pre-primary and comprheensive school education 2013. Retrieved from Statistics Finland: www.stat.fi/til/pop_2013_2013-11-15_tie_001_en.html

Itkonen, T., & Jahnukainen, M. (2009, August 8). Disability or Learning Difficulty? constructing Special Eduaiton Students in Finland and the United States. Retrieved from All Academic Research: citation.allacademic.com/meta/p_mla_apa_research_citation/3/0/7/6/5/pages307659/p307659-1.php

J. McLeskey, N. T. (2004). The Supply of and Demand for Special Education Teachers: A Review of Research Regarding the Chronic Shortage of Special Education Teachers. The Journal of Special Education, 5-21.

Kamenetz, A. (2014, October 30). UPDATED: New Details On Bill Gates’s $5 Billion Plan To Film, Measure Every Teacher. Retrieved from Creative Conversations: www.fastcompany.com/3007973/creative-conversations/updated-new-details-bill-gatess-5-billion-plan-film-measure-every-tea

Kelley, S. (2014, October 30). Interview with Shawn Kelley. (A. Ivie, Interviewer)

Key Provision on Transition: IDEA 1997 compared to H.R. 1350 (IDEA 2004). (n.d.). Retrieved from National Center on Secondary Education and Transition: www.ncset.org/premium-publications/related/ideatransition.pdf

Kieffer, M. J. (2013). Morphological awareness and reading difficulties in adolescent Spanish-speaking language minority learners and their classmates. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 44-53.

Kinlan, C. (2011, January 21). Rethinking Special Education in the U. S. Retrieved from Hechinger Report: hechingerreport..org/content/rethinging-special-education-in-the-u-s

Konrad, M., Keesey, S., Ressa, V., Alexeeff, M., Chan, P., & Peters, M. (2014). Setting Clear Learning Targets to Guide Instruction for all students . Intervention in School and Clinic, 50(2), 76-85.

Labor, D. o. (2013, 09 28). U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Web: stats.bls.gov. Retrieved from Info please: www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0104719

Lepi, K. (2013). How 12 Countries Spend Education Money (And If It Makes A Difference). Edudemic; connecting education & technology.

Levy, H. M. (2008, Mar-Apr). Meeting the needs of all students through differentiated instruction: helping every child reach and exceed standards. The Clearing House, 81(4), 161-164. doi:10.3200/tchs.81.4.161-164

Logan, B. (2008). Examining differentiated instruction: Teachers respond. Research in Higher Education Journal, 1-14.

M. Friend, W. D. (2013, 11 17). The Special Education Referral, Assessment, Eligibility, Planning, and Placement Process. Retrieved from Education.com: www.education.com/print/special-education-referral-assessment/

Major, A. E. (2012). Job Design for Special Edcuation Teachers. Current issues in Education Volume 15.

Martinez, A. M. (2011). Explicit and differentiated phonics instruction as a tool to improve literacy skills for children learning English as a foreign language. GIST Education and Learning Research Journal, 25-49.

Maxwell, J. C. (2011). The 5 Levels of Leadership. New York: Center Street Hatchette Book Group.

Morewood , A., & Condo, A. (2012). A Preservice Special Education Teacher’s. American Council in Rural Special Educatian.

Muffler, A. (2014, October 2014). Interview with Andrew Muffler. (A. Ivie, Interviewer)

NICHCY. (2012, 03). Categories of Disability Under IDEA. Retrieved from National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities: nichcy.org/wp-content/uploads/docs/gr3.pdf

Pardini, P. (2013, 11). The History of Special Education. Retrieved from rethinging schools. org: www.rethirngingschools.org/restrict.asp?path=archive/16_03/Hist163.shtml

Parent Brief Promoting Effective Parent Involvement in Secondary Educaiton. (2002, July). Retrieved from National Center on Secondary Education and Transition: ncset.org/premium-publications/printresource.asp?=423

Parsons, S. (2012). Adaptive teaching in literacy instruction: case studies of two teachers. Journal of Literacy Research, 44, 149-170.

Patrick, D. (2014, October 30). SB 1380 House Committee Report Version. Retrieved from Texas Legislature Online: www.capitol.state.tx.us/Search/DocViewer.aspx

Phipps v Clark County School District, 2:13-cv-00002 (United States District Court for the District of Nevada January 25, 2013).

Plock v Board of Education of Freeport School District , 07 c 50060 (United States District Court, N.D. Illinois, Western Division December 18, 2007).

Prater, M. A., Dyches, T. T., & Johnstun, M. (2006). Teaching students about learning disabilities through children’s literature. Intervention in School and Clinic, 42(1), 14-24.

Rambin, J. (2014, October 30). Bill Requiring Surveillance In Special Education Classes Heads to House. Retrieved from Austinist: austinist.com/2013/04/08/bill_requiring_surveillance_in_spec.php

Rehabilitation, V. (2013). Vocational Rehabilitation Services for High School Students with Disabilities. Retrieved from Executive Office of Health and Human Services: www.mass.gov/eohhs/consumer/family-services/youth-services/youth-with-disabilities/vocational-services.html

Reis, S. M., McCoach, D. B., Little, C. A., Muller, L. M., & Kaniskan, R. B. (2011). The effects of Differentiated Instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 462-501.

Rubin, C. M. (2013, Jan 14). The Global Search for Education: What Will Finland Do Next? Retrieved from Huff Post Education: www.huffingtonpost.com/c-m-rubin/finland-education_b_2468823.html

Sahlberg, P. (2012). A Model Lesson; Finland Shows Us What Equal Opportunity Looks Like. American Educator, 20-40.

Salem, L. C. (2006). Children’s literature studies: Cases and discussions. Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.

Saunders, A. F., Spooner, F., Browder, D., Wakeman, S., & Lee, A. (2013). Teaching Common Core in English Language Arts to Students with Severe Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Students , 46(2), 22-33.

Saundres, A. F., Bethune, K. S., Spooner, F., & Browder, D. (2013). Solving the Common Core Equation Teaching Mathematics CCSS to students with moderate and severe disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(3), 24-33.

Servillo, K. L. (2009). You get to choose! Motivating students to read through differentiated instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 2-11.

Short, K., Evans, A., & Hildebrand, K. (2011, August/September). Celebrating International Books in Today’s Classroom: The Notable Books for a Global Society Award. Reading Today, pp. 34-36.

Springer, B. (2014, October 31). Inteview with Ben Springer. (A. Ivie, Interviewer)

Stanford, B., & Reeves, S. (2009). Making it happen: Using differentiated instruction, retrofit framework. and Universal Design for Learning. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 1-9.

Stanford, P., Crowe, M. W., & Flice, H. (2010). Differentiating with technology. Teaching Exceptional Children Plus, 2-9.

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 935-947.

Subban, P. (2006). Differentiated Instruction: A research basis. International Education Journal, 7(7), 935-947. Retrieved 12 02, 2016, from files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ854351.pdf

Sullivan, K. (2011, October 27). Book Award Celebrates Awareness for Disabilities. Inside Eau Claire.

The Council of Chief State School Officers. (2014, October 30). Educational Leadership Policy Standards. Retrieved from ISSLC 2008: www.vide.vi/data/userfiles/Educational_Leadership_Policy_Standards_2008%20(1)(1).pdf

Thomas E. Scruggs, F. J. (2013). Common Core Science Standards: Implications for Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 49-57.

Tomlinson, C. (2009, July 24). What is differentiated instruction? Retrieved from Reading Rockets: www.readingrockets.org/article/what-differentiated-instruction

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). Mapping a route toward differentiated instruction. Educational Leadership, 57(1), 12-16. Retrieved 12 03, 2016, from blog.elanco.org/gsgsteacherresources/files/2015/01/Mapping-a-Route-Towards-Differentiated-Instruction-1synvr0.pdf

University of Michigan: SPECIAL NEEDS EDUCATION . (2013). Retrieved from Unversity of Michigan; Department of Psychology: sitemaker.umich.edu/delicata.356/funding_for_special_needs_education

Utah State Office of Education. (2014, October 31). LRBI Guidelines. Retrieved from Utah State Office of Education: www.schools.utah.gov/sars/DOCS/resources/lrbi07-09.aspx

Vaughn, S., & Linan-Thompson, S. (2003, Fall). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities? The Journal of Special Education, 37(3), 140-147. Retrieved 12 02, 2016, from files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ785943.pdf

Wasburn, M., Wasburn-Moses, L., & Davis , D. R. (2012). Mentoring Special Educators:. Hammill Institute on Disabilities, 59-66.

Washburn-Moses, L. (2005, January). How to Keep Your Special Education Teachers. Retrieved from Managing Your School: www.nassp.org/portals/0/content/49169.pdf

Winzer, M. A. (2006). Confronting difference: an exursion through the history of special education. In M. a. Winzer, The SAGE Handbook of Special Educaiton. SAGE Publications.

By Jennifer Freesland

When conducting a meta-search of studies on advocacy for children and youth with dwarfism, there was little to none education related research, most studies were of a medical nature. For educational purposes, it is important to underscore this lack of advocacy, since it also impacts children under other low-incidence disability categories. The purpose of this review of literature is to highlight the lack of research-based advocacy for children with dwarfism in educational research. As evidence, the limited number of articles that do exist on low-incidence disabilities mainly focus on rural areas. This literature review also aims to highlight the importance of parent-school collaboration and the importance of providing services in the school setting for children with low-incidence disabilities, especially dwarfism.

Lack of Research for Low-Incidence and Dwarfism in the Education Field

Achondroplasia, the most common form of dwarfism, makes up about 5 million of the United States population as of 2004. This makes achondroplasia a low-incidence disability. Low-incidence disabilities are defined as a visual or hearing impairment, or simultaneous visual and hearing impairments, a significant impairment or any impairment for which a small number of personnel with highly specialized skills and knowledge are needed in order for children with that impairment to receive early intervention services or a free appropriate public education (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Montgomery (2006) stated in her paper that there are a “variety of substantial barriers” that hinder the information that is proliferated about students with low-incidence disabilities. These “barriers” that Montgomery speaks of could be the reasons as to why there are not a lot of educational studies or research on students with dwarfism. Specifically, the barriers are: 1) Being that some school districts have fewer than ten students with the same low-incidence disability; it is hard to conduct large, randomized clinical trials to meet the research criteria (2004); and 2) Within the studies that are being conducted the intervention that is being tested may work exclusively for that individual student and cannot be generalized for other students with the same disability. The reason for this is occurrence is that students with disabilities as well as their non-disabled peers have different learning styles that are unique to them.

Most studies that look into low-incidence disabilities are done within the rural population, (eg., Ludlow, B. L., Conner, D., & Schechter, J. (2005) and Rude, H., Jackson, L., Correa, S., Lucker, J., Muir, S., & Ferrell, K.(2005). Notably, there was no mention or research found on students with dwarfism. This supports what Montgomery’s (2006) contention that since the numbers of students with low-incidence disabilities are so low, valid research cannot be completed. Even though 5 million in the overall population of the United States is a relatively small number, there should be some research done to help out parents and schools, when it comes to the education of a student with dwarfism. This lack of advocacy can lead to underrepresentation in the creation of policy, gaps in the quality of accurate information that is shared with the public, and the overall misrepresentation of a particular group. Supporting this notion, students with dwarfism are sometimes being as labeled learning disabled (LD). Notably, this is not supported or evidenced in the medical research. All of these issues point towards the idea that more research needs to be conducted in the area of low-incidence disabilities within the context of education.

Importance of Parent-School Collaboration

It is known that parents of students with disabilities frequently encounter problems when going through the special education system. This problem is magnified in low-incidence populations due to the relatively low numbers discussed and lack of advocacy efforts. When the Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Education Act (IDIEA) was written Congress explicitly wrote parents into the act.

Under IDIEA, parents are required to provide consent for evaluations, receive notes to attend meetings and receive procedural safeguards. It is important that in special education parents and school personnel work together to guarantee that children with disabilities receive the appropriate services that they need. When there is parental involvement in a student’s academic and behavioral repertoire, there are generally positive results on academic achievement. Parental involvement has also been found to decrease drop-out, since there are higher educational expectations. Moreover, parental involvement often decreases at-risk behaviors and improves student attendance in school. Within special education parental involvement is often dismissed. This can lead to disagreements between the school and the parents, and typically results in broken relationships that are difficult to mend, even when the setting or school changes.

While parental involvement is very important for the student and also for the parents, there are some barriers that parents may come up against. Burke, M. M (2013), found that parent may: (a) challenge authority at meetings, (b) experience logistical issues related to getting to the meetings, (c) not know their rights, (d) feel unwelcome, (e) feel like they are unable to express their discontent with educational services at the meetings, and (f) experience ineffectively explained procedural safeguards (2013). Due to these barriers, parents will likely not expressively participate in the IEP meetings, which further supports the importance of creating successful parent-school collaboration. Notably, there are zero studies that address the success of parental interactions within the context of education for students with dwarfism. Yet, it is of vital importance that teachers who teach children with achondroplasia know the following:

Treat the child like any other child.
There are over 200 distinct types of dwarfism. The most common type is Achondroplasia, which results in disproportionately shorter arms and legs.
Preferred terminology for someone with dwarfism is little person (LP), short-stature, dwarf or having dwarfism. The most preferred terminology is always simply the person’s name.
The term “midget’ is antiquated, and can be perceived by some as a derogatory, slang word.
Little People of America (LPA) is the largest organization that provides support and information for people with dwarfism and their families.
Dwarfism has no effect on cognitive ability. It is rare to have any type of cognitive issues in conjunction with dwarfism.
Children with dwarfism may need longer time for writing assignments because of their little hands.
Walking long distances may take longer for a little person.
During a fire drill a student with dwarfism should be in the front of the line never the middle or back.
Sweating and overheating are common since children with dwarfism tend to run warmer compared to average height children.
Encourage the child to talk about what is difficult for them and encourage them to come up with ideas and solutions.

It is important for parents and school to collaborate together for the benefit of the student.

Since there is not any research done on students with dwarfism at the educational level, parents and even schools need to look into the medical research, or Little People of America for information on how to make the students educational experience a success. John Hopkins being a teaching hospital and the Center of Skeletal Dysplasia, have lots of information on their websites that can be useful in the school setting.

Importance of School Services and Qualified Teachers in Education

Most students with low-incidence disabilities need services, these often include; a teacher for the deaf or hard of hearing, an occupational therapist, a speech therapist and possibly a teacher who can help with the students who are have vision impairments. Most of all, students with low-incidence disabilities need teachers who are certified/qualified in their respective area. Rude, H, et al. (2005), conducted a study that examined the perceived needs of students with low-incidence disabilities, based in rural areas of the United States. The authors aimed to find out information about the appropriateness and availability of appropriate educational services for students with low-incidence disabilities.

They found that many of the participants noted in their survey that the need for qualified teachers who could provide the appropriate educational services to learners with low-incidence disabilities, was their greatest concern. Another section that was of noted great concern, was that specified program components that are required through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) were not afforded to students with low-incidence disabilities (2005). Ludlow, B.L, et al. (2005) had mentioned in their article that “In 30 years, there has not been enough fully certified special educators to fill the positions in the nation’s public schools.” From an advocate’s perspective, this is unacceptable and highly unethical. Specifically, the survey that was done by Rude, H, et.al. (2005), asked parents “What are the three greatest needs?” out of the 100 surveys that came back eighty-four participants responded to that question. Some of the responses from this question included (a) the need for better training in general, (b) training for general educators, or giving the general education teacher more information on students with low-incidence disabilities, and avoiding turn-over of the staff that is already qualified or certified. Moreover, the Department of Education states that students with low-incidence disabilities need “personnel with highly specialized skills and knowledge are needed in order for children with that impairment to receive early intervention services or a free appropriate public education.” These are all valid suggestions from the parents, educators and vested stakeholders.

Several questions arise when analyzing the needs or issues posed. Namely; Where is the personnel with highly specialized skills? Should there be a small number of people effectively and extensively trained; or should every teacher and/or support staff have at least a little bit of knowledge on the subject? While students with low-incidence disabilities represent less than one percent of the school population (U.S. Department of Education, 2002), they are still entitled to the same protections related to access and quality as those found in larger populations. Since the chances of having a student with a low-incidence disability in the classroom is low, this population is largely overlooked. Yet, efforts must be made to make sure that the teachers and school personnel are ready to serve students with low-incidence disabilities appropriately. For little people, schools must be environmentally adapted to:

Accessible bathroom toilet, sink, toilet paper roll and paper towel dispenser.
Handicapped accessible door openers (at a reachable level).
Low locks in bathroom stall.
Step stool with handle to climb up on to cafeteria seating.
Stools in each classrooms to help get in and out of chairs or to help reach items.
Push cart to help carry a lunch tray in lunch room.
Light switch extenders to reach the light switches.
Materials moved to lower shelves for easy accessibility.

These accommodations can be as simple as a stool to reach something, or the student having their own personal assistant or aid. If a parent is active in their child’s life from the onset of the diagnosis or educational label, then by the time they enter school the parent will likely know what accommodations the student will need. It is important to note that oftentimes what the parent knowns can help their child is not easily available or willingly offered in schools.

Conclusion

After an extensive meta-search for educational research on low-incidence disabilities, and dwarfism in particular, it should be noted that there is a lack of advocacy-based research and minimal research overall for other low-incidence disabilities. Based on policy mandates, ethical socio-educational practice, and parent-based advocacy, more research should be conducted in these areas. Parents and schools must collaborate to increase positive educational outcomes, especially when a student has a low-incidence disability given the physical and/or psychological barriers that these can pose.

References

Burke, M. M. (2013). Improving parental involvement: training special education advocates.

Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 23(4), 225-234

Ludlow, B. L., Conner, D., & Schechter, J. (2005). Low incidence disabilities and personnel

preparation for rural areas: current status and future trends. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(3), 15-24.

Montgomery, J. K. (2006). Current status of evidence-based practices for low-disabilities

introduction to the special series. Communication Disorder Quarterly, 28(1), 37-398.

Rude, H., Jackson, L., Correa, S., Lucker, J., Muir, S., & Ferrell, K.(2005). Perceived needs of

students with low-incidence disabilities in rural areas. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 24(3), 3-14.

United States Department of Education. (2002). Twenty-fourth annual report to Congress on

implementation of the individuals with disabilities education act. Washington, DC.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs. (2003). Twenty-third

annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, DG: U.S. Department of Education.

About the Author

Jennifer Freesland is a general education teacher in South Florida. She has her Masters of Science in Special Education. Jennifer is a big advocate for her three year old daughter who has achondroplasia. She serves on the local and regional chapters of Little People of America as secretary.

Differentiated Instruction in Special Education By Christy Olivares

Christy Olivares

Education is important and will allow the United States to continue progressing past the 21^st century. Each student learns at their own pace and their own manner. That is when differentiated instruction plays an important role. Many factors should be considered when discussing effective differentiated instruction: teacher preparedness, teacher attitude and expectations, classroom management, learning levels of students, tiered instruction, student motivation and engagement. According to the United States government, special education students should be provided an opportunity to receive a free appropriate public education (FAPE). According to Vaughn and Thompson (2003), IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act), which was reauthorized in 1997 and 2004, gave students with disabilities the right to a FAPE education. The students could now be tested and identified and given special treatment.

Students with disabilities, or Exceptional Students, require special attention, love, patience, and guidance. ESE students, as they are affectionately called, require a more detailed level of differentiated instruction. Prior to explaining how differentiated instruction can be used to help these students, we need to closely define what differentiated instruction is. According to Hilyard (2004), when a teacher provides extra support, and changes the content, process, or product, they are providing differentiated instruction. Using differentiated instruction can have many benefits for students with disabilities. According to Vaughn and Thompson (2003), having small-group instruction allows students to have more 1-to-1 with teachers, individualization of instruction, raises on task behavior, and increases teacher motivating and feedback.

Differentiated instruction can be used in many ways by teachers. When a teacher differentiates the content, they are making sure students are still receiving grade level material but are being taught using different strategies and different resources. A few examples, according to Gray (2008), is that teachers need to plan fun, engaging lessons to target all learners. Teachers who use small groups to target individualized instruction have better scores when it comes to weekly testing and state testing such as the FSA (Florida State Standards). If a teacher teaches students the content while making sure that the lessons are fun and engaging, students will grasp the content easier and quickly. Using differentiated instruction, a teacher can make sure that each child is learning the content at their own pace and in their own manner.

Differentiated instruction also targets the process in which a lesson is taught. Some students learn better with audio, visual, or kinesthetic resources and lessons. Processes allow teachers to pick how they want to present their lessons to their students. Teachers get to know what type of student they have and how to best teach the content. According to Subban (2006), the teacher teaches using appropriate techniques and assists learners in reaching their fullest potential by figuring out how the students learn best and using it as a strength and not a weakness. After figuring out a student’s strength, teachers should use it to teach to their strengths and make sure that lesson plans have all types of different activities that allow the student to “show what they know”. Teachers should also be willing to try new approaches in teaching the content. According to Affholder (2003), teachers who employed differentiated instruction effectively have increased feelings of self-efficacy and have demonstrated a higher willingness to try new approaches.

Differentiated instruction allows students to show mastery in the way that they deem fit for their personalities, strengths, and learning styles. It is a way for students to demonstrate what they have learned. Products allow students to pick how they want to present their mastery of the lesson. Students can put on a play, create a poster, or record their voice on a lesson just to name a few examples. According to Gray (2008), students should have the ability to see, hear, speak, move, read, write, organize, engage, and achieve greatness in the classroom. One way to achieve greatness in the classroom is to be able to show mastery using any product that can be used and identified as being efficient. According to Tomlinson (1999), students should be active and responsible explorers. The child should feel challenged. Teachers responsibilities include making sure they give detailed instructions and explanations. Teachers also need to clarify key concepts and generalizations. The teacher then needs to “take a step back” and allow the child to “show what they know”. Teachers need to make sure to provide a balance between teacher-assigned and student-selected tasks.

IMPORTANCE OF DIFFERENTIATED INSTRUCTION IN SPECIAL EDUCATION

Differentiated instruction is an important topic to delve into when speaking about special education. Students with disabilities require special attention when it comes to teaching and differentiated instruction allows the teacher to figure out how to help students and give the guidance and support they need to be successful in their academic career. According to Subban (2006), inclusion of all types of students has been increasing. Decades ago, there were limited types of students in the classroom. Now, there is an influx of special needs, gifted, English Language Learners, and regular education students. As explained earlier: the important factors that should be considered when discussing effective differentiated instruction (teacher preparedness, teacher attitude and expectations, classroom management, learning levels of students, tiered instruction, and student engagement and motivation) help educators know how to get each individual student where they need to be and how teachers can help them get there.

One important factor to be discussed, teacher preparedness, helps us see how important differentiated instruction is. A teacher who prepares their lessons and resources prior to delivery day has a more increased effectiveness in their differentiated instruction. Using their content, teachers can find resources that match the content and pacing guide that is provided by the district and state standards. According to Gregory and Chapman (2001), teachers need to plan strategically to reach the diverse needs of all students in the classroom. Teacher attitude and expectations, another factor that is important, helps us determine how effective the teacher’s differentiation is. If a teacher is expecting their student to succeed but does not provide that student with the necessary skills, then the student won’t be successful. Teachers who always have a smile on their face, regardless of any obstacles in their path, have seen a better increase when it comes to student outcomes on daily occurrences. According to Carolan and Guinn (2007), many teachers are not comfortable in implementing differentiated instruction due to lack of time, professional development resources, and lack of administrative support. Many educators are upset with the lack of resources and administrative support and are not being as effective in the classroom.

Teacher’s expectations also play an important role. A teacher must make sure to explain what is expected during center rotations and show students how to do each activity that needs to be completed. A teacher must also put into play the level of loudness she or he would like their students to work at. Depending on the situation, students would work individually, in dyads or triads, or small group setting with no more than 6 to 7 students in the group. Teachers need to explain the objectives of centers and have instructions clearly written or labeled so that students know exactly what to do at all times. The teacher should practice going to centers with their students’ prior to giving students’ work to do at the center. That way, students know exactly what is expected of them at each center. Students with disabilities require clear, written instructions and an effective center rotation with clear expectations and rules helps them accomplish their goals.

Classroom management, the third main factor, allows for the classroom to flow without any issues. According to Subban (2006), an effective teacher whose classroom management is excellent, has no issues when students are working in centers as their students know what is expected of them and what they need to do. A teacher whose classroom management is subpar has more issues in making sure their class is on task always. Students who are in a classroom with effective classroom management seem to better comprehend and grasp the content versus students who are not in a well-managed class. Research conducted by Hodge (1997) shows that students who were prepared for state testing using differentiated techniques had a higher increase on their math scores but not much change in their reading scores. Further research should be conducted to see the correlation between reading scores and using differentiated instruction in an effective versus ineffective environment.

Learning levels of students, the fourth main factor, can aid teachers in making fun, engaging lessons for their students. According to Levy (2008), although students might be at different levels, grouping students with others of similar abilities is beneficial. The groups should change after each testing cycle. Grouping students by their needs allows them to either receive extra instruction, review what was taught, or receive an extension or challenging activity. Students can also be grouped by learning styles. Levy (2008) states that students have different personalities and learning styles. Many students are audio learners and listen to the teacher explain or listen to the story. Other students are visual learners and need to watch a video or watch the teacher and everything they write on the board.

Our third type of learner, kinesthetic learners, need to do something hands-on to understand what is happening and what they are learning about.

Tiered instruction, our fifth factor, allows teachers to stay focused on the standards and curriculum while allowing teachers to maintain flexibility in content, process, and product. Scaffolding is a temporary solution that allows teachers to build a bridge between what the student can do and what he or she needs to do. Some differentiated activities, according to Tomlinson (2009), use tiered activities where the learners are working toward the same skills but at different levels and complexity. When a teacher differentiates the content, he or she would teach at the independent reading level of the student and scaffold to get to the next level. There are different ways for the teacher to scaffold such as using reading materials at the students’ readability level, presenting ideas through visual and auditory means, and using reading buddies (Tomlinson C. , 2009).

Finally, student motivation and engagement, the last factor, allows teachers to make sure that their students are engaged and learning. Servillo (2009) stated that to motivate students to learn how to read, we need to teach at the students’ level and increase their interest of the topic and activity at hand. Collaborating with other educators and getting resources and information may help teachers motivate students. Researching about different activities and receiving professional developments that can aid in establishing a motivational classroom should be done by all teachers. Students need to remain motivated so that they can keep growing mentally. The assignments also need to be challenging so that students would not just get bored. Teachers should provide the students different options of activities to complete so that they can be motivated to complete it.

Instruction in Reading and Language Arts: A Review of the Literature

Florida’s educators have faced a lot of new changes this past year. Differentiated instruction has become a necessity in the classroom. Classroom teachers must be effective when planning and delivering their lessons. It is essential that as teachers plan, they are planning to teach each student in their classes. Students, parents, administrators, and community members can all be impacted by the results of teachers’ actions.

Differentiated Instruction

According to Tomlinson (2009), differentiated instruction is characterized by changing instruction to meet every student’s needs. Teachers should differentiate content, process, product, or the learning environment. Changing the assessments or groupings of these students will give them a bigger chance to see improvements on their reading skills. When a teacher differentiates the content, he or she would teach at the independent reading level of the student and scaffold to get to the next level. There are different ways for the teacher to scaffold such as using reading materials at the students’ readability level, presenting ideas through visual and auditory means, and using reading buddies (Tomlinson C. , 2009).

When teachers change the process they use to teach students, they can raise the students’ social and academic skills. Some differentiated activities, according to Tomlinson (2009), use tiered activities where the learners are working toward the same skills but at different levels and complexity. Using manipulatives is another way for the process to be unique for each individual student.

When teachers differentiate the product, teachers are giving opportunities to students to show what they know using different activities that would be better tailored to each individual student. Some students could create a puppet, manipulate objects, or organize information. Finally, when a teacher differentiates the learning environment, students may be better able to focus on instruction. It should be an environment where students feel secure, loved, and safe.

Universal Design for Learning

According to Stanford and Reeves (2009), differentiated instruction is important because it is not a one size fits all approach. Teachers need to figure out how to make sure that each individual child’s needs are met. According to Stanford and Reeves (2009), Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is essential for differentiated instruction. They go hand in hand because a child should not fail or fall behind without teacher intervention. The teacher needs to provide different ways for the student to grasp what is being taught. A Universal Design for Learning classroom uses differentiated instruction to meet every individual child’s needs.

Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of Learning

According to Subban (2006), Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of learning is essential to having an efficient classroom that has differentiated instruction going on correctly. Students need to have the opportunity to be social and to work with other students. A teacher’s role is to be a mediator and to scaffold the child throughout each of the necessary activities that relate to the topic at hand. Teachers need to make sure to create lesson plans that will target all students, not just those at the middle. Teachers need to differentiate according to a child’s background, language, interest, learner profile and readiness level.

Research on Differentiated Instruction

A study conducted by Reis, McCoach, Little, Muller and Kaniskan at the University of Connecticut explored the effect of School-wide Enrichment Model-Reading framework on reading achievement in five elementary schools. It was conducted in rural, urban, and suburban locations across five states. The researchers found that there is an effect between the School-wide Enrichment Model-Reading framework (SEM-R) program and students’ oral reading fluency and comprehension. According to the researchers, there was a huge gap between reading performance and high versus low socioeconomic levels.

According to Reis et al. (2011), research has determined that there is a drop in students’ interest and engagement in reading across all grade levels. There were 1,192 students and 63 teachers who participated in their study. The students ranged from two 2^nd grade gifted classrooms to fifth grade. The students were varied by race, ethnicity, and language as well as socioeconomic status. The program was done during an hour of the 2-hour traditional language arts block and the treatment group was given SEM-R. The results indicated that SEM-R appeared to affect fluency results differently across schools (Reis, McCoach, Little, Muller, & Kaniskan, 2011). Reading comprehension and oral reading fluency were significantly different for the treatment group at the high poverty urban schools. According to Reis et al. (2011), teachers and observers noticed that student enjoyment and engagement improved while they were working on this research.

Another study was conducted by Baker, Dreher, Shiplet, Beall, Voelker, and Garrett (2011) from the University of Maryland to determine if using informational text can aid students’ comprehension. According to Baker et al. (2011), older students should be able to comprehend and learn from informational text as they progress through the upper grades and college and start their careers. The Reading, Engaging, and Learning project (REAL) was created in order to close the achievement gap in reading. They used students from the 2^nd grade to the 4^th grade in three different public elementary schools that had the same demographics. According to Baker et al. (2011) children should be receiving the competencies they would need in order to begin reading informational text at kindergarten. Moreover, “Information text is a major source of difficult, abstract, specialized, and technical words” (Baker et al., 2011, p.199).

Focusing on learning to read and reading for learning may be beneficial to students and increase their reading achievement. The REAL project supported the idea that increasing students’ access to informational text would aid students in increasing their knowledge and comprehension. Classroom libraries were reviewed and modified to make sure that they had informational text. There were three groups, an informational text infusion/ reading for learning instruction, an informational text infusion/ traditional instruction, and a group of just traditional instruction. The study showed that all three groups showed similar results after their final testing. They pilot tested performance assessments so that they could determine if there was any change in the students’ comprehension skills.

Enrichment Approach

Schools should try to close the achievement gap using any necessary resource. A study that was conducted by Beecher and Sweeny (2008) at an elementary school showed that using the enrichment approach is beneficial. According to Beecher (2008), there are a lot of factors that could influence a students’ achievement. They include but are not limited to “rigor of the curriculum; the experience, quality, and commitment of the teachers; the learning environment, including safety and expectations of students; and class size” (Beecher & Sweeny, 2008, pg. 504). The enrichment approach was able to reduce the gap of achievement between rich and poor and among different ethnic groups. Researchers, along with administration, teachers, and parents, had to create a School Improvement Plan in order to improve the schools’ performance. It was determined that they needed to analyze the school and all data, develop a shared vision, and use gifted and talented strategies throughout the curriculum with all students.

Beecher and Sweeny (2008) also had to immerse students into other cultures via a Global Studies curriculum. According to Beecher and Sweeny (2008), the school’s mission was that they wanted to provide all students a safe, nurturing, and motivating learning environment where they could strive and grow. Beecher and Sweeney (2008) noted that many of the children at the school had no desire to learn, could not make connections to the curriculum, and felt isolated from the learning environment. Using the Enrichment Triad Model, they infused enrichment into different parts of the school day. There were three parts that were implemented. Type I experiences and activities “expose students to a variety of disciplines, topics, or issues not normally covered in classrooms” (Beecher et al., 2008, p. 510). Type II enrichments include “instructional methods and materials that promote the development of thinking and feeling processes” (Beecher & Sweeney, 2008, p. 510). Type III enrichments included “investigative activities and artistic productions in which the learner is a firsthand inquirer” (Beecher & Sweeney, 2008, p. 510).

The Global Studies Curriculum was developed by teachers who created units of studies that were differentiated and had infused information from the original curriculum. Each grade level was responsible for a country, region, or culture to study. They were responsible for creating lessons that engaged students. There were a few process skills that were included in the units of study such as compare and contrast, identifying the main idea, and supporting details. After the units were complete, teachers wrote out differentiated instruction lesson plans using strategies that were differentiated. The study was a success because it showed an increase in the students’ positive attitudes, engagement, and achievement on district and state assessments.

Phonics

According to Martinez (2011), it is important that students have all the necessary skills in order to understand what they are reading. One important skill they need to have is phonics and blending. Without it, they would not be able to comprehend a passage and it would just be letters on a page to them. Eighty-five girls attending a Catholic school in Bogota, Colombia were participants of this study. They were English as a Foreign Language (EFL) students that lived in Bogota, Colombia at the time of the study were receiving English in a bilingual 1^st grade classroom.

The purpose of the study was to determine if teaching phonics would improve their reading comprehension. After the study ended, Martinez (2011) noticed that the higher performing group and the middle group stayed roughly the same. The major improvement was shown in the lower performing group. They raised their percentage from 34% in test 1 to 59%, and ended test 7 with an 82%. The final exam was finished with an average of 59%.

It was below what they did in test 7 but they had increased from the first exam that was taken by over 30%. The study found that explicit phonics instruction can aid students who are acquiring a second language.

Morphological Awareness

Another study conducted by Kieffer (2013), discussed the role of morphological awareness in reading difficulties that are encountered by Spanish-speaking language minority learned and their native English-speaking peers in 6^th grade (Kieffer, 2013). There were 138 students (82 language minority learners; 56 native English speakers) that participated from two K-8 schools in Arizona. According to Kieffer (2013), morphological awareness begins as an oral language skill but develops as a written skill throughout their experiences in school. Kieffer (2013) used surveys to determine the amount of native English speakers, and non-English speakers. Kieffer (2013) also used a norm-referenced test called Gates-MacGinite Reading Test to determine the reading comprehension and Silent Word Reading Fluency abilities of his student subjects. He also put the students into reader groups that were determined by their cut-scores of the reading comprehension and word reading fluency measures. The results indicated that readers who had difficulties tended to score lower than those students who were proficient readers.

Teacher Interviews and Technology

Brenda Logan decided to interview teachers to see what they thought differentiated instruction was, how to use it effectively, what strategies work, and what are some of the myths and legends of differentiated instruction. According to Logan (2008), teachers stated that they need to change the content, process or product. Teachers also stated that every child should have the opportunity to learn at their own pace. Logan (2008) also stated that students should get the opportunity to use technology as much as possible especially since we are in the 21^st century.

According to Stanford, Crowe and Flice (2010), technology plays a very important part in the role of differentiated instruction. Students were able to use computers to receive differentiated content such as a Web Quest, processes such as creating PowerPoints for presentations, or products such as digital portfolios. The results indicated that using technology while differentiating instruction is beneficial for students.

This literature review supports the use of differentiated instruction in classrooms to enhance the learning outcomes of students with different abilities, different backgrounds, and different learning styles. When differentiated instruction is used, the results are: (a) an increase in social and academic skills, (b) an increase in engagement and motivation, (c) an increase in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, comprehension and (d) an increase in assessment scores.