Your search found 16362 results.

Descriptors:
Learning Problems; Learning Disabilities; Adult Education; Disability Discrimination; Foreign Countries; Administrators; Interviews; Dyslexia; Employees; Employment

Abstract:
The article explores the professionalism and the standards debate as it relates to teachers with specific learning difficulties in the context of Further Education in England. There is a tension between the government's policy of defining teachers more tightly in terms of entry qualifications and standards whilst espousing a policy of creating a more inclusive profession as promoted by the Equalities and Disability Discrimination legislation. How prepared are leaders and managers in Further Education to address this policy tension and what insights might be drawn from the Further Education context? Interviews with key leaders and managers in a Further Education college and the analysis of college policy documents are used to illuminate the issues surrounding the inclusion of teachers with specific learning difficulties. Suggestions are offered which may provide a way forward to address the policy tension. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Educational Opportunities; Evidence; Adolescents; Social Studies; Academic Standards; History; Secondary School Teachers; Secondary School Students; Student Needs; Educational Needs; Teacher Expectations of Students; Teacher Student Relationship; History Instruction; Teaching Methods; Critical Thinking; Thinking Skills; Special Education Teachers

Abstract:
The Common Core State Standards for literacy in history and social studies present opportunities and challenges for teachers of and adolescents with learning disabilities (LD). In addition to reading challenges, students must engage in higher order thinking and reasoning. To provide opportunities for students to successfully respond to such challenges, teachers must have an understanding of the expectations in the Standards, and of the learning needs of students with LD. Teachers can assure success for adolescents with LD by selecting proven instructional procedures and engaging in collaboration to provide students with the supports they need. Examples of one evidence-based practice, Content Enhancement, are provided to illustrate instructional protocols for teachers of diverse classes that include adolescents with LD. (Contains 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Mathematics Skills; Mathematics Instruction; Elementary Secondary Education; Academic Standards; Mathematics Tests; Outcomes of Education; Mathematics Teachers; Evidence; Intervention; Basic Skills; Elementary School Teachers; Secondary School Teachers; Elementary School Students; Secondary School Students

Abstract:
The Common Core State Standards provide teachers with a framework of necessary mathematics skills across grades K-12, which vary considerably from previous mathematics standards. In this article, we discuss concerns about the implications of the Common Core for students with mathematics difficulties (MD), given that students with MD, by definition, struggle with mathematical skills. We suggest that instruction centered on the Common Core will be challenging and may lead to problematic outcomes for this population. We propose that working on foundational skills related to the Common Core standards is a necessary component of mathematics instruction for students with MD, and we provide teachers with a framework for working on foundational skills concurrent with the Common Core standards. We caution, however, that implementation of the Common Core is in its infancy, and the implications of the Common Core for students with MD need to be monitored carefully. (Contains 1 table and 3 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Guidance; Special Education Teachers; Elementary School Students; Elementary School Teachers; Teacher Expectations of Students; Academic Standards; Reading Instruction; Reading Tests; Language Arts

Abstract:
The K-5 reading standards within the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards provide guidance to teachers about grade level expectations for students. Though the authors of the standards acknowledge that some students may experience difficulty reaching the rigorous expectations, they explain that the standards outline a pathway to proficiency for all students, including those who struggle with literacy. Students with learning disabilities, who often have significant literacy difficulties, may face particular challenges when their instruction is framed by these standards. This article unpacks the complex K-5 reading standards and provides a discussion of the implications for students with learning disabilities and their general and special education teachers. Examples from K-5 lessons and recommendations for teachers and researchers are provided. (Contains 4 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; State Standards; Evidence; Writing (Composition); Special Education Teachers; Academic Standards; Writing Instruction; Writing Tests; Educational Environment; Secondary School Students; Secondary School Teachers; Writing Teachers

Abstract:
This article examines the Common Core State Standards as they apply to writing and students with learning disabilities (LD). We first consider why the implementation of these standards is advantageous to writing instruction for students with LD as well as the challenges in implementing them. Next, we make the following four recommendations in terms of their implementation: (1) increase general and special education teachers' knowledge about writing development; (2) create a writing environment in which students with LD can thrive; (3) employ evidence-based writing practices in general education classes (where most students with LD are taught); and (4) use evidence-based writing practices effective with students with LD. We conclude by considering research that still needs to be undertaken to help educators maximize the probability that students with and without LD meet the writing benchmarks proposed in these Standards. (Contains 3 tables.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Science Instruction; Academic Standards; State Standards; Science Tests; Language Arts; Scientific Concepts; Science Teachers; Secondary School Students; Secondary School Teachers

Abstract:
The Common Core Science Standards represent a new effort to increase science learning for all students. These standards include a focus on English and language arts aspects of science learning, and three dimensions of science standards, including practices of science, crosscutting concepts of science, and disciplinary core ideas in the various subject areas. Many of these issues bring important implications for students with learning disabilities, which we discuss in turn. With appropriate supports and applications, students with learning disabilities can potentially benefit greatly from these new standards. However, the demands of these standards may require a higher level of support than those commonly available for many students with learning disabilities. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Writing (Composition); Writing Processes; Writing Ability; Writing Difficulties; Elementary School Students; Special Education; Educational Research; Instructional Effectiveness; Writing Instruction; Special Needs Students; Writing Achievement

Abstract:
By the upper elementary grades, writing becomes an essential tool both for learning and for showing what you know. Students who struggle significantly with writing are at a terrible disadvantage. Data from the National Assessment of Educational Progress indicate that only 25% of students can be classified as competent writers; students with learning disabilities (LD) have even greater problems with writing than their normally achieving peers and frequently demonstrate a deteriorating attitude toward writing after the primary grades. In this article, we focus on composing and the writing process, and examine the knowledge base about writing development and instruction among students with LD. We address what research tells us about skilled writers and the development of writing knowledge, strategies, skill, and the will to write, and how this relates to students with LD. Next, we summarize what has been learned from research on writing development, effective instruction, and the writing abilities of students with LD in terms of effective instruction for these students. Finally, we indicate critical areas for future research. Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Reading Achievement; At Risk Students; Tutoring; Problem Solving; Mathematics Education; Pretests Posttests; Word Problems (Mathematics); Intervention; Small Group Instruction; Intermode Differences; Teaching Methods; Achievement Gains; Aptitude Treatment Interaction; Grade 3; Mathematical Enrichment; Mathematics Achievement; Learning Disabilities

Abstract:
This intervention study compared the efficacy of small-group tutoring on the mathematics learning of third-grade students at risk for mathematics difficulty using either a school-provided standards-based curriculum (SBC) or a schema-based instruction (SBI) curriculum. The SBI curriculum placed particular emphasis on the underlying mathematical structure of additive problems to represent and solve word problems. At-risk students (N = 136) from 35 classrooms scoring below a proficiency level on their district accountability assessment were assigned randomly to treatment groups. Results indicated interaction effects on the word problem-solving (WPS) posttest and retention tests such that SBI students with higher incoming (pretest) WPS scores outperformed SBC students with higher pretest scores, whereas SBC students with lower pretest scores outperformed SBI students with lower pretest scores. No effects were found on number combinations automaticity, and mathematics and reading achievement. Implications to improve the problem-solving performance of at-risk students are discussed. (Contains 4 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Accountability; Beginning Teachers; Mathematics Education; Mathematics Instruction; Educational Practices; Elementary School Mathematics; Classroom Observation Techniques; Interviews; Curriculum Based Assessment; Intermode Differences; Educational Indicators; Inclusion; Classroom Techniques; Teaching Methods; Learning Disabilities; Academic Accommodations (Disabilities); Instructional Effectiveness; Achievement Gains

Abstract:
In this exploratory study, teachers' use of standards-based, discourse practices and their students' mathematics learning in inclusive elementary mathematics classrooms were examined. Two beginning teachers (one third-grade teacher, one fourth-grade teacher) and six students identified with disabilities or as low performing in mathematics participated in this study (three students from each classroom). Six classroom observations of teachers took place over 4 months focusing on a subset of indicators associated with Walshaw and Anthony's framework of mathematics classroom discourse practices. Follow-up interviews were also conducted. Curriculum-based and state-accountability measures were collected on the six target students in these settings. Different patterns of student performance emerged across the two classrooms in which teachers were observed using different types and degrees of standards-based discourse practices during mathematics lessons. Findings suggest indicators of effective mathematics teaching in inclusive general education classrooms to be validated by future research efforts. (Contains 6 tables and 2 figures.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website

Descriptors:
Assistant Principals; Response to Intervention; Middle Schools; Educational Improvement; Student Improvement; Academic Achievement; Grounded Theory; Principals; Capacity Building; Resource Allocation; Teaching Methods; Professional Development; Parent Participation; Middle School Students; Parents; Program Implementation; Facilitators (Individuals); Case Studies; Qualitative Research; Learning Disabilities

Abstract:
This article discusses a qualitative case study examining one middle school's response to intervention (RtI) efforts. Study participants included the principal, assistant principal, and members of the school's leadership team. A description of the RtI consensus and infrastructure-building processes, consideration of the RtI facilitators, and a review of the accomplishments and barriers to implementation they encountered are provided. (Contains 2 tables and 1 figure.) Note:The following two links are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software. Show Hide Full Abstract

Related Items: Show Related Items

Full-Text Availability Options:

More Info:
Help | Tutorial Help Finding Full Text |  More Info:
Help Find in a Library |  Publisher's website