Elise Frattura, Ph.D
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
United States


Our educational goals and legislation are
based on:
A. educational history

B. data
C. best practice



Common Princip...


Inclusion
 Inclusion or no inclusion?
 Who can be included

and who cannot be
included?
 How much time and for
what ...
Defining a normed
group of students. …

A. Educational history -

 Assumed a norm

group of students

Diagnosed those
who...
Over Time We Create More Labeled
Students and a Smaller Normed Group


Learning Disabilities
Cognitive
Disabilities

Orth...
Response to Intervention
Reading
Intervention

Cognitive
Disabilities

Orthopedically
Impaired

Deaf and Hard of
Hearing

...
Outcomes of such practices:


Students with disabilities are placed in remedial or low
grouping in classrooms or schools ...


Prevent special and general educators from sharing
expertise and developing proactive instructional
opportunities for a...
1.

Varied achievement within
student groupings positively
impacts student achievement.

2.

The students who are isolated...
Inclusion


RtI

RtI
Inclusion

Inclusion

RtI

Inclusion

RtI
All Pull Out Instructional Format
All Pull Out Instructional Format






All instruction for all learners, including
students with disabilities, is premised on a
rigorous core curriculum...


Special and general educators are
aligned to specific grade levels to share
knowledge and expertise with each
other and...


Using principles of universal access—
curriculum is differentiated for needs
of students with and without
disabilities ...
19
2010-11 - TBD
20

20.0%
18.0%
16.0%
14.0%
12.0%
10.0%
8.0%

18.7%
17.6%
15.8%
14.3%
11.8%

10.8%
9.1%

6.0%

4.0%
2.0%
0.0%
05-2004 06-2...
Leaders Beyond Inclusion :
 Define/clarify Principles of Practice under one system.
 Align College, State Department/Min...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Elise Frattura, Ph.D - Leading Beyond Inclusion: An International Perspective - IEFE Forum 2014

1,168 views

Published on

Elise Frattura, Ph.D - University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
United States

Leading Beyond Inclusion: An International Perspective

IEFE Forum 2014

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,168
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Elise Frattura, Ph.D - Leading Beyond Inclusion: An International Perspective - IEFE Forum 2014

  1. 1. Elise Frattura, Ph.D University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee United States
  2. 2.  Our educational goals and legislation are based on: A. educational history B. data C. best practice  Common Principles of Practice to Lead Beyond Inclusion for Universities, Ministries, Schools
  3. 3.  Inclusion  Inclusion or no inclusion?  Who can be included and who cannot be included?  How much time and for what subjects?  What teachers can teach what children?  How do I remediate?  Beyond Inclusion:  How do we meet the needs of all our learners, including students with disabilities in small and large mixed-ability instructional formats?  How do we begin our instruction with how a each child learns?  How do we keep general education class sizes small?  How do we assist special and general educators in sharing expertise to better collaborate around the needs of all learners as individual learners?
  4. 4. Defining a normed group of students. … A. Educational history -  Assumed a norm group of students Diagnosed those who did not meet the norm criteria  Created separate programs  Deaf and Hard of Hearing Learning Disabilities Orthopedically Impaired Cognitive Disabilities General Education Visually Impaired Gifted Autism Behavioral Disabilities Frattura, 2012
  5. 5. Over Time We Create More Labeled Students and a Smaller Normed Group  Learning Disabilities Cognitive Disabilities Orthopedically Impaired Deaf and Hard of Hearing Programs for Students with ADHD The populations of disabilities increasing are those that are not medically diagnosed. …  but educationally diagnosed. Autism General Education Early Childhood Programs Visually Impaired Gifted Behavioral Disabilities Frattura, 2012
  6. 6. Response to Intervention Reading Intervention Cognitive Disabilities Orthopedically Impaired Deaf and Hard of Hearing Programs for Students with ADHD Tier 3 RtITier 2 Autism Gifted Response to Intervention is legislation that was intended to provide assistance to students prior to special education services – but it has unintentionally created more labeled groups Tier 1 We have found that an Behavioral Disabilities increase in removal from general education – and a Math decrease in achievement Intervention  Early Childhood Programs Visually Impaired Remediation  Learning Disabilities Frattura, 2012
  7. 7. Outcomes of such practices:  Students with disabilities are placed in remedial or low grouping in classrooms or schools away from their nondisabled peers. Often receiving substandard educational access – thus limiting outcomes to be productive members of society.  Students with disabilities or those who are struggling often receive the most fragmented education and often those children who need the most cohesive education.  Create a model that students typically experience failure before they experience any success.
  8. 8.  Prevent special and general educators from sharing expertise and developing proactive instructional opportunities for all learners.  Support a parallel system with general education which becomes costly at all levels, universities, state departments, ministries, etc.
  9. 9. 1. Varied achievement within student groupings positively impacts student achievement. 2. The students who are isolated the most in ability groupings often are the furthest behind. 1. Our approach and pedagogical practices may be increasing the identification of disabilities. Hnushek, E.,Klin, J., Markman, M., Rivkin, S. (2003) Does Peer Ability affect student achievement? Journal of Applied Econometrics Oakes, 1985,Yonezawa, Wells, and Serna, 2002).
  10. 10. Inclusion  RtI
  11. 11.  RtI Inclusion
  12. 12.  Inclusion RtI
  13. 13.  Inclusion RtI
  14. 14. All Pull Out Instructional Format
  15. 15. All Pull Out Instructional Format
  16. 16.    All instruction for all learners, including students with disabilities, is premised on a rigorous core curriculum for all students Students with and without disabilities are placed in regular classrooms using principles of natural proportions – small group spaces are available to all students The continuum of services allows for large group, small group, and 1:1 instruction based on “how” each child learns.
  17. 17.  Special and general educators are aligned to specific grade levels to share knowledge and expertise with each other and across all abilities and disabilities.  Class sizes for all learners are no larger than 25 to 30 students.  Special and general educators co-plan and co-serve through proactive instructional practices for each and every learner - based on the principles of universal instruction, curriculum, and
  18. 18.  Using principles of universal access— curriculum is differentiated for needs of students with and without disabilities the first time the concept is taught versus taught to a normed group and then adapted after the fact (which often occurs in an inclusion model).  Personalized learning plans are used for all learners to assist educators in determining appropriate instructional practices.  All educators and all administrators support the education of all students
  19. 19. 19 2010-11 - TBD
  20. 20. 20 20.0% 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 10.0% 8.0% 18.7% 17.6% 15.8% 14.3% 11.8% 10.8% 9.1% 6.0% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 05-2004 06-2005 07-2006 08-2007 09-2008 10-2009 11-2010
  21. 21. Leaders Beyond Inclusion :  Define/clarify Principles of Practice under one system.  Align College, State Department/Ministry, School Goals to the Principles of Practice.  Collect and analyze data by “how” students are served to determine progress of models of service delivery.  Develop a unified infrastructure at all levels under “Teaching and Learning for All Learners” Versus separate special education departments.  Realign funding and legislation to support teaching and learning of all learners.  Human Resource practices aligned to Principles of Practice.  Technology to support teaching and learning for all learners.

×