Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | A | Academic Exchange Quarterly

Nature and use of curriculum in special education.

Article Excerpt
Abstract

This study reports the results of a district-wide survey about the nature and use of special education curriculum. Findings indicate that (a) special education teachers believe that the IEP constitutes the curriculum for students with disabilities; (b) there is no statistical significance based on gender when it comes to which method of curriculum is preferred; and (c) and although future training is desired, there is no statistical significance as to what the focus should be on as it relates to the special education curriculum.

Background

The field of special education has made tremendous progress within the past 30 years. It is an ever-changing field with the ultimate goal of helping all students, but specifically students with disabilities, achieve independence. The question of which direction special education takes is an important one and this study is based on the philosophy that teachers should lead the way. Beliefs and best practices, especially regarding special education curriculum, is an area that will continue to change and grow. Special education curriculum has historically been drawn from the Individualized Education Program (IEP) (Pugach & Warger, 2001). Many special educators feel that it is a documentation of the curriculum for students with disabilities, and use the goals and objectives from the plan as the primary source when programming for these students. Thus each student's curriculum is developed based on his or her needs as recorded on the document.

Other educators see the IEP as more of a reference point in the context of a standard curriculum. They feel the primary function of the plan is to document recommendations for curricular accommodations and modifications (Adelman & Taylor, 1993). This view, however, assumes that the mission of schooling is the same for all students, those with and without disabilities. Further compounding the disagreement about the nature and content of special education curriculum are the concerns of teachers and administrators alike, that the training of special educators is inadequate in the broad areas of curriculum development (McKenzie, 1991), as well as in content subject areas (Cline & Billingsley, 1991). Sands, Adams, & Stout (1995) found that teacher training in curriculum development and modification was most likely to take place through "on-the-job" experiences and that teachers wanted more training in the areas of curriculum for teaching compensatory skills and life skills.

Teachers' beliefs and practices can influence both curriculum practices in the classrooms and reform issues about curricular implementation (Conley, 1991). Also, due to the shift towards more inclusive schools, special education educators need to have more input into what is required in general education curriculum (U.S. Department of Education, 2003). Inclusive programs continue to transform the role of the special education teacher and collaboration between the regular educator and the special education educator is and will become increasingly more important (Agran, et al., 2002). Pugach and Warger (2001) indicate that by targeting the curriculum rather than the student deficits, educators will have a better chance of eliminating barriers to student success. This exploratory study was designed to collect...