mild intellectual disabilitiesmyresource.phoenix.edu/secure/resource/aed222r3/... · module on the...

Mild Intellectual Disabilities

REFLECT UPON

• What are the primary criteria used toidentify students with intellectualdisabilities?

• What are the major characteristics ofstudents with mild intellectualdisabilities?

• How many students are identified withmild intellectual disabilities, and what arethe major causes?

• What educational practices improveoutcomes for students with mildintellectual disabilities?

• What are the prevailing controversialissues related to students with mildintellectual disabilities?

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4

Special Education for Today’s Teachers: An Introduction, by M ichael S. Rosenberg, David L. W estling, and Jam es M cLeskey.

Published by Prentice Hall. Copyright © 2007 by Pearson Education, Inc.

Robert Hessels took an unusual route into teach-ing. He completed an undergraduate degree inphilosophy and then obtained graduate degrees inanthropology and biology. After working for sev-eral years, he decided to become a teacher. Specialeducation seemed a natural, as Robert had a keeninterest in social justice and equity. He enteredspecial education because “I thought I could makea difference. I still do.”

After completing a master’s degree at the Uni-versity of Florida, Robert began a teaching careerthat has taken him to Virginia, southern Florida,and now back to Gainesville, Florida. Currently, heworks as an eighth-grade special educationteacher at Howard Bishop Middle School, wherehe teaches students with mild disabilities (learningdisabilities, mild intellectual disabilities), mostly ingeneral education classrooms. Certifications inspecial education, science, social studies, andmath allow Robert to co-teach with general edu-cation teachers to provide instruction to studentswith disabilities in several subject areas.

When asked to describe a typical day, RobertHessels pointedly states that “there is no typicalday” for a middle school special education

teacher. He begins most days by “putting outfires” with parents, general education teachers, orstudents. He notes that, because of the unpre-dictable nature of his job, he has to be flexible andcannot develop a work plan and stick to it onmost days. Indeed, if he tried to do this, he wouldend up very frustrated. He does note that hespends as much time as possible during the dayco-teaching with general education teachers inseveral subject areas.

One of the most memorable periods of Robert’steaching career was the years he spent teaching agroup of students with mild intellectual disabilitiesin an inclusive high school in Virginia. Robertworked with teachers in the high school to ensurethat these students were successfully included for

My Profession, My Story: Robert Hessels

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4



202 www.prenhall.com/rosenberg

Reflective Exercise #1As we discussed in the “People-First Language” feature in Chapter2, the words we use make adifference. Think of a word thathas been used to describe you orsome real or imaginedcharacteristic you possess. Thisword may relate to your race,ethnicity, gender, body shape ortype, hair color, religion, and soforth. How did you feel when thisword was used? Is this wordsocially acceptable (or politicallyincorrect)?

To learn more aboutRobert Hessels, his back-ground, and his views on

inclusion, collaboration, and highstakes testing, go to the Mr. Hessels

module on the DVD-ROM.

much of the school day with peers in general education classrooms. Henotes that these students gained many of the academic and social skills ingeneral education classrooms that they would need for success in life. “Theylearned many things they would not have learned in a separate special edu-cation class.” When these students were seniors, Robert worked with manyof them to arrange transitions into work settings where they had “real pay-ing jobs.” Most of the students were successful in these work settings andcontinue to be successful to this day.

While Robert Hessels enjoys most things about his job, the bureau-cracy that exists in schools frustrates him. This bureaucracy mandatestests and regulations that “are not always in the best interest of stu-dents.” He notes that a special education teacher must use “artful endruns” at times to ensure that students “get what they need, in spite of thebureaucracy.”

Robert’s advice for those who are thinking about becoming special ed-ucation teachers is to “carefully think about whether you want to be a spe-cial education teacher, then think about it again . . . and again.” He goeson to note: “Liking kids is not enough. The rewards from teaching in spe-cial education do not come quickly. They accumulate slowly over time, of-ten from unexpected sources.” For example, he notes that the singlegreatest reward for him is getting a student out of a separate special edu-cation class and into an inclusive classroom.

Special education teachers must be “more creative than you imaginedpossible.” He notes that an effective special education teacher is a personwho can help students realize their potential and teach them so that theywill become “life-long learners,” continuing to gain skills that will allowthem to be successful in life. He concludes: “We often focus on the treesand lose sight of the forest” when we’re educating students with disabili-ties. “We need to concentrate on the long term and not just test scores.”This prepares students not for next week or next year but for their lives.

If you have had direct contact over time with persons with intellectual disabili-ties (formerly called mental retardation). you know that these individuals vary

dramatically in the characteristics they exhibit. This includes how they communicateand get along with others, how quickly they learn academic material, how much sup-port they need in school, and a range of other variables.

To illustrate,consider for a moment the differences between students who have mildintellectual disabilities and those with severe intellectual disabilities. Most students withmild intellectual disabilities appear very similar to others in school,except for the fact thatthey learn academic material much more slowly than most other students. The President’sCommittee on Mental Retardation (1969) called these students the “six hour retardedchild” because they were labeled as intellectually disabled during the school day butadapted well and were often not readily distinguishable as intellectually disabled at homeor in the community. As our featured teacher,Robert Hessels,indicated,these are studentswho may need support as they transition from school to work settings but can often besuccessful in work settings with real paying jobs.

In contrast, students with severe intellectual disabilities are often readily distin-guishable from other students in schools. These students have significant difficulties

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4



Chapter 8: Mild Intellectual Disabilities

in communicating, learning, and interacting socially with others. Many students withsevere disabilities also have significant weaknesses in sensory and physical develop-ment. As a result of these characteristics, limitations are placed on the level of inde-pendence of persons with severe disabilities, and they need supports (e.g., assistivetechnology, a paraeducator) in school and at home.

203

FAQ Sheet

STUDENTS WITH MILD INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

Who are they?

• Students with mild intellectual disabilities have a measured IQ that is lower than 98% of theschool-age population (i.e., below approximately 70).

• These students have adaptive behavior skills that are significantly below average. Adaptivebehavior includes conceptual, social, and practical skills that people learn so that they canfunction in their everyday lives.

What are typicalcharacteristics?

• Low achievement in all academic areas• Deficits in memory and motivation• Inattentive/distractible• Poor social skills• Deficits in adaptive behavior

What are thedemographics?

• 0.84% of school-age students (approximately 555,000) are labeled with intellectual disabilities.• Approximately 470,000 students (0.71%) are labeled with mild intellectual disabilities.• The percentage of the school-age population identified with intellectual disabilities declined by

approximately 10% between 1990 and 2004.

Where arestudentseducated?

• 13% of students labeled with intellectual disabilities spend most of the day in general educationclassrooms, while 57% spend most of the school day segregated from typical peers.

• The proportion of students with intellectual disabilities who are educated in generaleducation classrooms for most of the school day increased by approximately 72% between1990 and 2003, while the proportion of students educated in separate settings for most of theschool day declined by 19%.

How arestudentsidentified andassessed forintervention?

• Primary criteria for identification are significantly subaverage intellectual functioning, existingconcurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and manifested during the developmentalperiod, that adversely affects a child’s educational performance.

• A score of approximately 70 or below in an intelligence test is considered to be subaverageintellectual functioning.

• A standardized test of adaptive behavior is used to determine if the child has deficits inconceptual, social, and practical skills that are significantly subaverage.

• A standardized achievement test is used to determine if the child’s educational performance isadversely affected (i.e., if the student’s achievement is well below grade level).

What are theoutcomes?

• Intellectual disabilities persist through the school years and into adulthood.• Adults with mild intellectual disabilities are often employed in occupations with low status and

low pay.• Many students with mild intellectual disabilities continue to need support into adulthood in

employment and independent living, although some of these students need no support.

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




Perhaps in part due to the complexity of the category, intellectual disabilities arewidely misunderstood. Many persons, especially those who have had little contactwith individuals with intellectual disabilities, have narrow, stereotyped perspectivesabout the persons in this special education category. One thing that most profession-als and the general public agree on is that intellectual disability is the most stigmatiz-ing disability category. This stigma is vividly illustrated by the casual use of the wordretard among school-age students and the frequent lack of reaction from teachers orparents when this term is used.

To address the complexity of the category of intellectual disabilities, we will pri-marily include information regarding students with mild intellectual disabilities in thischapter. Additional information regarding students with severe intellectual disabilitiesis provided in Chapter 12.For a quick overview of the category of intellectual disabil-ities, you might want to examine the critical information about these students that isincluded in the FAQ Sheet.

We struggled with choosing which terminology to use in this chapter. IDEA andmost state education agencies currently use the term mental retardation to describethis category.But the term has become highly stigmatizing,as we note throughout thechapter. We made the decision to use the term intellectual disabilities in large partbecause of this stigma. While we do not believe that changing terminology will in thelong term reduce the stigma attached to this category, it will help in the short term.

Also supporting our choice of this term was the decision by the leading profes-sional association in this area, the American Association on Mental Retardation(AAMR), to change its name to the American Association on Intellectual and Devel-opmental Disabilities in January 2007. It appears that the term intellectual disability,which is widely used in many European countries, is rapidly becoming the preferredterm for the category. We discuss the controversy surrounding the use of the termmental retardation in more detail at the end of this chapter.

DEFINITIONS AND CLASSIFICATION CRITERIA

IDEA 2004 includes a general definition of intellectual disability (mental retardation isthe term used in the law) but does not differentiate among students with mild and se-vere intellectual disabilities as we do in this text. Thus, in the following sections wediscuss the full range of intellectual disabilities, including how intellectual disability isdefined and what criteria are used to identify these students.

The definition of intellectual disability or mental retardation in IDEA 2004stipulates that these students have “significantly subaverage general intellectualfunctioning, existing concurrently with deficits in adaptive behavior and mani-fested during the developmental period, that adversely affects a child’s educationalperformance” (sec. 300.8[c][6]). Four criteria are used to identify students with in-tellectual disabilities based on this definition.First, these students must have a meas-ured IQ that is significantly below average. This typically is defined as an IQ ofapproximately 70 or below, which means that the student scores lower than ap-proximately 98% of all school-age students. Second, the student must have deficitsin adaptive behavior. This criterion is used to ensure that intellectual functioning isnot the exclusive criterion used to identify persons with intellectual disabilities.Thus, to be identified with an intellectual disability, students must also have signifi-cant limitations in adaptive behavior, which includes practical and social skills thatstudents use to function effectively in their everyday lives (Hourcade, 2002). Third,the student must have manifested the intellectual disability during the develop-mental period, thus indicating that the disability is a long-term problem. This crite-rion is used to differentiate intellectual disabilities from other disabilities, such astraumatic brain injury, which may occur in adulthood. Finally, the intellectual dis-ability must adversely affect the student’s educational performance. This includeslow levels of academic achievement,difficulty adapting to classroom or other schoolsettings, poor social skills, and so forth.

Reflective Exercise #2Have you ever used the word retardin casual conversation? Did othersreact negatively to your use of thisword? Is this word consideredpolitically incorrect? Have youheard others use it? How did youreact? Why are reactions to theuse of the words discussed inReflective Exercise #1 so differentfrom reactions to the word retard?

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4



205Chapter 8: Mild Intellectual Disabilities

TABLE 8.1

LEVELS OF INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY BASED ON IQ

Label Range of IQ Scores

Mild intellectual disability 50/55 to approximately 70

Moderate intellectual disability 35/40 to 50/55

Severe intellectual disability 20/25 to 35/40

Profound intellectual disability Below 20/25

Source: APA, 2000.

Levels of intellectual disability are often differentiated based on a student’s IQlevel (APA, 2000). For example, Table 8.1 provides IQ ranges for students with differ-ing levels of intellectual disability. Students with mild intellectual disabilities typicallyhave an IQ that ranges from 55 to 70. These are students who can attend to their per-sonal needs,are largely independent in school settings,and in many cases can interactsuccessfully with other students with limited assistance from teachers or other edu-cators. In addition, the disability of students with mild intellectual disabilities is typi-cally not readily noticeable and is only identified upon examining the student’slearning and adaptive skills.

The needs of students with severe intellectual disabilities (including those who fallinto the moderate, severe, and profound levels of intellectual functioning in Table 8.1)vary widely: Some can function relatively independently in performing daily livingtasks, while others require a significant level of support. Overall, these students havedisabilities that are often easily noticeable (Beirne-Smith,Patton,& Kim,2006),and theyhave “significant weaknesses in learning abilities,personal and social skills,and/or sen-sory and physical development”(Westling & Fox,2004,p.3). In addition,students withsevere intellectual disabilities often lack the skills to maintain themselves independ-ently, and require support and assistance in school, at home, and in other settings(Westling & Fox, 2004). See Chapter 12 for a more extensive discussion of severe in-tellectual disabilities.

The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities(formerly the American Association on Mental Retardation [AAMR]), the leadingprofessional organization in the field of intellectual disabilities,has published a widelyused definition of intellectual disability. This definition expands on some of the con-cepts provided in the IDEA definition (Luckasson et al.,2002):“[Intellectual disability]is . . . characterized by significant limitations in both intellectual functioning and inadaptive behavior as expressed in conceptual,social,and practical adaptive skills. Thisdisability originates before age 18” (p. 13).

Luckasson and colleagues continue by noting five factors that should be consid-ered when determining if a person should be identified with an intellectual disability:

1. Limitations in present functioning must be considered within the context of com-munity environments typical of the individual’s age peers and culture.

2. Valid assessment considers cultural and linguistic diversity as well as differencesin communication, sensory, motor, and behavioral factors.

3. Within the individual, limitations often coexist with strengths.4. The purpose of describing limitations is to develop a profile of needed supports.5. With appropriate personalized supports over a sustained period, the life func-

tioning of the person with mental retardation generally will improve. (p. 13)

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




This definition extends the IDEA definition in three noteworthy ways. First, it definesthe developmental period as occurring before age 18. Thus, an intellectual disabilityshould be manifested during the school years and is most often identified beforeschool entry for students with more severe intellectual disabilities and early in ele-mentary school for students with mild intellectual disabilities.

Second, the AAMR definition extends the concept of adaptive behavior to includeconceptual,social,and practical skills that people use to function in their everyday lives.

When these skills are significantly limited, aperson’s ability to respond to specific situa-tions and the environment is affected (Luckas-son et al., 2002). Areas in which adaptivebehavior deficits occur are listed in Figure 8.1.

Third, and perhaps most significantly,rather than identifying students based on theseverity of their disability (see Table 8.1), ascurrently occurs in most states,the AAMR rec-ommends an emphasis on identifying stu-dents based on the level of supports neededto function effectively (see Figure 8.2).For ex-ample most students who have traditionallybeen identified with a mild intellectual dis-ability would probably be identified using thisapproach as students needing intermittentsupport (episodic need),while perhaps a fewwould need limited support for specific peri-ods of time. In contrast, the needs of students

with severe disabilities would range from limited,to extensive,to pervasive support inmost instances.

Conceptual SkillsReceptive and expressive languageReading and writingMoney conceptsSelf-directions

Social SkillsInterpersonalResponsibilitySelf-esteemGullibility (likelihood of being tricked or manipulated)NaïvetéFollowing rulesObeying lawsAvoiding victimization

Practical SkillsPersonal activities of daily living such as eating, dressing, mobility, and toiletingInstrumental activities of daily living such as preparing meals, taking medication, using the

telephone, managing money, using transportation, and doing housekeeping activitiesOccupational skillsMaintaining a safe environment

FIGURE 8.1

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR SKILLS USED TO IDENTIFY PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

Source: Adapted from AAMR, Definition of Mental Retardation: Fact Sheet of Frequently AskedQuestions About Mental Retardation. 2005. Retrieved from http://www.aamr.org/policies/faq_mental_retardation.shtml.

Most students with mildintellectual disabilities needintermittent supports.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




Intermittent. Supports on an “as needed basis.” Characterized by episodic nature, person notalways needing the support(s), or short-term supports needed during life-span transitions(e.g., job loss or acute medical crisis). Intermittent supports may be high or low intensity whenneeded.Limited. An intensity of support characterized by consistency over time, time-limited but notof an intermittent nature, may require fewer staff members and less cost than more intense lev-els of support (e.g., time-limited employment training or transitional supports provided dur-ing the school to adult period). Extensive. Supports characterized by regular involvement (e.g., daily) in at least some envi-ronments (such as work or home) and not time-limited (e.g., long-term support and long-termhome living support). Pervasive. Supports characterized by their constancy and high intensity; provided across envi-ronments; potential life-sustaining nature. Pervasive supports typically involve more staffmembers and intrusiveness than do extensive or time-limited supports.

FIGURE 8.2

LEVELS OF SUPPORT FOR PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

Source: Luckasson et al., 2002, Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and systems ofsupport (10th ed.), p. 152.

Supports are defined as “the resources and individual strategies necessary to pro-mote the development, education, interests, and personal well-being of a person withan intellectual disability. Supports can be provided by a parent, friend, teacher, psy-chologist,doctor or by any appropriate person or agency”(AAMR,2005,p.3). This ap-proach to the identification of persons with intellectual disabilities is a radicaldeparture from past practices and is intended as a first step in “forcing the field tothink differently about mental retardation and how we intervene in the lives of peo-ple with that label” (Wehmeyer, 2003, p. 273).

More specifically,while past definitions have emphasized the student’s deficits in in-tellectual development and adaptive behavior, the levels-of-support approach empha-sizes how a person’s needs can be met within a particular setting (e.g., school, home,work). Thus,rather than viewing an intellectual disability as solely a problem that resideswithin the student,this approach recognizes the need to consider how the environmentcan be altered so that the student receives appropriate supports and can be successful.

The extent to which professionals in the field of intellectual disabilities will ac-cept this change in practice remains in question. While the levels-of-support approachto identification was originally proposed by AAMR in 1992 (Luckasson et al., 1992),by the late 1990s few states had adopted the definition (Polloway, Chamberlain, Den-ning, Smith, & Smith, 1999). While the levels-of-support approach to student identifi-cation is designed to reduce the stigma associated with the label mental retardationor intellectual disability and place more emphasis on the supports that students needto be successful, it will likely take many years to determine whether this approach canbe successfully implemented in schools.

PRIMARY CHARACTERISTICS OF STUDENTS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

In this section,we take a closer look at the characteristics of children and youth withmild intellectual disabilities. You should note that the characteristics of studentswith more severe intellectual disabilities are addressed in Chapter 12. In the follow-ing section, we describe these students based on key learning, cognitive, and socialcharacteristics.

While we discuss several characteristics that are often seen when a student isidentified with a mild intellectual disability,we do not mean to suggest that all students

Reflective Exercise #3Have you had contact with aperson with an intellectualdisability? How was this persondifferent from others? How was heor she the same? Can you identifybehaviors indicating that theperson needs intermittentsupports to functionindependently? Behaviorsindicating that the person needsextensive or pervasive support?

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




with this disability are alike. Indeed, as with any group of people, students with mildintellectual disabilities vary widely in their ability to do schoolwork and adjust to so-cial situations in school and other locations. However, in contrast to most other dis-ability categories, students with mild intellectual disabilities tend to have moregeneral,delayed development in academic, social, and adaptive skills. This delayed de-velopment is reflected in low achievement across content and skill areas as well as sig-nificantly lower scores on measures of intelligence and adaptive behavior whencompared with students who are not identified with intellectual disabilities.

ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE

Students who are identified with mild intellectual disabilities lag significantly behindgrade-level peers in developing academic skills. Thus, students with mild intellectualdisabilities are likely to be significantly delayed in learning to read and learning basicmath skills (Taylor, Richards, & Brady, 2005). This delay in developing foundationalskills in reading and math, coupled with delays in language skills, then results in de-lays in other academic areas that require the use of these skills (e.g., writing, spelling,science).

Students with intellectual disabilities continue to lag behind age-level peers in ac-ademic achievement throughout their school years.However,many students with mildintellectual disabilities develop basic literacy skills and functional mathematics skills.For example, most students with mild intellectual disabilities learn basic computa-tional skills and functional arithmetic skills related to money, time, and measurement.However,most of these students continue to have difficulty with more advanced skillsrelated to content, such as mathematical reasoning and applying concepts to solveproblems (Beirne-Smith et al., 2006).

It is noteworthy that delayed language development,which is characteristic of stu-dents with mild intellectual disabilities, also has a negative influence on academicachievement. The academic area in which language delay has the most detrimental ef-fect is reading (Torgesen,2000). While students who are mildly intellectually disabledand who are poor readers share a deficit in phonological language skills similar toother students with disabilities (e.g., students with LD) (Fletcher,Scott,Blair,& Bolger,2004), students with intellectual disabilities are also often significantly delayed in gen-eral oral language skills. Thus, even if students with mild intellectual disabilities de-velop the ability to read individual words and strategies for reading comprehension,they will have difficulty comprehending what they have read because of weak verbalskills in areas such as vocabulary. Therefore, teachers need to provide these studentswith instruction to address their phonological weaknesses as well as a broader rangeof language skills (e.g., vocabulary development) (Torgesen, 2000).

COGNITIVE PERFORMANCE

Students with mild intellectual disabilities are characterized by general delays in cog-nitive development that influence the acquisition of language and academic skills.Moreover,while these students can learn much information that is part of the generaleducation curriculum,they learn more slowly than do typical students.Deficits in spe-cific cognitive skill areas also contribute to this delay. Three of the most important cog-nitive skill deficits exhibited by students with mild intellectual disabilities are relatedto attention, memory, and generalization.

AttentionStudents with mild intellectual disabilities have difficulty with different types of at-tention, including orienting to a task, selective attention, and sustaining attention to atask (Wenar & Kerig, 2006). Orienting to a task requires a student to look in the di-rection of the task (e.g., a teacher demonstrating how to solve a math problem on anoverhead projector in the front of the room). Selective attention requires that the stu-dent attend to relevant aspects of the task and not to unimportant task components(e.g., attending to one type of math problem on a page and completing the appropri-

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




ate operation).Finally, sustained attention requires that the student continue to attendto a task for a period of time.

The attentional difficulties of students with mild intellectual disabilities have sev-eral implications for how they may be more effectively taught (Beirne-Smith et al.,2006, p. 277). For example, teachers should

1. present initial stimuli that vary in only a few dimensions,2. direct the individual’s attention to these critical dimensions,3. initially remove extraneous stimuli that may distract the individual from attending4. increase the difficulty of the task over time, and5. teach the student decision-making rules for discriminating relevant from irrele-

vant stimuli.

Memory

Students with mild intellectual disabilities also have difficulty remembering infor-mation (i.e., short-term memory). For example, these students may have difficultyremembering math facts or spelling words; or if they remember this informationone day, they may forget it the next. To some degree, memory problems are influ-enced by attentional difficulties. That is, students will have difficulty rememberinginformation if they do not orient to the information, select the information thatneeds to be remembered, and maintain attention to the important material for a pe-riod of time.

However, distinct from attentional problems, students with mild intellectual dis-abilities have difficulty generating and using strategies that help facilitate short-termmemory. For example, when students attempt to remember information, many use arehearsal strategy (repeating information over and over) to facilitate learning (Kirk,Gallagher, Anastasiow, & Coleman, 2006). Teaching approaches to addressing short-term memory deficits include focusing on meaningful content during instruction andinstructing students about strategies that they might use to facilitate remembering in-formation (e.g., rehearsal, clustering information, using mnemonic devices) (Smith,Polloway, Patton, & Dowdy, 2004). The use of mnemonic devices was discussed inChapter 6.

GeneralizationA final area in which many students with mild intellectual disabilities have difficultyrelates to the generalization of information to other material or settings (Wenar &Kerig,2006).For example,a student may learn operations for addition and subtractionbut may then have difficulty generalizing this information to a division problem.Simi-larly, a student may learn a new word when reading material in one subject area butmay have difficulty reading the same word in other reading material. Students withmild intellectual disabilities also have difficulty generalizing material learned in onesetting to another (e.g., from school to the community). Teaching strategies that maybe used to address difficulties with generalization include teaching material in relevantcontexts, reinforcing students for generalizing information across material or settings,reminding students to apply information they have learned in one setting to another,and teaching information in multiple settings (Smith et al., 2004).

SOCIAL SKILLS PERFORMANCE

Many of the cognitive characteristics of students with mild intellectual disabilities maycontribute to difficulty interacting socially. For example, a low level of cognitive de-velopment and delayed language development may cause a student with intellectualdisability to have difficulty understanding the content of verbal interactions and un-derstanding expectations (e.g.,when to listen,when and how to respond) during ver-bal interactions. Similarly, difficulty with attention and memory impedes socialinteractions, as students with mild intellectual disabilities have difficulty attending toimportant aspects of social interactions, maintaining attention over time, and holdingimportant aspects of what they observe in short-term memory.

Reflective Exercise #4What skills do you and yourfriends need to get along socially?What characteristics of studentswith mild intellectual disabilitiesmight negatively affect their abilityto get along with others? Whatcould a teacher do to reduce theeffect of these characteristics andsupport students with mildintellectual disabilities in gettingalong with others?

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




In addition to social difficulties that re-sult from general cognitive deficits, studentswith mild intellectual disabilities share manyof the same social difficulties of studentswith learning disabilities (see Chapter 6), in-cluding the inability to read social cues andinteract successfully in conversations, lack ofaffiliation in school activities, low social sta-tus, and negative self-concept.

As with students with LD, these charac-teristics often lead to lower social status inclassrooms and, at times, alienation of stu-dents from teachers and peers and lack of af-filiation or involvement in school. Moreover,social skills deficits may lead students withmild intellectual disabilities to feel that theyare unimportant to peers and teachers andproduce feelings that they are not involved inthe social community of the school. Thesedifficulties may lead students with mild intel-

lectual disabilities to withdraw in social situations or seek attention in inappropriateways. They may also behave inappropriately because they have difficulty distin-guishing between acceptable and unacceptable standards of behavior (Beirne-Smithet al., 2006).

Directly teaching social skills is one approach that may be used to address the so-cial skills deficits of students with mild intellectual disabilities.(See Chapter 7 for moreinformation on this topic.) This may be necessary for many students with mild intel-lectual disabilities because their limited cognitive and language skills prevent themfrom developing these skills through spontaneous interactions with peers.

In addition, as you will see in a later section on placement practices for studentswith mild intellectual disabilities, most of these students have little opportunity to in-teract with age-level peers in school settings, due to the fact that they spend a largeproportion of the school day in segregated school settings with other students withdisabilities (Williamson, McLeskey, Hoppey, & Rentz, 2006). Extensive research evi-dence reveals that the social skills of students with mild intellectual disabilities tendto be improved when they are provided with appropriate supports and included in ageneral education classroom with age-appropriate peers for a large part of the schoolday (Freeman & Alkin, 2000).

PREVALENCE, COURSE, AND CAUSAL FACTORS

PREVALENCE

During the 2004–2005 school year,more than 555,000 U.S. students were classified ashaving intellectual disabilities,or 0.84% of the school-age population (U.S.Departmentof Education, 2006). Researchers have estimated that 70–85% of all children with in-tellectual disabilities have mild to moderate intellectual disabilities (Murphy, Yeargin-Allsopp,Decoufle,& Drews,1995; Taylor et al.,2005).Our best estimate of the numberof students with mild intellectual disabilities is about 470,000, resulting in a preva-lence rate for these students of approximately 0.71%. Thus, when students with mildintellectual disabilities are included in general education classrooms, this results in ap-proximately one student in every six general education classes.

It is important to note that the number of students in the intellectual disabilitiescategory declined between 1990 and 2004 by approximately 10%. It is unclear whythis decline occurred, although Beirne-Smith and colleagues (2006) have speculatedthat it could relate to factors such as (1) reticence to label students from culturally di-verse backgrounds because of their overrepresentation in the mild intellectual dis-

Directly teaching social skillsthrough activities such as roleplaying can be beneficial for manystudents.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




abilities category, (2) identifying high-functioning students with the less stigmatizingLD label; and (3) the positive effects of early intervention efforts that reduced the oc-currence of mild intellectual disabilities.

A final consideration regarding the prevalence of students with intellectual dis-abilities is the extent to which students in this category represent the racial and eth-nic population of students in the United States. Table 8.2 presents data from the2004–2005 school year regarding the percentage of students from each of five racialgroups who were identified with intellectual disabilities and the percentage of eachof these groups in the population of school-age students in the United States.It is note-worthy that the group that is most significantly overrepresented in the intellectualdisability category is African American students. Based on their representative pro-portion in the school-age population, these students are more than twice as likely tobe identified with an intellectual disability as one would predict.Furthermore, AfricanAmerican students have been significantly overrepresented in the intellectual disabil-ity category for nearly 40 years (Hosp & Reschly, 2004).

Many professionals have expressed concern regarding the overrepresentation ofAfrican American students in the intellectual disability category because this categoryand the use of the label mentally retarded are viewed as very stigmatizing (Hosp &Reschly,2004;Losen & Orfield,2002).For example,research has shown that when stu-dents are given a negative label such as mentally retarded, teachers tend to focus onthe students’ negative behaviors, even though those behaviors may not differ signifi-cantly from other students’ (Hosp & Reschly, 2004).

In addition to concerns regarding the stigma attached to the intellectual disabil-ity label, professionals have expressed concern because most students who are iden-tified with intellectual disabilities are segregated from typical peers for much of theschool day (Williamson et al., 2006). These segregated placements do not allow stu-dents with intellectual disabilities access to the general education curriculum and “of-ten result in fewer opportunities for students to access postsecondary education andin fewer employment opportunities” (Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2002, p. 184). Further-more, in some school districts, most students identified with intellectual disabilities

TABLE 8.2

PERCENTAGE OF ALL SCHOOL-AGE STUDENTS LABELEDINTELLECTUALLY DISABLED BY RACE/ETHNICITY, 2004

Race/Ethnicity Intellectually Disabled1 Total Population2

American Indian and Alaska Native 1.21 0.98

Asian and Pacific Islander 1.98 4.10

Black 33.36 15.08

Hispanic (not Black) 12.35 17.65

European American 51.00 62.19

Source: U.S. Department of Education, 2006.

1. These percentages represent the total percentage of students with disabilities who are labeled intellectuallydisabled for each race/ethnic group. Columns thus add to 100%.

2. These percentages reflect the percentage of the total school-age population that is represented by eachracial/ethnic group. If students are proportionally represented, the percentage in each disability categoryshould equal the percentage of the overall population in the third column. For example, 17.65% of Hispanicshould be labeled intellectually disabled if they are proportionally represented in this category. The figure in theintellectually disabled column for these students is 12.35%, indicating that Hispanic students are proportion-ally underrepresented in this category.

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




are African American, resulting in racial segregation in separate classes for these stu-dents (Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2002).

A final concern that has been expressed regarding the overrepresentation ofAfrican American students in the intellectual disability category relates to the inef-fectiveness of segregated special education placements for these students. As we havenoted, extensive research evidence has revealed that students with mild intellectualdisabilities tend to benefit academically and socially when they are provided with ap-propriate supports and included in general education classrooms with age-appropriate peers for much of the school day (Freeman & Alkin,2000). Thus,not onlyis the label mental retardation or intellectual disability stigmatizing for AfricanAmerican students,but they are also often disadvantaged by being placed for much ofthe school day in highly segregated settings that limit their opportunities for academicand social growth as well as their long-term opportunities for success.

THE COURSE OF MILD INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES

As students with mild intellectual disabilities progress through school, a performancegap widens between students with and without disabilities (Beirne-Smith et al., 2006;Patton et al., 1996). This occurs in reading and mathematics as well as across the restof the curriculum. It also occurs with respect to the development of social and adap-tive skills. In short, persons with mild intellectual disabilities enter adulthood at a sig-nificant disadvantage with respect to academic and social skills when compared totheir peers who are not identified with intellectual disabilities.

Three outcomes are viewed as critically important for adults with mild intellectualdisabilities (and other adults as well):productive employment,participating successfullyin postsecondary education, and psychological well-being (Patton et al., 1996). Whilesome persons with mild intellectual disabilities struggle greatly with each of these out-comes,others are relatively successful and are generally satisfied with their lives.

Productive EmploymentResearch has shown that persons with mild intellectual disabilities are typically em-ployed in jobs requiring fewer skills with lower take-home pay than are typical peersand attain limited advancement in their employment (Seltzer et al., 2005). However,

some research has shown that adults with mildintellectual disabilities are “equally likely to beemployed as their higher IQ siblings, [have]greater job stability, and [are] equally satisfiedwith their jobs”(Seltzer et al., 2005,p.465). Asour featured teacher, Robert Hessels, noted,careful transition planning is required, begin-ning early in adolescence,if students with mildintellectual disabilities are to be successful inobtaining and keeping real paying jobs aftertheir school years. For additional informationon transition planning, see Chapter 4.

Postsecondary EducationA major factor that impedes the success ofmany adults with intellectual disabilities istheir lack of opportunity to participate inpostsecondary education. Patton and col-leagues (1996) note that a critical step towardsuccessful involvement in postsecondary ed-ucation for persons with mild intellectual dis-abilities is the extent to which they are

welcomed into these settings and accommodations are provided for their disability.Until recently, postsecondary education was largely limited to persons without dis-

Most adults with mild intellectualdisabilities are employed but oftenin less skilled jobs.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




abilities. This has changed dramatically in recent years, as large numbers of personswith disabilities, including those with mild to severe intellectual disabilities, have be-gun to attend postsecondary education institutions to network, learn social and aca-demic skills, and obtain job skills (e.g., Pearman, Elliott, & Aborn, 2004; Zafft, Hart, &Zimbrich, 2004). As increasing numbers of adults with intellectual disabilities con-tinue their education, it is likely that employment will improve as will other criticallife outcomes.

Psychological Well-BeingFinally, some research indicates that adults with mild intellectual disabilities seem tobe most at risk in the area of psychological well-being (Seltzer et al., 2005). Morespecifically, adults with mild intellectual disabilities often have less of a sense of pur-pose in life,fewer opportunities for personal growth,a higher rate of depressive symp-toms, and less personal autonomy than do their peers without intellectual disabilities(Seltzer et al.,2005). This concern is currently being addressed,to some degree,by thegrowing use of approaches that provide persons with intellectual disabilities with thecore skills needed for self-determination (Sands & Wehmeyer, 2005), which havebeen shown to correlate with “an improved quality of life for adults with disabilities,particularly those outcomes [such] as employment, community living, and post-secondary education”(Thoma & Getzel,2005,p.234). We provide further informationregarding self-determination later in this chapter.

CAUSAL FACTORS

For almost all students identified with mild intellectual disabilities, we do not knowthe particular cause of the disability.However,we do know that many of these studentscome from families who are living in poverty and that a disproportionate number ofsuch families are members of non–European American groups (Wenar & Kerig,2006).Because of the strong family and cultural factors involved, this type of intellectual dis-ability was originally called “cultural-familial”but now is referred to as “intellectual dis-ability that results from psychosocial disadvantage” (Beirne-Smith et al., 2006, p. 162).

Before we address family and cultural factors that may put students at risk for be-ing identified with a mild intellectual disability, it is important to note that most chil-dren who grow up in poor homes are not identified with mild intellectual disabilities,nor are most children from non–European American groups (often called “minority”groups) who grow up in these settings so identified. Moreover, most students whogrow up in poor homes have measured IQs that fall within the normal range.However,there do seem to be family factors related to living in a low-socioeconomic-statushome, especially for children from non–European American groups, which put a stu-dent at greater risk for being identified with a mild intellectual disability.

Many professionals have speculated that a combination of risk factors may existin poor homes and contribute to the high incidence of mild intellectual disabilities inthese settings. For example, Sameroff (1990) determined several risk factors based onprevious research, including the amount of stress in the environment (e.g., inadequatehousing, inadequate nutrition, inadequate health care), the family’s resources for ad-dressing this stress,the number of children in the family,the education level of the par-ent(s), head of household in an unskilled occupation, mental health and educationlevel of the mother, and the family’s flexibility in addressing children’s needs. In a lon-gitudinal study to examine these risk factors, Sameroff found that, as the number ofrisk factors increased, IQ scores for children tended to decrease. For example, inhomes with multiple risk factors,children scored 30 points lower on IQ tests than didchildren in homes with no risk factors; and those children were much more likely tobe identified with a mild intellectual disability.

In addition to family factors,cultural differences that exist in families living in povertymay contribute to the higher identification rate for students with mild intellectual dis-abilities. As we noted in Chapter 3, the number of students from non-middle-class,

Reflective Exercise #5How will knowledge regarding thecourse of intellectual disabilities,especially adult outcomes,influence your expectations forthese students in your classroom?How will this informationinfluence what you teach thesestudents? How will you guardagainst having expectations thatare too low, which is difficult forany teacher to avoid?

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




non–European American families has increased dramaticallyover the past decade, while the number of teachers from thesegroups has declined (National Education Association, 2003).This leads to a demographic divide between students and teach-ers, as most teachers are female, European American, and frommiddle-class backgrounds that differ significantly from the back-grounds of their students. This divide may cause teachers to mis-understand or misinterpret the behavior of students from pooror different cultural backgrounds and lead them to have diffi-culty in effectively meeting the academic and behavior needs ofthese students.

With regard to this demographic divide, the identificationof intellectual disabilities is often dependent on the extent towhich a student varies from the social norms of a community(Murphy et al.,1995). A teacher determines these norms in herclassroom, while teachers and administrators determine socialnorms for a school. Social norms relate to what a teacher ex-pects as “normal” classroom behavior. For example, “normal”students might be those who are able to sit and listen for ex-

tended periods of time,complete pencil-and-paper tasks with minimal assistance,taketurns speaking in class, use standard grammar, be deferential to adults, look teachersin the eye when reprimanded, ask questions when they don’t understand, use a logi-cal sequential communication style,and have parents who help them with homeworkand attend school events. Thus,a child who differs from these norms,as many studentsfrom low-socioeconomic-status homes and different cultural backgrounds do, is morelikely to be referred and identified with a disability.

The issues of social norms and the demographic divide were addressed in Chapter 3,where you completed a personal demographic questionnaire and addressed differencesthat exist across cultural and socioeconomic settings. For more information regardingthese topics and how they might be addressed in your classroom,see Chapter 3.

While family and cultural factors are the most widely studied cause of mild intel-lectual disabilities, several additional factors have been identified that may contributeto the development of these disabilities (The ARC,2005; Wenar & Kerig,2006). Thesefactors include problems

• During pregnancy, such as use of alcohol or drugs, malnutrition, exposure toenvironmental toxins, or maternal illnesses such as rubella or syphilis

• At birth, such as prematurity and low birth weight, or difficulties duringdelivery, such as birth injuries or temporary oxygen deprivation

• After birth, such as infections (e.g., meningitis, encephalitis), injuries (e.g., ablow to the head), or exposure to environmental toxins (e.g., lead or mercury)

IDENTIFICATION AND ASSESSMENT

The primary criteria used to identify students with intellectual disabilities are subav-erage scores on tests of intelligence and adaptive behavior. A school psychologist of-ten administers a test of intelligence and interprets the results for the multidisciplinaryteam. The multidisciplinary team determines if the student’s level of intelligence fallsbelow the cutoff for an intellectual disability and, if the IQ score is below 70, whichlevel of intellectual disability is indicated. (See Table 8.1 for cutoffs for different levelsof intellectual disability.) Intelligence measures that are widely used to identify stu-dents with intellectual disabilities are the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale (5th ed.)(Roid, 2003) and the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (4th ed.) (Wechsler,2003). For more information regarding intelligence tests, see Chapter 4.

While an IQ score of 70 or below is a major criterion for identifying a student asintellectually disabled, it is not sufficient. The student also must have significant limi-

Many factors during pregnancy, atbirth, or during the early years of achild’s life may contribute to thedevelopment of a mild intellectualdisability.

Reflective Exercise #6How does knowledge regardingthe causes of mild intellectualdisabilities influence how youperceive these students? Will thisinformation influence how youinteract with and teach thesestudents in your classroom? Whatwill you expect of these students?

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




To see Robert Hesselsdiscuss the topic ofinclusion and how it

relates to this population ofstudents, go to the Mr. Hesselsmodule on the DVD-ROM andclick on clip 5: Inclusion.

tations in adaptive behavior. To make this determination, a team member administersa measure of adaptive behavior. Tests that are most often used in this area include theAAMR Adaptive Behavior Scale—School (Lambert, Nihira, & Leland, 1993), the Adap-tive Behavior Assessment System (2nd ed.) (ABAS-II) (Harrison & Oakland,2000),andthe Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales (2nd ed.) (Sparrow, Cicchetti, & Balla, 2005).See Figure 8.1 for a list of the adaptive behavior skills that are used to identify personswith intellectual disabilities.

Finally, if a student’s IQ and adaptive behavior measures fall within the range thatindicates significant limitations, the multidisciplinary team determines if the child’seducational performance has been adversely affected. Measures of academic achieve-ment, such as the Woodcock-Johnson Tests of Achievement (Woodcock,McGrew, & Mather, 2001) and the Wechsler Individual Achievement Test (2nd ed.) (WIAT-II) (Psychological Corporation,2001),are typically administered to provide thisinformation. These tests provide achievement scores in the areas of language,reading,writing, and mathematics.

Before we leave this topic, it is important to note that controversy has surroundedthe identification of students with intellectual disabilities for several decades. Initially,this controversy related to the IQ cutoff that should be used to identify these students.In 1961 the IQ cutoff for intellectual disabilities was set at 85 (Heber, 1961). Thismeant that approximately 16% of the school-age population would theoretically meetthis criterion.In 1973 the IQ cutoff was lowered to 70,reducing the proportion of theschool-age population who would meet this criterion by 14% (i.e., to 2.28%) (Gross-man,1973).Some have suggested that this change in the definition “cured”14% of theschool-age population of intellectual disabilities.More recently, in 1992 the AAMR def-inition increased the IQ cutoff to 75 (Luckasson et al., 1992), doubling the number ofstudents who would meet this criterion,but lowered it again to 70 in the most recentversion (Luckasson et al., 2002).

Similarly, controversy has surrounded the extent to which adaptive behaviorshould be a criterion for identifying students with intellectual disabilities and how thisconstruct should be defined. Adaptive behavior became a formal criterion for identi-fying students with intellectual disabilities in 1973 and has subsequently been rede-fined and refined.

It is important to note that these changes relate to issues surrounding the identi-fication of students with mild intellectual disabilities (i.e., raising or lowering the up-per limit on IQ changes the number of students with mild intellectual disabilities whoare eligible for this category but has little or no influence on students with more se-vere disabilities).More specifically,the changes have been made,to a large extent, in re-sponse to concerns regarding the overrepresentation of students from non–EuropeanAmerican groups in the intellectual disability category and the stigma that is often as-sociated with this label (Dunn, 1968).

EDUCATIONAL PRACTICES

Extensive research has been conducted regarding evidence-based educational prac-tices that are effective with students with mild intellectual disabilities. This evidencereveals that these students can learn far more than we anticipated in the past but needmore time to learn and benefit from effective instructional practices. In the sectionsthat follow, we review placement practices regarding students with intellectual dis-abilities and follow with a discussion of educational practices that are effective forthese students as they progress through school and transition to adult life.

SERVICE DELIVERY

While students with intellectual disabilities have been provided with an education inprimarily segregated, separate settings for the past 100 years, researchers have ques-tioned the effectiveness of these placements for more than 70 years (Bennett, 1932;

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




Carlberg & Kavale,1980; Johnson,1962;Polloway,1984).Much of the research that hasbeen conducted on this issue revealed that students with intellectual disabilities ben-efit from spending at least some—and, in many instances, a large—proportion of theschool day in general education classrooms. For example, after reviewing research re-lated to the effectiveness of separate class placements for students with intellectualdisabilities, Freeman and Alkin (2000) concluded that “children with milder mentallevels of intellectual disabilities achieve more positive results in the integrated class-room than do their counterparts in segregated settings.” They go on to note that theplacement of students “with mental retardation in general education classrooms tendsto improve their social skills and competence” (p. 15).

In spite of the support from research to place these students in general educationclasses for at least part of the school day, many students with mild intellectual disabil-ities are taught in segregated, separate settings for most of the day (McLeskey, Henry,& Hodges, 1999; Williamson et al., 2006). For example, overall, 52% of students withdisabilities spend 80% or more of the school day in general education classrooms,com-pared to only 13% of students with intellectual disabilities (see Table 8.3). Similarly,only 18% of all students with disabilities spend most of the school day (60% or more)segregated from peers, compared to 57% of students with intellectual disabilities.

It is important to note that changes have occurred over the past decade indicat-ing that significant progress has been made in including increasing numbers of stu-dents with intellectual disabilities in general education classrooms (Williamson et al.,2006). For example, in 1989–1990, 7.6% of students with intellectual disabilities wereeducated in general education settings for most of the school day. By 2004–2005, thisfigure had increased to 13.1% (U.S. Department of Education, 2006). Similarly, in1990–1991, 70% of students with intellectual disabilities were educated in settingswhere they were segregated for 60% or more of the school day.By 2004–2005,this fig-ure had dropped to 57%.

As our featured teacher, Robert Hessels, noted, a highlight of his career has beenincluding students with mild intellectual disabilities in high school general educationclassrooms. His comments suggest the difficulty of this task. If inclusive programs areto be developed for students with mild intellectual disabilities, several activities areneeded to ensure that these students have the supports necessary to be successful ac-ademically and socially. Perhaps most important, these supports include well-prepared general and special education teachers who have the knowledge and skills

TABLE 8.3

PERCENTAGE OF SCHOOL-AGE STUDENTS WITH INTELLECTUALDISABILITIES AND ALL DISABILITIES TAUGHT IN DIFFERENTPLACEMENT SETTINGS, 2004–2005

Disability Category Placement Settings

<211 21–601 >601 Separate setting2

Mild intellectualdisability 13.09 29.66 50.79 6.46

All disability 51.87 26.50 17.60 4.03

Source: U.S. Department of Education, 2006.1. These percentages represent the time students spend outside of the general educationclassroom. Thus, the first category, <21%, indicates that these students spend less than 21% ofthe school day in a separate, special education setting and is thus the most inclusive settings.2. Separate setting combines several categories reported by the U.S. Department of Education,including public separate facility, private separate facility, public residential facility, privateresidential facility, and home/hospital environment.

Reflective Exercise #7In spite of evidence that studentswith mild intellectual disabilitiesbenefit from placement in well-supported general educationclassrooms for much of the schoolday, few of these students areeducated in such settings. Why doyou think this is the case? Whatchallenges would these studentspresent for teachers? What typesof support would teachers need tosuccessfully include more studentswith intellectual disabilities?

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




related to classroom instruction and behavior management that are necessary to meetthe needs of students with diverse needs. However, evidence also reveals that signifi-cant change in an entire school is needed if inclusive programs are to be successfullyimplemented (McLeskey & Waldron, 2000, 2006; Waldron & McLeskey, 1998). The“Site Visit” feature provides a description of an inclusive school program that hasbeen successfully implemented in several schools (McLeskey & Waldron, 2006; Wal-dron & McLeskey, 1998).

Site Visit:Effective Practices in Action

THE INCLUSIVE SCHOOL PROGRAM (ISP)

As increasing numbers of students with mild disabilities are included in general education classroomsfor much of the school day, it is important that inclusive programs be developed and validated thatsuccessfully include students in general education classrooms and ensure that these students makeadequate yearly progress in core academic subjects (e.g., reading and mathematics). The purpose ofthe program developed by Waldron and McLeskey (1998) was to develop inclusive school programsin elementary schools that successfully met these goals for students with mild disabilities.

Waldron and McLeskey worked with teams of teachers from three elementary schools to developinclusive school programs (ISPs). Teams of teachers and administrators from each of the three schoolsworked over the course of a semester to examine their school,plan an inclusive program that was tai-lored to meet the needs of students and teachers in their school, and plan professional developmentactivities that were needed by teachers to implement the proposed program. They also read aboutand discussed the basic principles of school change (Fullan, 2001).

While ISPs across the three schools differed based on individual school needs, they shared sev-eral characteristics:

1. Separate classes for students with LD and mild intellectual disabilities were closed.2. Special education teachers worked collaboratively with two or more general education teachers.3. Programs for students with disabilities were built on the general education curriculum and en-

sured that effective instructional practices were used in the general education classroom.4. Attempts were made to avoid disproportionate numbers of students with disabilities in any gen-

eral education classroom.5. School organization was examined and changed to ensure that students could be provided with

instruction of appropriate intensity (e.g., small-group instruction in reading).6. Instructional assistants were used to provide support and intensive instruction for students with

disabilities.

As you will recognize, this program used many of the principles of effective instruction that havebeen discussed in this chapter and also adapted the general education classroom to include studentswith mild disabilities and ensure that they had access to the general education curriculum. While stu-dents with mild disabilities were included in general education classrooms for much of the schoolday, they were pulled out of general education classrooms, along with other students with similar in-structional needs in reading or mathematics, for intensive instruction for short periods of time dur-ing the school day.

The results of research conducted by Waldron and McLeskey revealed that students with milddisabilities who were educated in these ISPs made more progress in reading and comparable progressin math to students who were educated in traditional special education resource programs.

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




EARLY INTERVENTION

Research has revealed that the early experiences of children have an important influ-ence on their later development and that effective early intervention programs canhave a significant positive influence on a student’s intelligence level,academic achieve-ment, and social competence (Taylor et al., 2005). For students with mild intellectualdisabilities, evidence indicates that children of mothers with low IQs are at a particu-lar risk for poor intellectual outcomes and possibly mild or moderate intellectual dis-abilities and thus would benefit from early intervention (Ramey & Ramey,1992).

Ramey and Ramey (1992) examined the results of three early intervention pro-grams for students who were at a particular risk for poor intellectual outcomes. Eachprogram was designed to provide these students with intensive early intervention.Ramey and Ramey concluded that these children respond very favorably to intensive,systematic, early intervention. Based on this research, six essential types of experi-ences are recommended:

1. Children should be encouraged to explore the environment.2. Children should be guided toward basic thinking skills in areas such as sorting and

sequencing.3. Accomplishments of children should be celebrated and reinforced.4. Skills that are learned should be practiced and expanded upon.5. Negative consequences should be avoided when children are engaged in trial-and-

error learning.6. Children should be provided with extensive oral and written language experiences.

It is noteworthy that long-term follow-up of children who were at risk and par-ticipated in programs that included these characteristics revealed very positive out-comes. For example, Campbell, Ramey, Pungello, Sparling, and Miller-Johnson (2002)found that reading and math gains persisted into adulthood and that, as adults, partic-ipants in these programs had more years of total education and were more likely to at-tend college.

CLASSROOM INTERVENTIONS

As you will recollect from the previous discussion of the characteristics of studentswith mild intellectual disabilities, these students tend to take longer to learn academic

content than do other students and lag be-hind age-level peers in basic skills. They alsodo not automatically generate strategies forlearning and remembering academic content,as many students do. Information that wehave discussed regarding effective instruction(see Chapter 5), learning strategies (seeChapter 6), and principles to design effectivecurriculum and instruction (see Chapter 6)may be used to improve learning outcomesfor students with mild intellectual disabilities.In addition, in the sections that follow we dis-cuss the use of explicit instruction, peer tu-toring, monitoring student progress, andtechnology to address the instructional needsof students with mild intellectual disabilities.

Explicit InstructionIn addition to these strategies, students withmild intellectual disabilities benefit from be-ing provided with teacher-directed explicit

instruction. While much research regarding this type of instruction has focused onstudents with mild intellectual disabilities, the instructional approaches that are sub-

Well-designed early interventionprograms are very beneficial forchildren with mild intellectualdisabilities.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




Reflective Exercise #8Based on what you have read inthis chapter about thecharacteristics of students withmild intellectual disabilities, whydo you think Direct Instruction hasbeen so effective with thesestudents? What characteristics ofDI lead to this effectiveness?

To learn more aboutexplicit instruction, go tothe Ms. Sprague module

on the DVD-ROM and click onclip 7: Explicit Instruction.

sequently described have also been proven effective for students with and without dis-abilities (Coyne, Kame’enui, & Carnine, 2007; Shuell, 1996).

If a student you are teaching does not gain proficiency in important curricularcontent, the most effective instructional strategies to ensure that this material islearned are built upon the principles of mastery learning (Bloom, 1971, 1976). Sev-eral assumptions underlie this approach to learning (Shuell, 1996):

• Instruction is organized into well-defined units.• Mastery of each unit is expected of each student before proceeding to the next unit.• Tests are administered to determine mastery.• If a test reveals that mastery has not been achieved, supplemental materials and

activities are used to teach the information again.• Under appropriate conditions, all students can learn well or master most of the

content.• Time is used to individualize instruction. (Some students take more time to

master content than others do and may have to repeat the instructional cyclemore than once.)

Various programs and approaches to instruction have been developed based onmastery learning, and these programs have generally been proven effective (Shuell,1996). The approach that has the strongest research to support its effectiveness andis the most widely used is Direct Instruction (DI) (Carnine, Silbert, Kame’enui, &Tarver, 2003; Coyne et al., 2007; Kame’enui & Carnine, 1998; Rosenshine & Stevens,1986; Stein, Silbert, & Carnine, 1997; Swanson, Hoskyn, & Lee, 1999). Further informa-tion regarding this approach to teaching and learning is provided in the “Highly Ef-fective Instructional Strategies” feature on Direct Instruction.

Peer TutoringGood and Brophy (2003) have noted that individualized tutoring is the optimal instructionalmethod for meeting the needs of students who are struggling academically. Other re-searchers have reached a similar conclusion (Pinnell, Lyons,DeFord,Bryk,& Seltzer,1994;Slavin et al.,1994;Spear-Swerling & Sternberg,1996; Vaughn,Gersten,& Chard,2000). Thisapproach may be especially effective for students with mild intellectual disabilities, whoneed extra time and practice to learn academic material. Of course, the drawback to thismethod is that it is very expensive and needs to be targeted at students who will receivethe maximum benefit.

Schools have engaged in a variety of activities to provide cost-effective individualtutoring.Most often,these programs have focused on young students experiencing dif-ficulty learning to read, although programs have also been developed across age lev-els and content areas. To reduce costs, some schools have rearranged the school dayto allow teachers to provide tutoring just before or after school. Others have trainedtutors (e.g., parent volunteers, teacher education students from local universities) towork with students during or after school hours.

In addition to these approaches,peer-tutoring programs are widely used and cost-effective. These programs may involve after-school tutoring in subject areas for mid-dle or high school students or tutoring in basic skills areas (e.g., reading and math) forelementary students.Peer tutoring is a group of strategies that use peers (either same-age or cross-age) as one-on-one teachers providing individualized instruction,practice,repetition, and clarification of concepts (Utley, Mortsweet, & Greenwood, 1997).

Extensive research has been conducted on the use of peer tutoring as a strategyfor improving learning outcomes for both the student being tutored (the tutee) andthe student doing the tutoring (the tutor).Research has revealed that well-designed tu-toring programs result in improved educational outcomes for students with and with-out disabilities who are struggling to learn academic content (Elbaum, Vaughn,Hughes, & Moody, 1999; Fuchs, Fuchs, & Burish, 2000; Mathes, Howard, Babyak, &Allen,2000; Vaughn et al.,2000). In addition,one of the unexpected findings of this re-search has been that the tutoring experience results in improved academic achieve-ment for both the tutor and the tutee (Elbaum et al., 1999; Fuchs et al., 2000).

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




Highly Effective Instructional Strategies

DIRECT INSTRUCTIONDirect Instruction is built upon the principles of masterylearning described in this chapter. Furthermore, the spe-cific teaching behaviors that are used as part of Direct In-struction have received strong support from research aseffective practices (Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986). Thesebehaviors address what a teacher does to begin a lesson,present information during the lesson, guide student prac-tice after instruction, correct student work and providefeedback, plan and carry out student seatwork, and followup the lesson. These components include the following(Rosenshine & Stevens, 1986):

1. Daily review and checking homeworkSet up routines for students to check each other’s

homework.Review and question past learning.Reteach when necessary.Review relevant prerequisite skills.

2. Presentation of material and informationProvide a short statement of objectives.Provide an overview or advance organizer.Proceed at a rapid pace but in small steps.Check for understanding by asking questions.Highlight main points.Provide concrete examples and illustrations.Provide models and demonstrations.As necessary, provide detailed and redundant instruc-

tion and examples.3. Guided practice

Teacher initially guides student practice.Ask frequent questions and implement overt student

practice (from teacher or materials).

Teacher evaluates student responses to check for un-derstanding.

When checking for understanding, teacher gives addi-tional explanation or process feedback or repeatsexplanation as needed.

All students respond and receive feedback; teacher en-sures that all students participate.

Initial student practice is sufficient so students canwork independently.

Guided practice continues until students firmly graspcontent and a success rate of at least 80% is achieved.

4. Correctives and feedbackQuick, firm, correct response can be followed by an-

other question or a brief acknowledgment of cor-rectness (e.g., “That’s right”).

Hesitant correct responses should be followed by processfeedback (e.g.,“Yes,Linda,that’s right because . . . ”).

Student errors indicate a need for more practice.Monitor student work for systematic errors.Attempt to obtain a substantive response to each

question.Corrections can include sustaining feedback (i.e., sim-

plifying the question,giving clues),explaining or re-viewing steps, giving process feedback, orreteaching the last steps.

When the first response is incorrect, try to elicit an im-proved response.

Continue guided practice and corrections until thegroup can meet the objectives of the lesson.

Praise should be used in moderation, and specificpraise is more effective than general praise.

To ensure that peer tutoring is effective, training for tutors is required, and otherprocedural guidelines must be addressed. Good and Brophy (2003) have providedguidelines for implementing peer-tutoring programs. These guidelines begin by not-ing that the learning outlook in the class must change to a “we learn from one another”mind-set. They also describe several procedural matters that must be addressed:

1. Clearly specified times of the day should be set aside for tutoring.2. Specific assignments should be clearly described and related materials provided

for tutors.3. Tutors should work with tutees long enough to complete a sequence of assign-

ments (over 1 to 2 weeks) and not start anew each day.4. Tutoring assignments should be changed every couple of weeks to prevent tutors

from developing an “I’m your teacher”perspective.5. Tutors should not administer tests or be responsible for other student evaluation.6. All students should be both tutors and tutees.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




7. Developing a peer-tutoring program takes time. The teacher should spend thefirst week or so modeling tutoring behaviors, making sure instructions for tutor-ing are clear, having students model appropriate tutoring, and so forth.

8. Let parents know that peer tutoring will be used and that all students will be bothtutors and tutees.

Assistive TechnologyAssistive technology has great potential for improving instruction for students with in-tellectual disabilities and other disabilities (Edyburn, 2002). Assistive technology(AT) means “any item,piece of equipment,or product system,whether acquired com-mercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, orimprove the functional capabilities of a child with a disability” (IDEA 2004, Sec.620[1]). It is important to note that language in IDEA requires that assistive technol-ogy be considered when planning IEPs for students with disabilities.

5. Independent practice (seatwork)Provide sufficient practice.Practice should be directly relevant to the skills/con-

tent being taught.Practice to overlearning and responses are firm, quick,

and automatic.During independent practice, students should achieve

a 95%-correct rate.Students should know that seatwork will be checked.Students should be held accountable for seatwork.Seatwork should be actively supervised whenever

possible.6. Weekly and monthly review

Systematically review material previously learned.Include review in homework.Test frequently.Reteach material missed on tests.

Thus,based on the principles of mastery learning and thecomponents of effective instruction,a well-designed DirectInstruction lesson would include the following steps:

1. Review and reteach previously taught information thatis directly relevant to the current lesson. Teach anynecessary prerequisite skills.

2. Clearly state the purpose of the lesson and provide anadvance organizer so the students will understandwhat content the lesson will address and what activi-ties will be included.

3. Present the information in small steps, providing illus-trations, modeling any necessary skills, and providingvaried examples.

4. Provide clear and detailed instructions or explanationsregarding the content being taught.

5. Provide students with a high level of practice on thecontent being learned after each step.

6. Ensure that all students understand the content. Theteacher should closely monitor student practice and askmany questions to check for student understanding.

7. Reteach the content as necessary.8. Provide students with teacher-guided practice of

newly learned content.9. Provide students with the opportunity to practice the

newly learned skill with peers or independently, withfeedback and correction as necessary.

10. Provide explicit instruction for seatwork activities andmonitor student seatwork as necessary.

Rosenshine and Stevens (1986) have noted that this typeof lesson is most applicable to well-structured content thatfollows explicit steps. Thus, such a lesson is most relevantfor teaching basic skills in reading or basic content in mathand will be less useful for a discussion of social issues in so-cial studies or for teaching the composition and writing ofterm papers in any content area.

While some educators have provided extensive informa-tion regarding how to apply the principles of Direct Instruc-tion to reading (Carnine et al., 2003) and math (Stein et al.,1997), others have developed entire instructional programsthat apply these principles. For example, Reading Mastery(Engelmann & Bruner,1995) is a complete instructional pro-gram to teach reading that is built upon the principles of Di-rect Instruction. This program includes highly structuredmaterial for students in grades K–6, with related scripts forteachers as they teach material to students.Similar programsare available to teach reading to older students and to teachmathematics: Corrective Reading (Engelmann, Hanner, &Johnson,1999) for students in grades 4–12,Connecting MathConcepts (Engelmann, Carnine, Bernadette, & Engelmann,1997) for grades K–8, and Corrective Math (Carnine, Engel-mann,& Steely,1999) for grade 4 to adult.

Activity: Go to the Video Classroom section of theTeacher Prep website, click on Special Education andthen module 3: Curriculum and Instruction in theLRE. Watch video 1 and answer the accompanyingquestions. Think about how Direct Instruction ishelping these students and how you could adaptthese principles to a lesson in another content area.

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




Can You Help Me with This Student?

ADDRESSING THE NEEDS OF A MIDDLE SCHOOL STUDENT WITH AMILD INTELLECTUAL DISABILITY IN SOCIAL STUDIES

Ernest is beginning middle school at McArthur MiddleSchool. Ernest was educated in an elementary schoolwith an inclusive program, where he was taught in ageneral education classroom for most of the school day.McArthur Middle School has recently begun an inclusiveprogram, and students with mild intellectual disabilitiesare educated in general education classrooms for mostof the school day.

Ernest has been assigned to Ms. Hodges in social stud-ies.Ms.Hodges is known throughout the district as an ex-cellent teacher. She does many hands-on activities, hasstudents work on projects in cooperative groups, and en-gages students in discussion regarding critical historicalissues and current events that are addressed in her class.However, Ms. Hodges has never had students with mildintellectual disabilities in her class and is apprehensivethat she will not be able to meet Ernest’s needs.

Ernest is a student who has always been interested inhistory.He is well behaved but tends to sit quietly in classand not participate unless called on by the teacher.Ernesthas shown that he is quite capable of participating inclass discussions when he has knowledge of the histori-cal or current events that are being addressed. He alsoworks well with others, although he does not attempt totake the lead in group activities. The major barriers toErnest’s participation in class discussions and group ac-tivities are his inability to read class material and hishesitation to speak unless called upon by the teacher.Ernest is reading on a second-grade level, while the ma-terial for class is typically written at a seventh-gradelevel. The class is beginning a unit on the Civil War andthe contributions of important people to the war.

Ernest’s difficulty in reading is common among studentswith mild intellectual disabilities as they begin middleschool.Furthermore,Ms.Hodges’s concerns regarding herability to address Ernest’s needs are well founded and rea-sonable.Inclusion is a new experience for her,and she willneed assistance in devising instructional approaches to ad-dress his instructional needs. It is important to note thatsome of the strategies that Ms. Hodges uses with studentswho are not labeled with disabilities may be useful forErnest, including books on tape, movies and televisionmovies related to the Civil War, and cooperative group ac-tivities. Additional elements of effective practice that shemay choose to use with Ernest include the following:

Adapt instructional expectations for Ernest using the plan-ning pyramid (see Chapter 5). As you read in Chapter 5,the planning pyramid is used to assist teachers as they plancontent and instruction for lessons and units.Using the plan-ning pyramid,Ms.Hodges will determine content all studentsin her class will learn regarding the contributions of impor-tant people in the Civil War,content that most students willlearn,and content that a few students will learn.

Adapt curriculum and instruction using the nine typesof adaptations (see Chapter 5). To facilitate student par-ticipation in the general education curriculum, teacherscan choose among nine types of instructional adaptations(Cole et al., 2000). For example, the most frequently usedadaptations tend to be adaptations in size (e.g.,the numberof items that a student is expected to complete) and time(e.g., time allocated for completing a task). However, forErnest, Ms. Hodges may want to adjust the difficulty levelof lessons, structure how students participate and provideresponses, and provide peer support for learning material.

Provide peer tutoring. Ms.Hodges may use peer tutoringto assist Ernest in learning important material for class dis-cussions or information that may be included on classroomtests.Ms.Hodges will probably find that peer tutoring is a use-ful strategy for many students in her class and will not onlybenefit the student being tutored but also help the studentdoing the tutoring to better remember classroom content.

For more information on strategies to address the needsof middle school students with mild intellectual disabilitiesin inclusive classrooms, consult the following resources:

Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (2007). The inclusive classroom: Strategiesfor effective instruction (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Deshler, D., & Schumaker, J. (Eds.). (2006). Teaching adolescents withdisabilities. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

EXTEND AND APPLY• If you were a special education teacher at McArthur Mid-

dle School,how would you respond to Ms.Hodges if sheasked why Ernest is being included in her classroom?

• How would you assure her that she will be able to meetErnest’s instructional needs?

Activity: Go to the Video Classroom section of theTeacher Prep website, click on Special Educationand then module 6: Learning Disabilities. Watchvideos 1 and 2 and answer the accompanyingquestions. Think about the different types oftutoring you see and what might benefit Ernest.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




Many types of devices have been used to enhance the learning of students withdisabilities and to address student needs in a multitude of areas (Edyburn,2002; West-ling & Fox, 2004). Areas addressed by assistive devices include writing, communica-tion, reading, studying, math, recreation and leisure, mobility, vision, and hearing. Forexample, a motorized wheelchair is considered a relatively low-tech assistive technol-ogy device.Other AT devices include communication boards for persons with limitedmobility and devices that translate written words into tactile symbols for persons whoread braille.

For students with mild intellectual disabilities, assistive technology has enormouspotential for providing support in general education classrooms and access to the gen-eral education curriculum. For example, AT can be used to provide students with ad-ditional practice on information or skills that are not yet mastered; provide feedbackto the student through prompts, reminding and reteaching skills; and monitor studentresponses and provide additional information to support the student in achieving mas-tery (Foshay & Ludlow, 2005).

Perhaps the approach to assistive technology that has the most potential to ben-efit persons with mild intellectual disabilities is built upon the concept of universaldesign for learning (UDL), which we discussed in Chapter 5. One of the most im-portant applications of UDL entails the use of technology to provide all students withaccess to the general education curriculum. For example, textbooks and other mate-rials designed to facilitate learning of the general education curriculum have tradi-tionally been designed with typical or “average”learners in mind. Thus,these materialsare usually written at a level that is reasonable for a student who can readily read andunderstand grade-level material, and such students often make adequate progress inthe curriculum using these materials and learn the material to mastery. However, forstudents with mild intellectual disabilities and others with reading problems (e.g.,most students with LD), the material is often too difficult to read independently. Pub-lishers of textbooks and curriculum materials are beginning to design these materialsto accommodate a broad range of student skill levels. For more information regardinguniversal design for learning, see the “Technology for Access” feature.

With the increasing diversity of U.S. classrooms as well as federal and state man-dates making local schools and school districts accountable for the educational out-comes of all students, designing the curriculum and related materials within the UDLframework shows much promise for better meeting the needs of all students. More-over, only a decade ago, UDL was a distant, seemingly far-fetched dream of a few in-structional technology experts. Given the dramatic improvements in technology that

Techology can be used to provide access to the general education curriculum.

To see two examples ofassistive technology inclassrooms, go to the Mr.

Hessels module on the DVD-ROMand click on clip 8: Small GroupInst., then go to the Ms. Biddlemodule and click on clip 9: UDL.

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




TECHNOLOGY FOR ACCESS

Source: Hitchcock, C., Meyer, A., Rose, D., & Jackson, R. (2002). Providing new access to the general curriculum: Universal design for learning.Teaching Exceptional Children, 35 (2), 8–17. Copyright 2002 by The Council for Exceptional Children. Reprinted with permission.

UNIVERSAL DESIGN FOR LEARNING (UDL)Recognition of the shortcomings of currently available curriculum materials has led some educators andtextbook publishers to explore options for designing materials using UDL that are more accessible to allstudents. A critical feature of universal design when it is applied to the development of curriculum is thatthis framework builds in accommodations and makes differences among students in a classroom an or-dinary part of the school day (McLeskey & Waldron,2000) rather than requiring that changes be built inas an afterthought.Such a design feature for the curriculum would save the teacher much planning time,reduce the stigma that is attached to some adaptations and accommodations for students,and ensure thatmore students could be successfully included in a general education classroom.

While many UDL features may be designed in written materials (e.g., differing instructional goals forstudents), technology plays a critical role in ensuring that a curriculum is universally designed. For ex-ample, using a traditional hard copy of a textbook,reading levels cannot be changed.However,the use ofdigital content for a textbook or other classroom material allows many options for accommodating studentreading levels (and other needs) by building in multiple representations (e.g.,image,text,video),transform-ing one medium to another (e.g.,text-to-speech or speech-to-text),or modifying the characteristics of a pres-entation (e.g.,size and color of text,loudness of the sound) (Hitchcock,Meyer,Rose,& Jackson,2002).

Universal design is intended for use by all students and should benefit students who alreadyknow much of the information presented in the curriculum and who are ready to move beyond thisinformation, those whose primary language is not English, students who have difficulty maintainingattention to materials for long periods of time,or persons with mild intellectual disabilities who maylack the reading and conceptual skills to successfully master the material being presented.

Following is an illustration of the application of UDL using a typical lesson from a general edu-cation classroom (Hitchcock et al., 2002):

TEACHING AESOP’S FABLESSuppose the teacher assigns a student to read an Aesop’s fable. The goal of this assignment deter-mines the appropriate steps for making the fable accessible. The teacher will ask, Is the goal

To learn to decode text?To learn comprehension strategies?To build vocabulary?To learn the moral or point of the fable?To learn the common elements of any fable?To learn how to compare and contrast fables with news reports?To articulate the relationship between the fable and the overall culture?

The scaffolds and supports that might be appropriate depend entirely on the purpose of the assignment.If, for example, the purpose of the fable assignment were to become familiar with the elements

commonly found in fables, then supporting word decoding, vocabulary, and comprehension of thestory itself would not interfere with the learning challenge. Supports such as text-to-speech, linkedvocabulary, or animations illustrating interactions between characters would support different stu-dents but still leave the appropriate kind of challenge for all learners.

But if the goal were to provide practice in decoding and reading fluency,providing those same sup-ports could undermine the learning challenge and actually impede access to learning. The reading sup-port would eliminate the students’opportunity to practice and work toward reading independence.

This task provides an example of the need for the teacher to clearly determine the goals of instruc-tion for all students in the classroom.Furthermore,the teacher may have different goals for different stu-dents in the classroom for this task,depending on the skills that students have to address this fable.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




Reflective Exercise #9What goals might a fifth-gradeteacher have for students withmild intellectual disabilities whenteaching Aesop’s fables? Howwould these goals differ from thegoals for students who read ongrade level in the class? Advancedstudents? How could UDL be usedto accommodate the needs of allthese students?

have occurred during the past decade, UDL is becoming a reality. Many textbooks arebeing designed with UDL features, and technology is being used to significantly en-hance the accessibility of these materials. This relatively new process of curriculumdevelopment will probably grow dramatically in the next few years.

If you think back to the comments of our featured teacher,Robert Hessels, two ofhis major goals for students with mild intellectual disabilities were to include them ingeneral education classrooms and to prepare them to be lifelong learners. UDL hasgreat potential for providing the supports that are needed to realize these goals,as per-sons with disabilities are provided with access to increasingly complex content inschool and job settings.

TRANSITION TO ADULT LIFE CONSIDERATIONS

As we have noted, the symptoms of intellectual disabilities persist into adulthood. Asyou will recollect,a wide range of students who have varying needs for support as theytransition to adult life populates the category of intellectual disability. These supportswill be determined, in large part, by the severity of individual deficits in academicskills, adaptive behavior, and social/behavioral skills. Some students with very mild in-tellectual disabilities can be successful in living and work settings with little supportas they learn to compensate for these deficits. In contrast, individuals with more sig-nificant disabilities will have difficulty getting and keeping a job and functioning in-dependently in society. We begin this section with a critical concept that is importantto ensure the success of any student with mild disabilities: self-determination. This isfollowed by a review of supports that many of these students will need in postsec-ondary and vocational settings.

SELF-DETERMINATION

Historically, persons with intellectual disabilities have had decisions made for them,often by teachers, parents, or other caregivers. Thus, the basic tenets of a democraticsociety, including autonomy, independence, empowerment, and self-determination,were often overlooked for these people (Sands & Wehmeyer,2005). This probably oc-curred because most professionals,parents, and caregivers underestimated the capac-ity of persons with intellectual disabilities to make these decisions (Sands &Wehmeyer, 2005).

This has changed in recent years as increasing numbers of parents and profes-sionals have recognized the importance of involving persons with intellectual disabil-ities in decisions regarding their own lives. Research has shown that persons withintellectual disabilities who develop the core skills of self-determination have an im-proved quality of life and improved outcomes with regard to community living, post-secondary education, and employment (Thoma & Getzel, 2005). In addition, theprocess of self-determination

helps students become more persistent, productive, and motivated. Theirself-confidence increases, and, with it, their self-esteem and comfort in at-tempting difficult tasks.In some cases,behavior problems decrease once stu-dents are allowed to exercise personal preferences within their dailyactivities and routines.Students have made academic gains when goal-settingactivities are integrated into lessons in subjects such as reading,writing, andmath. (Sands & Wehmeyer, 2005, p. 274)

In short,self-determination provides persons with intellectual disabilities with theopportunity to take more ownership for their lives, and with this ownership oftencomes more motivation to succeed.

Wehmeyer (1996) has defined self-determination as “acting as the primary causalagent in one’s life and making choices and decisions regarding one’s quality of life freefrom undue external influence or interference” (p. 22). An action is thus self-determined if the individual acts autonomously,the behaviors are self-regulated,the in-dividual initiates the action and responds in a psychologically empowered manner,

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4



To learn more about self-advocacy, go to the Mr.Hessels module on the

DVD-ROM and click on clip 3:Self-Advocacy.


and the individual acts in a self-realizing way(i.e., uses a “comprehensive, and reasonablyaccurate, knowledge of [herself] and [her]strengths and limitations to act in such a man-ner as to capitalize on this knowledge in abeneficial way” ([Wehmeyer & Schwartz,1997, p. 246]).

If students with intellectual disabilitiesare to be self-determined when they exitschool and enter adult life, they need certainskills and dispositions that may be developedwhile in school. The skills that lead to self-determination include knowledge about howto access resources that are needed as anadult; communicating interests, preferences,and needs; setting and monitoring goals;plan-ning and managing time; identifying and solv-ing problems; and self-advocating (Wehmeyer& Schwartz, 1997). Developing these skills

and an increased level of self-determination will ensure that individuals have signifi-cant influence and control over their own lives,are less dependent on others,and havea higher-quality life (Westling & Fox, 2004).

Sands and Wehmeyer (2005) have developed a framework for teaching the keyskills related to self-determination—i.e., goal setting and decision making. This frame-work includes guidelines for teaching students to (1) identify a goal, (2) explore op-tions for reaching the goal, (3) choose and act on an option for reaching the goal, and(4) evaluate and revise goals and decisions.

VOCATIONAL SUPPORT

Some individuals with mild intellectual disabilities can be successful in competitiveemployment with little or no support in job settings. However, many individuals withmild intellectual disabilities,especially those whose academic,adaptive,and social/be-havioral skills are most severely delayed, will probably have difficulty meeting the de-mands of a job setting and will require support. For example, individuals with mildintellectual disabilities may need assistance on jobs that require reading or mathe-matics skills. A job coach can work with the individual and employer to ensure thatsupports are in place so that these issues are addressed.

Another issue that is important to address in job settings that employ individualswith more severe delays is the training of co-workers. Job settings for persons withdisabilities are more successful if co-workers understand how disabilities affect jobperformance. Training for co-workers is best achieved in small groups rather than informal training sessions and should include information regarding the specific sup-ports needed by an individual rather than more general information regarding dis-abilities (Westling & Fox, 2004).

SUPPORT IN HIGHER EDUCATION

While the majority of high school graduates go on to some form of postsecondary ed-ucation, higher education opportunities are very limited for students with more per-vasive developmental delays, such as students with mild intellectual disabilities.Recently this has begun to change,and several states have developed dual enrollmentprograms in community colleges (i.e., students enroll in the community college whilestill in high school) for students with intellectual disabilities and other developmentaldisabilities (Hart,Mele-McCarthy,Pasternack, Zimbrich,& Parker,2004;Pearman et al.,2004; Zafft et al., 2004). Most of these programs provide some form of life-skills train-ing and community-based employment training.Many of the programs also emphasizeeducating students with disabilities with typical peers.

Student-led IEP meetings canincrease a student’s self-advocacyand skills for self-determination.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4




For example,the College Career Connection (CCC) was designed to assist personswith intellectual disabilities and autism to choose, gain admission, and successfullycomplete an inclusive postsecondary experience in a local community college (Zafftet al.,2004).Practices included the use of a student-centered approach to identify stu-dent strengths and preferences and the development of an interagency planning teamthat worked with the student to develop individualized services and supports. TheCCC model was based on the following guiding principles:

1. The vision of the student set the direction and controlled decision making.2. Options explored for the student were inclusive and occurred in settings with a

natural proportion of persons with disabilities.3. Options did not include any special programs or specially designated, segregated

classes.4. Supports based on individual student needs were developed and were not “one

size fits all.”5. Collaboration was a necessary component for a successful program.

Evaluation of this model for the adults with intellectual disabilities who com-pleted the postsecondary experience revealed that they were more likely to gain com-petitive employment and were less likely to need ongoing supports as they movedinto employment than were peers who did not complete such a program.In addition,Zafft and colleagues (2004) note that the postsecondary experience resulted in posi-tive perceptions and raised the expectations of parents, teachers,and prospective em-ployers regarding the individual who had “been to college.” While additional researchis needed to better understand how postsecondary programs may be used to improveoutcomes for persons with intellectual disabilities, it is clear that such programs havethe potential to offer persons with intellectual disabilities many opportunities to im-prove their lives with respect to employment and social involvement in the commu-nity that have not been available in the past.

PREVAILING ISSUES, CONTROVERSIES, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR THE TEACHER

Great progress has been made in the past 30 to 40 years in addressing the educa-tional needs of students with LD and mild intellectual disabilities. While there isgeneral agreement in the professional literature regarding educational interven-tions for these students, several areas of controversy remain regarding who shouldbe identified with mild intellectual disabilities, what term should be used to labelthese students, and how persons with intellectual disabilities are treated in schoolsand society.

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT THE OVERIDENTIFICATION OF AFRICAN AMERICANSTUDENTS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES?

As we have noted, a disproportionate number of African American students are iden-tified with intellectual disabilities (see Table 8.2).Specifically,more than twice as manyAfrican American students are identified with intellectual disabilities as would be ex-pected based on the number of African American students in the school-age popula-tion.For several reasons,professionals have viewed this overrepresentation of AfricanAmerican students in the intellectual disability category as a problem.

First, the intellectual disability label is generally viewed as highly stigmatizing,while some other special education labels are much less stigmatizing (e.g., LD). Sec-ond, students who are identified with intellectual disabilities are most often providedwith special education services in a highly segregated,separate setting with other stu-dents who are identified with intellectual disabilities (Skiba,Poloni-Staudinger,Gallini,Simmons,& Feggins-Azziz,2006; Williamson et al., 2006). Third, the highly segregatedsettings in which students with intellectual disabilities are educated are viewed by

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




many as ineffective and inappropriate for meeting students’ needs (Freeman & Alkin,2000; Williamson et al., 2006). Finally, in some schools or districts, disproportionaterepresentation may result in racial segregation in separate special education classes(Skiba et al., 2006; Zhang & Katsiyannis, 2002).

Two primary reasons are often cited for the disproportionate representation ofAfrican American students in the intellectual disability category. First, African Ameri-can students are more likely to come from very poor or low-income homes (Zhang &Katsiyannis, 2002). The effects of poverty on student achievement are well docu-mented (Hosp & Reschly, 2004) and are presumed to result from associated factorssuch as increased risk for homelessness, inadequate parenting skills, parental sub-stance abuse,child abuse or neglect, limited health care,and lack of early interventionservices (Beirne-Smith et al., 2006).

Cultural difference is also often cited as a factor contributing to the overrepre-sentation of African American students in the intellectual disability category, as it hasbeen suggested that there is an African American behavioral style (Hosp & Reschly,2004). Thus,a conflict is often created between the teacher’s expectations for studentbehavior and those of her African American students. This difference is exacerbatedby the fact that most teachers are European American and female,and there is a short-age of teachers from non–European American backgrounds,especially African Amer-ican teachers (Tyler, Yzquierdo, Lopez-Reyna, & Flippin, 2004). (We address this“cultural mismatch” in detail in Chapter 3.)

To some degree, this overrepresentation has been addressed by identifying fewerstudents with intellectual disabilities (Beirne-Smith et al., 2006) and instead identify-ing increasing numbers of African American students using the less stigmatizing LDlabel. However, in spite of this progress, the overrepresentation of African Americanstudents in the intellectual disabilities category persists. To address this concern, sev-eral actions are needed:

• Prevention of disabilities by providing improved health care and high-qualityearly education programs

• Early intervention in school settings to address the needs of students who are atrisk for developing academic problems (which may be addressed, to somedegree, by the response-to-intervention (RTI) approach to student identificationdescribed in Chapter 6)

• Improved initial preparation and ongoing professional development for teachersrelated to addressing the needs of students from diverse backgrounds (e.g.,racial, language, high poverty).

WHAT TERM SHOULD BE USED TO LABEL PERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES/MENTAL RETARDATION, OR SHOULD WE FOCUS ON HOW WE VALUE AND TREATPERSONS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES?

We struggled in writing this chapter with what we would call people who are cur-rently generally labeled with the term mental retardation. As we noted, mental re-tardation is the most stigmatizing of disability labels. In addition, the negativecolloquial use of the term (“He’s a retard” or “That’s retarded”) has become so wide-spread that it seems likely that the term will soon be discarded for a more neutral butdescriptive one. Intellectual disability seems to be emerging as a preferred term forlabeling persons rather than using the term mental retardation (Beirne-Smith et al.,2006). The American Association on Mental Retardation (AAMR) recently affirmedthis trend when it changed its name to the American Association on Intellectual andDevelopmental Disabilities. However, at this point, mental retardation remains theterm that appears in federal legislation, is used in most states,and is used by most pro-fessionals and the general public.

Obviously, changing terminology in response to identified needs and stigma at-tached to labels is important. This has occurred several times over the years. Persons

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4



To link to websites thatsupport and extend thecontent of this chapter, goto the Web Links module

in Chapter 8 of the CompanionWebsite at www.prenhall.com/rosenberg.


Reflective Exercise #10Based on what you have read inthis chapter, what role can youplay and what activities can youengage in as a teacher to increasethe value of persons withintellectual disabilities in yourclassroom? In your school? In thecommunity?

with intellectual disabilities were originally labeled using terms such as feebleminded,moron, imbecile, and idiot. Later, the term mental deficiency was used, while theterm mental retardation was adopted in 1961 by the AAMR (Heber, 1961). Thesechanges at least temporarily reduced the stigma associated with persons who were solabeled. However, more needs to be done.

Bogdan and Biklen (1977) first used the term handicapism to describe “assump-tions and practices that promote the differential and unequal treatment of people be-cause of apparent or assumed physical, mental, or behavioral differences” (p. 59).These authors contended that people with disabilities were subjected to stereotyping,much as members of some racial groups were subjected to racism or women weresubjected to sexism. Beirne-Smith and colleagues (2006) have changed this term todisablism and suggest that it is comprised of three elements—stereotyping,prejudice,and discrimination. They go on to note that “Many people view adults with retarda-tion as childlike (stereotyping), which leads to the belief that they are incapable ofmaking decisions for themselves (prejudice), which in turn results in others makingdecisions for them without their input or knowledge (discrimination)” (pp. 47–48).

Discrimination against persons with disabilities, particularly those with intellec-tual disabilities or mental retardation, seems to emerge from the low value we placeon these persons. Wolfensberger (1985) contends that there is a strong connection be-tween how we perceive a person and how that person is treated.He identified sociallydevalued groups in society based on the extent to which they were treated with pity,viewed as a menace, ridiculed, perceived as childlike, and so forth. Wolfensbergerfound that only persons with mental illness were more negatively perceived than per-sons with intellectual disability or mental retardation.

What should be done about disablism and the low value that is placed on personswith intellectual disabilities in society? This will remain a controversial issue in theforeseeable future.However,progress is being made as more students with intellectualdisabilities are being included with typical peers for much of the school day,have jobsin competitive work settings,and interact with persons without disabilities in typical,day-to-day settings (e.g., health clubs, restaurants, grocery stores). This contact willserve to dispel many of the misconceptions regarding persons with intellectual dis-abilities and should increase the value many persons place on these individuals. Fur-thermore, the emphasis that has been placed on self-determination for persons withintellectual disabilities and other disabilities will serve to better prepare these indi-viduals for self-advocating and improving their status in society. Obviously, you as ateacher play a key role in ensuring that persons with intellectual disabilities are val-ued and are not the victims of discrimination in schools.

SUMMARY

Students with mild intellectual disabilities tend to developacademic and social skills at a slower rate than their peersdo. This developmental lag tends to get larger over timeand continues into adulthood.

Definition and Classification Criteria

• Two major definitions are used for intellectualdisabilities, one from IDEA 2004 and the other fromthe American Association on Intellectual andDevelopmental Disabilities (formerly AAMR).

• The primary criteria used to identify students withmild intellectual disabilities are significantlysubaverage functioning in general intellectual

development and adaptive behavior (includingpractical and social skills that students use in theireveryday lives).

• The American Association on Intellectual andDevelopmental Disabilities has suggested that alevels-of-support approach be used to identifystudents with intellectual disabilities, but thisapproach has not been widely accepted.

Characteristics of Students

• The primary characteristics of students with mildintellectual disabilities relate to significant delays in

ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4




the development of academic, cognitive, and socialskills.

• All academic skills tend to be delayed. Cognitive skillsthat are delayed include attention, memory, andgeneralization skills.

• Delays in developing social skills seem to be related,at least to some degree, to delays in developinglanguage and cognitive skills.

• Students with mild intellectual disabilities havedifficulty interacting with peers and may need to bedirectly taught social skills.

Prevalence, Course, and Causes

• Approximately 0.71% of the school-age population,or one student in every six general educationclassrooms, is identified with a mild intellectualdisability.

• African American students tend to be significantlyoverrepresented in the mild intellectual disabilitiescategory.

• Mild intellectual disabilities persist through schooland into adulthood. While some adults with mildintellectual disabilities struggle greatly, others arerelatively successful and generally satisfied withtheir lives.

• While we can identify the cause of severe intellectualdisabilities for many students, we do not know thecause of mild intellectual disabilities for moststudents.

• A major risk factor for mild intellectual disabilities isgrowing up in a home where several risk factorsexist, such as limited financial resources, loweducation level of parents, and a high level of stressin the environment.

Identification and Assessment

• Several changes have occurred in the primary criteriaused to identify students with intellectual disabilities(i.e., intellectual functioning and adaptive behavior)over the past several decades.

• Changes in the identification criteria have occurredprimarily because of the overrepresentation ofcertain non–European American groups in thiscategory as well as the stigma that is associated withthis category of disability.

• An IQ score of 70 or below and a similar score on ameasure of adaptive behavior are used to identifystudents with mild intellectual disabilities.

Educational Practices

• Students with mild intellectual disabilities benefitfrom being taught using direct, explicit, teacher-directed instruction.

• An instructional approach that has proven to behighly effective for students with mild intellectualdisabilities is Direct Instruction (DI).

• Peer tutoring and the use of technology to supportinstruction are also effective instructionalapproaches for these students.

Prevailing Issues

• While educational opportunities for students withmild intellectual disabilities have improvedsignificantly since the passage of IDEA in 1975,controversial issues remain, including theoverrepresentation of African American students inthis category, the labels that are used for this category,and how persons with intellectual disabilities arevalued and treated by the general public.

ADDRESSING THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS

Council for Exceptional Children Knowledge Standards addressed in the chapter:

CC1K5, EC1K1, ED1K2, CC2K1, CC2K2, CC2K3, CC2K5, CC2K6, EC2K3, EC2K4,CC3K1, CC3K2, CC5K3, CC6K1, CC6K4, CC7K4, CC8K1, CC8K2,

Appendix B: CEC Knowledge and Skill Standards Common Core has a full listing ofthe standards referenced here.

ISB

N: 0-536-08747-4



ISB

N: 0

-536

-087

47-4



mild intellectual disabilitiesmyresource.phoenix.edu/secure/resource/aed222r3/... · module on the...

Documents