This study was designed to investigate the role of video in the growth of written reflective responses between two groups of preservice teachers. Fifty-four students enrolled in four sections of a required special education course that focused on family-professional collaboration participated. Subjects included candidates seeking general and special education certification and a teaching endorsement in special education. Participants were divided into two groups. Group 1 students participated in three role-plays, reflected on their actions, and then wrote reflections after each role-play. Group 2 students participated in three role-plays that were recorded with digital videotape and placed on a streaming server. Students watched each video, reflected on their actions, and then wrote reflections. A developmental coding rubric was used to score students' written reflections following the role-plays. Analysis of the written responses and follow-up focus discussions demonstrated an increase in reflective thought in the written reflections of the students who used video. Findings also showed positive attitudes about the use of technology for personal reflection. Implications for future practice and the use of digital video technologies are discussed.

Poor math performance is a major concern leading the current educational reform agenda. Many educational math critics are claiming a math crisis. Researchers and school personnel are trying to resolve this crisis. Some are looking at curriculum-based evaluation (CBE) as a process for solving this problem. CBE and curriculum-based measurement (CBM) are widely accepted validated tools for effectively yielding information necessary to make sound educational decisions. In this article, best practices in CBE and CBM are described as they pertain to math instruction. Specific steps of the CBE process are described as they pertain to math.

This study investigated 51 instructional methods specifically targeted as best practices for the education of students with severe disabilities. A survey was mailed to 120 project directors, professors, administrators, and researchers who provided direct and/or indirect services to individuals with severe disabilities. A total of 53 surveys (44%) was returned and 51 were included in the final data analysis. Participants judged each method on familiarity, soundness, and appropriateness for implementation in general education settings. Findings indicated that all methods were judged both sound and appropriate by the majority of participants. Twelve methods, however, were considered inappropriate in academic settings by 20% or more of the respondents, whereas one method was considered inappropriate by at least 20% of participants in other regular education settings. Implications for practice, research, and preservice teacher preparation programs are discussed.

No abstract