Case study methodology was used in combination with a participatory action research (PAR) approach to examine the process of redesigning one high school science course to incorporate the principles of Universal Design for Learning (UDL) and to promote access to the general curriculum. The participants included one general education teacher and two special education teachers. Two sections of the course were targeted for redesign. Each section included students with disabilities (mild, severe) and without disabilities. The redesign process involved changes to the course in the areas of curriculum, instructional delivery/organization of learning environments, student participation, materials, and assessment. Data were collected across one school year through documents, interviews, and focus groups and were analyzed qualitatively using a constant comparative method. DESCRIPTORS: participatory action research, universal design for learning, general education curriculum Amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (1997, 2004) require schools to provide services that enable all students with disabilities to participate and progress in the general curriculum. The law does not define where access should be provided or who is qualified to provide access (Dymond & Orelove, 2001). One potential option is for students to obtain access in the high school general education classroom. Dymond, Renzaglia, Gilson, and Slagor (in press) found that 96% of the general and special educators at one high school believed students with significant cognitive disabilities (SCD) should access the general curriculum in general education classrooms whereas only 56% believed access should occur in a special education

Service learning is a form of pedagogy that enables students to address the school curriculum through service to the community. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted to define the key elements of high school service learning programs and describe empirical investigations focused on the elements. Twelve elements emerged from 62 articles. The elements most frequently discussed were (a) student participation, (b) action, and (c) reflection. Least mentioned were (a) student assessment and program evaluation and (b) celebration. This study suggests the need for a consistent definition of service learning, investigation of methods for including students with disabilities and students at risk, validation of the elements with practitioners, and empirical research to examine the relationship between elements and student outcomes.

A statewide survey of coordinators of inclusive high school service-learning programs was conducted to validate elements, methods, and barriers to including students with and without disabilities in service-learning. Surveys were mailed to 655 service-learning coordinators; 190 (29%) returned a completed survey. Findings support the validity of the elements and methods. Respondents consistently rated the elements and methods higher in importance than actual use. Few barriers were identified although some individual respondents reported extreme barriers. Lack of money and time to co-plan were the greatest barriers shared across respondents. School size, presence of a service-learning graduation requirement, and inclusion of students with intellectual disability did not account for significant differences among service-learning coordinators.

The researchers described in this case study how Service Learning was incorporated within the context of an early childhood program where the teachers used the Project Approach. The Service Learning project was embedded in an investigation about water and was designed to help tsunami victims in Asia. Participants included two teachers and 12 children age five to seven in a kindergarten/first grade classroom. Data were collected over one month through observations and interviews. This investigation revealed common features shared by Service Learning and the Project Approach. Findings illustrated how the Project Approach facilitated the implementation of Service Learning.

No abstract