Creating Socially Supportive Environments for Fully Included Students who Experience Multiple Disabilities

Abstract

This investigation analyzed the effectiveness of an intervention designed to facilitate the social inclusion of three students who experienced significant physical and intellectual challenges and, for two students, dual sensory impairments. The children were full-time members of two Jirst-grade and one fourth-grade classrooms. The individualized intervention package included three major components: (a) provision of ongoing information to classmates about the communication system, adaptive equipment, and educational activities of the students with disabilities in the context of naturally occurring interactions between the students and their classmates or during "club" meetings;(b) identification and utilization of various media that could serve as the basis for interactive exchanges between the focus students and others; and (c) ongoing facilitation by educational staff of social exchanges between students and their classmates through the establishment of a "buddy" system, arrangement of interactive activities across the day, and prompting and interpreting communicative exchanges when necessary. All aspects of intervention were implemented by educational staff including general education and inclusion support teachers, paraprofessionals, and related service personnel. A n analysis of the interactive patterns between the focus students and others indicated that when the intervention was fully implemented, there were increases in (a) reciprocal interactions with peers, (b) focus student-initiated interactions, and (c) focus student-initiated interactions that were comments (with no increase in requests or pro-53 tests). In addition, there were decreases in assistive interactions with paraprofessionals. The social validity of changes in interactive patterns between the focus students and their classmates was established through interviews with the students' friends and their teachers.

Communication Partner Instruction in AAC: Present Practices and Future Directions

“…Some authors have included instruction that has targeted only communication partner interaction skills (e.g., Carter & Maxwell, 1998;Light, Dattilo, English, Gutierrez, and Hartz, 1992). Many other authors have also included instruction for communication partners about (a) how to operate specific AAC systems (e.g., Bruno & Dribbon, 1998;Culp & Carlisle, 1988); and (b) position AAC systems in the physical environment or conduct activities involving communication in natural environments (e.g., Basil & Soro-Camats, 1996;Bornman & Alant, 1999;Hunt, Alwell, Farron-Davis, & Goetz, 1996). Despite these differences in instructional program content, the communication partner intervention literature has been relatively consistent in identifying effective interaction skill targets.…”

With parents at the table: creating supports for children with disabilities in general education classrooms

“…Each support plan included a listing of educational supports (e.g., adapted materials and modified instructional content, performance requirements, and teaching methods) (Falvey et al 2000;McDonnell et al 2002;Ryndak and Ward 2003) and social and behavioural supports (e.g., European Journal of Special Needs Education 341 social facilitation by adults, partner systems, interactive materials and media, and positive behaviour supports) (Hunt et al 1996;Turnbull, Pereira, and BlueBanning 2000;Horner et al 2006). Examples of educational and social supports developed and implemented for each of the participating students are presented in Table 1.…”

Accessibilité, politiques inclusives et droit à l’éducation : considérations conceptuelles et méthodologiques

“…Les données recueillies peuvent alors mettre à jour les discriminations à l'oeuvre ainsi que leur évolution, comme le révèlent par exemple les statistiques relatives aux types de scolarisation ou celles montrant que les jeunes adultes américains présen-tant un BEP sont proportionnellement moins nombreux que l'ensemble de la population à accéder à des cursus universitaires longs (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, & Levine, 2005). Elles peuvent également s'interroger sur les apports du partage d'activité et d'expérience qu'autorisent l'accès aux formes ordinaires de scolarité, notamment en termes d'aptitudes langagières et relationnelles, d'inscription dans un réseau social, d'engagement dans la vie de la classe, de représentations de la déficience, d'inscription professionnelle, d'accès aux loisirs, etc., (Foreman, Arthur-Kelly, Pascoe, & King, 2004 ;Hunt, Alwell, Farron-Davis, & Goetz, 1996 ;Kennedy, Cushing, & Itkonen, 1997 ;Farrel, 2000 ;Wagner et al, 2003a).…”