Ecobehavioral Analysis of the Experiences of Students With Complex Support Needs in Different Classroom Types

Abstract

Students with complex support needs frequently experience restrictive educational placements such as self-contained and separate school classrooms. Given the need to support students with complex support needs to experience positive outcomes and make progress in the general education curriculum, there is a need to investigate the characteristics of the classroom contexts in which they are learning. The purpose of this study was to use ecobehavioral assessment observation methods to investigate how student behaviors, educator behaviors, and classroom ecology vary across general education, resource, self-contained, and separate school classrooms. We observed 116 students with complex support needs across the United States, and results indicated that contextual features of resource, self-contained, and separate school classrooms do not offer superior levels of instruction or supports for students with complex support needs as compared with general education classrooms. We were more likely to observe no one interacting with the focus student, no instruction, and the presence of distractions in self-contained and separate school classrooms compared with general education classrooms. Implications for policy, research, and practice are presented.

Disrupting the System: How Social Systems Perpetuate Educational Segregation of Students with Extensive Support Needs

“…For example, the authors found that in resource, self-contained, and separate school classrooms educators were significantly more likely to be focused on other adults, rather than being focused on students, when compared to educators in general education classrooms. Further, educators in self-contained and separate school classrooms were significantly more likely to be providing no instruction to students, compared to educators in general education classrooms (Zagona et al, 2022). Gee et al (2020) analyzed the instructional progress and outcomes of 15 pairs of students with ESN in one district who were matched on 12 characteristics (e.g., disability labels, eligibility for alternate assessment, communication, literacy, and numeracy levels) by comparing their first and most recent individualized education programs (IEPs).…”

“…For instance, Mayton et al (2014) found that many district personnel assume that students with ESN can only receive individualized instruction in segregated environments. During observations of 116 students with ESN across the United States, Zagona et al (2022) did not find evidence of practices meant to address students' needs (e.g., greater access to individualized supports) that commonly are used as a rationale for maintaining a student with disabilities in segregated placements. For example, the authors found that in resource, self-contained, and separate school classrooms educators were significantly more likely to be focused on other adults, rather than being focused on students, when compared to educators in general education classrooms.…”

Socioeconomic disparities in education placement for children of primary school age with autism spectrum disorder in China

“…The mere physical integration of autistic children in mainstream classrooms is widely considered insufficient for a successful educational experience (25,48), but that does not mean that the solution is to place them in a segregated placement. It must move toward ensuring students with ASD are served in inclusive, general education classrooms, where they can access academic instruction, meaningful interactions and relationships with peers, and supplementary aids and services (49)(50)(51).…”

Using AI to Support Special Education Teacher Workload

“…SETs, particularly those that work with students with extensive learning, behavioral, and social-emotional needs (often in a more restricted self-contained setting), spend a disproportionate amount of their time with out-of-classroom demands (Zagona et al, 2022). Kurth and colleagues (2016) reported that these SETs spend up to 47% of their time engaged in non-teaching tasks and are two to three times more likely to be focused on non-teaching tasks during instructional time than teachers in general education settings (Zagona et al, 2022). These non-teaching and non-student-facing responsibilities include IEP management (e.g., writing present levels, collaborating with team members, progress monitoring, and updating progress), parent communication, and lesson planning.…”