Jennifer Fager
February 1998
By Request...
Published twice yearly for NWREL member institutions
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
101 S.W. Main Street, Suite 500
Portland, OR 97204
Telephone (503) 275-9500
Mr. Jones, a second-year teacher of fourth-graders, sits in his classroom in August and sighs as he glances at his student information sheet for the coming year. In a class of 27, he learns he will have one autistic child, one with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), three language-minority students, one gifted child, one emotionally troubled student, one hearing-impaired child, and four others identified as learning disabled. Roughly one-third of his students will come from impoverished homes, and several from single-parent homes. More than one-fourth of his students will be minority students.
Part of what attracted him to the teaching profession was the challenge it promised. He had always been aware of the responsibilities, but had not shied away from them. Throughout college and his first year of teaching, he had been regarded as a very good and skillful teacher—a natural. However, this year he is overwhelmed at the thought of taking on this group of diverse learners; so many children with such different backgrounds and unique needs. He wonders how he can possibly offer every one of them a successful learning experience.
Though the above scenario is hypothetical, it is a reality for many teachers across the country. Schools are increasingly faced with classrooms full of students who have more differences than similarities, and teachers are being asked to respond to this diversity in productive ways. The challenge of educating such diverse groups of students will only become greater in the next century (Larke, 1992). It is the foundation of American education to serve all students, yet doing so can be a daunting task for even the most skilled teacher. Knowing what actions to take and options to investigate can become overwhelming in the face of the many demands put on educators on a daily basis.
Discussions of "learning for all" can take many directions. It is the intent of this booklet to explore the concept and what it means for education today. This booklet will not focus upon any one issue related to student differences, such as inclusion, multiculturalism, talented and gifted learners, or learning styles. Rather, the focus is broad, building on the premises that (1) student differences exist and these differences can influence the way they learn, and (2) there are certain measures schools and teachers can take to improve the likelihood that all students will succeed in school. The aim is not to offer foolproof solutions, but to investigate ideas that will help educators examine their own practices and offer strategies for implementation. Examples of eight schools that have targeted a learning-for-all mission are also included.
Serving all students has not always been a priority in American schooling; however, it is routinely emphasized as the way to attain many of today's education goals. Schools weren't originally designed or even expected to meet the needs of all children (Lezotte, 1994). The mission of schools has remained dynamic during the last 150 years. Over time, schools have been seen as agents for transmission of appropriate morals and values, repositories for troublesome street youth, and instruments used to guide students into the appropriate career molds based upon their social classes. Our feelings about schools and how they should serve students have been in a constant state of evolution (Nasaw, 1979). Even up to the middle part of this century, class, race, national origin, and gender were considered determinants of a child's education eligibility.
Slowly, with legislation that focused attention upon compulsory schooling and child labor, attitudes toward schools and the role they play in the lives of all children began to broaden. In recent years, legislation such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (reauthorized in 1994 as the Improving America's Schools Act), Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act which was reauthorized in June of 1997, and the Goals 2000: Educate America Act of 1994, all speak to the nation's growing commitment to educate all of its diverse learners. Other efforts, such as the national Blue Ribbon Schools recognition program and emphasis on high standards for all students, provide further evidence of this commitment.
Today, most Americans acknowledge the need for a high-quality education for every child. The recognition of this need is only a small step toward carrying out a learning-for-all mission however. Though the public is generally in strong support of high standards and a quality education for all students, there is little consensus as to how schools should help students to high levels of achievement (McDonnell, McLaughlin, & Morison, 1997).
How do we as a society successfully educate all students whose backgrounds and abilities vary so widely? Children differ by gender, culture, ethnicity, physical ability, mental ability, learning style, socioeconomic status, domestic arrangement, native language, and mobility. All children need to be continually challenged. How can teachers tailor instruction to suit many learning styles? How can they create a climate of respect and tolerance when such concepts may not be reinforced at home? In short, how can teachers successfully serve all students? Without simple answers, we turn our thoughts toward an exploration of ideas, suggestions, and options.
To say that there are benefits and advantages associated with strong efforts to serve all students seems to be a statement of the obvious, yet it is important to remember why the concept is so pertinent for today's schools. The following list attempts to detail some of the general advantages commonly associated with a learning-for-all mission.
Emphasis on serving all students will:
If asked, most educators would agree that serving all students is the basis of everything they do. But to truly make it a priority takes an active commitment and ongoing effort from the entire school community. It cannot be just the principal's vision, or the vision of a select group of teachers—it must be agreed upon and reinforced by everyone at the school. Though there is no quick route to success for effectively serving all students, the following list suggests topics for implementation considerations relevant to any school environment.
Preparation. Careful planning and preparation will make transitions go more smoothly and efficiently.
School Profile. The development of a school profile can provide educators with a picture of how well the school serves all students. Profiles give schools direction and guidance as to what steps need to be taken to improve services to learners. Though much can be said about the technical aspects of creating a profile, some basic things to keep in mind when putting one together are:
Steps to consider in conducting a school profile are (Kansas State Board of Education, 1992; Anderson & Gabriel, 1987):
Goals. Setting school goals is an effective way of guiding the efforts of staff toward the shared vision. Goals should:
Family Involvement. Open relations among the school, parents, and others in the community are essential in any learning-for-all mission. Enlisting family support is key to the success or failure of the effort to:
Outside Support. Gaining the support of the outside community including businesses, social service agencies, and policymakers is crucial to the effort. Partnerships will enhance the school's service network and make serving all students a community mission. Keep in mind, however, that if outside support systems are shaky, start small (Williamson, 1994; Golomb & Hammeken, 1996). Some suggestions for partnerships are:
School Leadership. The principal's role in helping to bring about a new way of serving students is of utmost importance. The school principal should:
Professional Development. Professional development for each teacher is another key component to every successful learning-for-all mission. For student learning to improve, teacher learning must also improve (Foxwell, 1993). The following list outlines recommendations for effective professional development.
Curriculum. A well-organized curriculum that has continuity from grade to grade increases the likelihood that students will experience academic success. In making curricular decisions, schools can keep in mind the following:
School Climate. A positive school climate can contribute greatly to the success of all students. When students feel good about their school and what it represents, it will be reflected in the work they do each day. Of the many things schools can choose to do to improve climate, some suggestions are:
Service Coordination. Coordinate the various services the school provides to children so that teachers, both regular and special education, are in constant communication with each other and are able to collaborate to best serve each student (Hilliard, 1991).
Monitor Progress. Regular monitoring of the school's progress toward its goals will reveal areas in which the school has been successful and areas that need to be given more attention. This can be done by (Cotton, 1995):
The demands of teaching in today's classrooms cannot be overstated. To assist teachers in finding ideas that will help them maximize learning for all students, this section offers practical suggestions for daily instruction.
Adaptations. Under varying circumstances, all learners at one time or another benefit from adaptations in the normal learning situation. Such adaptations may be simple or complex, one-time or ongoing. They may involve the coordination of several educators, or just the teamwork of teacher and student. (Specific ideas for adaptations are given in the following section.)
Expectations. Expectations have profound affects on education outcomes for students of all levels and backgrounds.
Sensitivity. With such a wide array of student needs represented in any classroom, it can be challenging to be sensitive to each and every one of them. Remember the following:
Learning Influences. Acknowledge and understand how learning styles, cultural differences, intellectual ability, native language, and socioeconomic status are among the many factors that can affect the way in which students learn and the rate at which they learn (CCSSO, 1990b). Remember that it is the teacher who ultimately plays the role of mediating and transforming curriculum when representing learning content to students (Williamson, 1994).
Professional Development. Just as the school needs to be committed to the professional development of its staff, the teachers also need to take responsibility for furthering their knowledge and expertise. Their buy-in is critical to a successful effort. In addition to participating in school- or districtwide inservice activities, teachers can work in pairs or small groups on an ongoing basis to enhance their individual instructional techniques and classroom strategies.
Instructional Styles. Adjust instructional styles and classroom activities to meet different student needs. A variety of factors can affect the way in which students learn, including their cultural background, socioeconomic status, native language, intellectual capability, learning style preference, or physical disability (Heron & Jorgensen, 1995; Larke, 1992; Hilliard, 1991; Huber & Pewewardy, 1990; CCSSO, 1990b). Vary instructional approaches; try to appeal to a wide variety of learning styles and preferences. Teachers need to be flexible, adaptive, and able to diversify in many ways (Wilberg, 1995; Heron & Jorgensen, 1995; Barry, 1992; Udvari-Solner, 1992).
The Classroom. When contemplating classroom design and environment consider the following:
As previously noted, there are many times when an individual learner or group of learners can benefit from slight to detailed adaptations or modifications to the everyday learning structure. Many times, teachers make these changes without even realizing it. Sometimes, the changes require the intricate cooperation of a team of teachers, administrators, specialists, and parents. There also will be times when certain adaptations are not feasible for particular situations. In such cases, schools must do what is possible and reasonable, including the exploration of alternatives, to serve student needs. The following list details different instructional variables that can be manipulated to suit individual learner needs.
Regardless of what adaptations may be used and what brought them about, a team approach and shared responsibility are crucial. Team members can include the special and regular education teacher, the principal, parents, tutors, school psychologists, and other parties who are relevant to a child's education (Udvari-Solner, 1992; Golomb & Hammeken, 1996).
Successfully implementing a learning-for-all mission means understanding and preparing for potential problems that may arise. Some recommendations from the literature include:
Much can be said about serving all students. Volumes can be written. Discussions can be endless, but one thing is certain: As society continues to diversify, so do students. Though responding to these changes can seem overwhelming at best and downright frustrating at worst, they are nonetheless reality—a reality educators see everyday.
There is no quick formula for schools to use as they contemplate what can be done to offer all students a top-notch education. What works in one school may flop in another. Many variables— some controllable, some uncontrollable—contribute to the success of any school improvement effort. In the end, it is up to each school to determine what the best route is.
On the following pages are descriptions of eight school or district programs that exemplify strong efforts to serve all students. Though the programs are all different in focus and scope, they all share one common, unwritten goal: "Go the extra mile to serve each and every student." The school programs described are located in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington. All have identified a specific need in their school or district and have responded to the need by creating or adopting programs that target learning for all. They are just a few of the many excellent programs found in the region and throughout the country. Some have been in existence for several years, while others are fledgling efforts. Included for each site is location and contact information, observed outcomes as a result of the program, a description of the program, and tips directly from these educators for others looking to implement similar changes in their schools.
With the realization that many students in the Chugach School District seemed to be having literacy-related difficulties, the district took an aggressive approach toward the instruction of reading. (An assessment indicated that 98 percent of students in the district were not reading at grade level.) A summer 1996 inservice that was attended by all K-12 teachers focused on reading instruction strategies that promote phonemic awareness as well as two other vital components in the reading process—fluency and comprehension. In addition, the entire district adopted the Multisensory Approach to Reading (MTA), based on the Orton-Gillingham method of teaching reading ( a method based on phonetics but emphasizing auditory, visual, and kinesthetic learning styles).
In the fall of 1996, armed with new instructional awareness and this new approach to teaching literacy, district educators began to address the decoding skills that were deficient in a majority of the students. Using MTA as a part of each classroom has provided instruction on the structure of the English language in an organized and scientific approach. It is designed to enable students to master and retain material presented through a process of discovery, learning, introduction, review, practice, and evaluation.
All K-12 students participate in the program regardless of their reading level. At the beginning of the school year, all students are assessed in their reading skills, then a student reading profile is made for each student. This provides every student with a plan of action for reading improvement. Many secondary teachers are especially excited about the program because they have strategies to intervene when they see students struggling. At the high school level, the information is presented in a class called linguistics. The etymology of words, dictionary skills, spelling, promoting a love of the English language, and learning from those who are language experts are all part of the plan for developing proficiency in receptive as well as expressive language. Eventually, the district hopes that the program will only be needed in the elementary grades.
There is a great deal of accountability involved in this reading plan due to various state and district standards and assessments. The presentation of the material may look different in each class, but the process remains the same. Instruction begins with focus on the structure of the language and gradually moves toward reading. The program provides students with immediate assessment, a predictable sequence, and ties in writing, reading, and spelling. Students like it because teachers promise them that they will never be asked to do anything they haven't been taught.
For further information about adapting the MTA program to your school, please contact:
Edmar Ed. Associates Edith Hogan or Margaret Smith, Coauthors of MTA, P.O. Box 2, Forney, TX 75126
Jamie Williams, Chairman, Academic Language Therapist Program, Southern Methodist University, 3328 Stanford, Dallas, TX 99508
Keys to SuccessSeveral years ago the Lewiston School District looked at compliance with "least restrictive environment" legislation which stemmed from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This was done in a effort to ensure that the district was serving kids in the environment best suited to meet their individual needs. Teachers were asked to examine their practices of serving students through pull-out programs. They were then asked to begin eliminating the use of such programs and to instead serve all students as much as possible in regular classrooms. From this evolved the district's policy of inclusion.
At McGhee, all students, regardless of their mental or physical ability, spend their days in a mainstream classroom. They are removed only if they are in need of services that don't lend themselves to a regular classroom setting, such as physical therapy, speech therapy, diapering, or tube feeding.
Since the implementation of this policy, evidence of inclusion is everywhere. With a glimpse into any of McGhee's 15 classrooms, a visitor may see a child with a severe disability, such as cerebral palsy, bound to a wheel chair yet participating to the fullest in all classroom events. The person would also see other students interacting naturally with the disabled student. What the person might not see is the way students feel about their disabled peers—to them disabilities aren't really an issue. In most of their minds, a disabled kid is just another kid, who maybe has to tackle learning a little differently than most.
At McGhee, inclusion is a way of life. Whether students have severe physical disabilities, attention deficit disorder, are autistic, dyslexic, or suffer from any other host of learning limitations, they are incorporated fully into school. While this is no easy feat for the educators at McGhee, they feel that it is the best way to effectively provide all students with a quality education. Paula Grillo, the special education teacher who coordinates the inclusion program at McGhee, refers to the process as "organized chaos." However, she also asserts that with the support of teachers, administrators, and the school board, the program is rewarding for teachers and students.
Coordination between the principal, regular teachers, special education teachers, and special education assistants is key to the success of inclusion at McGhee. The district has provided its educators with numerous inservice activities that have helped them make the transition to inclusion.
The main goal behind the inclusion policy at McGhee is to treat all students with dignity. Inclusion helps students to understand that everyone must be respected and welcomed into the school and community. Inclusion continually presents students, teachers, and administrators at McGhee with many opportunities for reaching out and helping other people. The practice has helped to strengthen the entire school as kids have learned to help each other with real problems.
Keys to SuccessThe primary goal of the Family Growth Program in the Great Falls School District is to promote the academic achievement of all students. They believe the best predictor of success in school and life is a family's ability to provide their children with the ways and means to learn and lead a successful life. By providing the family with parenting information, a resource room in the school, and referral assistance to needed community resources, the district feels that children will have more opportunities to get the support they need to succeed in school. The Family Growth Program serves families in Title I schoolwide programs in schools with a poverty rating of 50-85 percent based on the number of students qualified to receive free or reduced lunch.
The district holds the philosophy that they enroll entire families, not just individual students. To fully serve each family, they strive to avoid judging families, and instead work with them to make each child's education the best it can be. With this in mind the Family Growth Program was started. The three components of the program are:
The Family Growth Program could not succeed if were not for the parent aides who run it. They coordinate, and often teach the parenting classes, staff the family resource center; and conduct all of the home visits. The aides also coordinate much of their work with the classroom teachers. Some are individuals who have been in the same situations as the families they assist. Though they do not necessarily hold any advanced degrees, they are trained by district professionals and receive continual inservice training and development. The program also has a parent involvement coordinator and a supervisor who monitors it. Support for the program comes mainly from Title I funds that are matched by the district.
Keys to SuccessAs a schoolwide Title I site, Washington Elementary School in Billings, Montana, serves a variety of students with a variety of needs. The philosophy at Washington Elementary is, "All children can learn to love to learn through open doors, open classrooms, and open minds." To ensure that this philosophy truly guides the work of everyone there, the school offers a host of extra educational programs that are intended to bolster learning-for-all students. In addition to regular daily education, 15 other educational programs and activities are available to students and their parents. At any one time, most students are involved in several of the school's extra programs. Some programs enlist schoolwide participation, while others are targeted at a specific age group. Below is a listing of the programs and a brief description of each.
Though the above list might seem to be overly ambitious in some schools, it is everyday business at Washington Elementary. The entire faculty is committed to the effort, and the parents and surrounding community have become involved in the school as well.
Keys to SuccessTwelfth grade is not finished for any student at North Salem High School in Salem, Oregon, until they have completed the Senior Project. In addition to state and district graduation requirements, the Senior Project is the capstone experience that allows students to use a vast array of skills they have acquired throughout their education. The project is an extensive, semester-long endeavor that consists of three phases. They are: the research paper, the development of a product or performance that pertains to the research paper, and an oral presentation based on the research paper and the product delivered to a panel of judges and other students. The phases of the project are detailed below.
The Research Paper. The paper provides important background knowledge for the product and presentation phases of the Senior Project.
The Product or Performance. This stage requires students to create some product that applies the knowledge gained during the research stage.
The Presentation. The presentation is the final stage of the Senior Project. It is the culmination not only of a full semester's work, but the final requirement needed to complete 12 years of education.
English teachers at North Salem are charged with preparing students for and guiding them through the Senior Project. They also are responsible for recruiting and training judges who participate in the project. Much of curriculum in 12th grade English is geared toward the Senior Project. Teachers assist students in all aspects of the project. They provide information on effective research writing techniques and library search strategies connect them with experts to guide the work of their products, provide examples of presentations, and listen to them practice their presentations. Because the English teachers are so intensely involved with the seniors and their projects, they do not participate in judging at any phase.
What is especially striking about the Senior Project is its inclusiveness. Regardless of ability level, all students are expected to complete it. The standard is not lowered for anyone. This is not to say that it doesn't take some students longer, or that teachers don't assist some more than others. Staff has arranged translators to convert research papers to English just to ensure the successful completion of a project. Their goal is for every student, not just the majority, to successfully complete all three phases of the project. With the full support of the community, the success rate of the project has been extremely high. In the two years that the Senior Project has been a graduation requirement, only one of 470 students has failed to pass it.
For further information about adopting the Senior Project, contact Carleen Osher or Jane Summers of Far West Edge at 541-770-9483.
Keys to SuccessA theme common in today's popular press and professional journals is the need to increase standards of student performance in America's schools. Mathematics skills in particular are often the focus of attention. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act states that by the year 2000, U.S. students will be first in the world in mathematics and science achievement. At McKay High School in Salem, Oregon, all students are required, with the exception of those with notable disabilities, to complete at least one year of high school algebra in order to graduate.
This effort, known as "Algebra For All," was approved by the school board in April 1996. Beginning this year, all ninth-graders must take algebra. There are three different ways students can take algebra. These include:
Regardless of what algebra class they take, students receive the same math credit. The Salem-Keizer School District, which McKay is part of, requires all students to complete four semesters of math before graduating. The student who chooses not to take math beyond the minimum four semesters will have studied all of the topics of a first-year algebra text prior to graduation, thus making a full-year course in Algebra I the minimum standard.
There are several reasons why McKay has adopted Algebra For All. To begin with, many students were not challenging themselves in math. The school wanted to make algebra the basic math course that all others would be built upon. "Algebra," states McKay Principal Rey Mayoral, "leads to higher-level thinking skills and is a gateway to classes at colleges and universities." It also empowers students to take on more advanced math coursework. McKay educators also felt it important that students take algebra early in their high school career, to avoid putting it off until it becomes too late and to keep themselves open to further challenges.
The key component to the success of Algebra For All is, of course, the teachers and administrators who implement the program. Without their commitment to the program, there is little chance it would work. Teacher inservice was provided through several half days of staff development time to develop scope and sequence, to coordinate the freshman version of the course with science (science teachers joined math teachers), and to go through a formal adoption to select a text.
Keys to SuccessWhen military housing in the Seattle area became available for purchase about six years ago, two local agencies, South King County Multi-Services and Catholic Community Service, leased 22 units. The housing was set aside exclusively for homeless families. Eight of the units were reserved for long-term stays (up to two years), and are managed by Catholic Community Services. Fourteen units, managed by South King County Multi-Services, were reserved for short-term stays (three to five weeks).
The initial knowledge that there would be a substantial homeless population in the community and schools concerned many in Kent. They were unsure how this would impact students already attending in the district, and wanted to be as prepared for this new group of students as possible. After several school-community meetings, the district pursued a special setting for the homeless students that would gently ease them into the routine of schooling, and that could meet some of their unique emotional and material needs. What resulted was ACCESS (A Caring Community Ensures Student Success).
The ACCESS classroom is located at Sunnycrest Elementary School. It is run by a certified teacher and a full-time teaching assistant. The program is supported by district and Title I funds. All children in the program are bused to school each day. The primary intent of the ACCESS classroom is to take care of the children's initial needs so they can be successful in a regular classroom setting. This can mean getting them necessary books, setting them up on breakfast and lunch plans, getting them clothing, or fulfilling health needs such as eye glasses. They are also screened to determine their reading and math levels. ACCESS instruction is individualized for each student. Among many other things, ACCESS teachers emphasize the importance of education as a way to break the cycle of poverty prevalent for most of the children.
After seven to 10 days in the ACCESS classroom, students are reviewed by the ACCESS teacher and other school staff to determine whether or not they should be mainstreamed into a regular classroom. The program is not meant to be a long-term placement for any student. However, for as long as children are in the school, the ACCESS teacher will have contact with them and their families. Students that are in the school on a long-term basis are also matched with a part-time family service worker who connects regularly with them and their families.
About 100 students go through the ACCESS program each year. Generally, there are eight to 12 students in the class at any given time. Most ACCESS students are eager to learn and be in school, but are performing below grade level. In all likelihood, this is due to the fact that the majority of them have been in more than 10 schools by grade four. Many have spent more time out of school than in it. Because their lives are often filled with the stress and chaos commonly faced by adults, they tend to be more mature than other children of similar age. It is also probable that these children have never been able to establish any lasting friendships because of the high mobility of their families.
Meeting the needs of such unique children could not be done without the strong support of the surrounding community, which has adjusted well to the presence of the homeless families. Each year community members contribute countless amounts of school supplies, stuffed animals, Christmas gifts, books, and other materials to the children in the ACCESS room. They want to ensure that these children have a positive experience, even if they are only in the community for a short period of time.
Keys to SuccessIn the Pasco, Washington, School District there is a common educational philosophy that pervades at each school. The philosophy is that every student will receive certificated instruction all day (without initial instruction from teacher aides), in a language they understand. In the high school alone, more than one-half of the student population come from homes where English is not the primary language. To serve this diverse group of students, the district built upon an already existing program that is known as the Transitional Bilingual Program. It is rooted in district educational philosophy, and it is available to all students in grades K-12.
The program is based upon research that indicates students become proficient in English much faster if they first become strong in their primary language. The Transitional Bilingual Program at the secondary level (students in grades 6-12) first provides limited-English-speaking students with instruction in their native language, and gradually transitions them to English instruction. Students are placed in the program based on their level of English-language proficiency. Most students in the program begin with content area instruction (courses such as math, science, and social studies) delivered to them in their native language only, and have two hours of English as a Second Language (ESL) class. As they progress, English in content-area courses is increased using sheltered-English teaching strategies. They advance through five language levels before they are incorporated fully into mainstream classes.
The majority of the program is funded with basic education dollars instead of relying on federal and state bilingual dollars. The district's goal is for 100 percent of its teaching staff to be trained in instructional practices consistent with bilingual education. Through intensive staff development that trains teachers in sheltered-English methods, cross-cultural communication, and ESL strategies, the district ensures that its educators are able to effectively serve this diverse student population.
Overall, the program has proven successful for students and the community in general. It has worked so well, in fact, that the district is now host to many visitors throughout the year who are looking to implement similar programs in their schools.
Keys to SuccessAnderson, P. & Gabriel, R. (1987). The school profiling guide: School related behavior. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Barry, N. (1992). Learning-centered psychologist principles: Social factors in learning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association.
Center for National Origin, Race, & Sex Equity (CNORSE). (1996). The fourth R: Responsibility. Ensuring educational excellence through equity and effective school practices. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
.Cotton, K. (1995). Effective schooling practices: A research synthesis 1995 update. Portland, OR: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (1989). Success for all in a new century: A report by the Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Author.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (1990a). Higher order learning-for-all: A report by the Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Author.
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). (1990b). Restructuring learning-for-all students: A policy statement by the Council of Chief State School Officers. Washington, DC: Author.
Foxwell, E. (1993). Making the grade: Teacher education's role in achieving the National Education Goals. ERIC Digest. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Teacher Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 358 069)
Golomb, K. & Hammeken, P. (1996). Grappling with inclusion confusion? Learning, 24(4), 49-51.
Heron, E. & Jorgensen, C. (1995). Addressing learning differences right from the start. Educational Leadership, 52(4), 56-58.
Hilliard, R. (1991). Restructuring education: Agenda for the 1990s. New Orleans, LA: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, New Orleans, LA.
Huber, T. & Pewewardy, C. (1990). Maximizing learning-for-all students: A review of literature on learning modalities, cognitive styles and approaches to meeting the needs of diverse learners. Wichita, KS: Wichita State University & Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Kansas State Board of Education. (1992). Building a school profile: The QPA needs assessment process. Topeka, KS: Author.
Larke, P. (1992). Effective multicultural teachers: Meeting the challenges of diverse classrooms. Equity and Excellence, 25(2-4), 133-38.
Lezotte, L. (1994). The nexus of instructional leadership and effective schools. The School Administrator, 51(6), 20-23.
Lucas, D. & Thomas, G. (1990). The geography of classroom learning. British Journal of Special Education, 17(1), 31-34.
Markavitch, V. (1994). Living the effective schools philosophy. The School Administrator, 51(6), 26-28.
Mathews, G. (1994). Some lessons on the path to learning-for-all. The School Administrator, 51(6), 29-30.
Matluck, B. (1987). The effective schools movement: Its history and context. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory.
McDonnell, L.M., McLaughlin, M., & Morison, P. (Eds.). (1997). Educating one and all: Students with disabilities and standards based reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Nasaw, D. (1979). Schooled to order: A social history of public schooling in the United States. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory [NCREL]. (1997). Critical issue: Educating teachers for diversity [Online]. Available: http://www.ncrel.org/ncrel/sdrs/pathwayg.htm
Sleeter, C. & Grant, C. (1986). Success for all students. Phi Delta Kappan, 68(4), 297-299.
Stainback, W., Stainback, S., & Stefanich, G. (1996). Learning together in inclusive classrooms. What about the curriculum? Teaching Exceptional Children, 28(3), 14-19.
Udvari-Solner, A. (1992). Curricular adaptations: Accommodating the instructional needs of diverse learners in the context of general education. Topeka, KS: Kansas State Board of Education.
United States Department of Education [USDOE]. (1995). The Improving America's Schools Act of 1994. Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Washington, DC: Author.
Wang, M., Reynolds, M., & Walberg, H. (1995). Serving students at the margins. Educational Leadership, 52(4), 12-17
.Wilberg, M. (1995). The school-to-work opportunities act: An opportunity to serve all students. Women's Educational Equity Act Publishing Center Digest. Newton, MA: Education Development Center, Inc.
Williamson, M. (1994). Realizing New Learning-for-all Students: A Framework for the Professional Development of Kentucky. Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning.
|
This document's URL is: © 2003 Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory
Date of Last Update: 08/13/2004 
|