Search

The adoption and sustainability of evidence-based Tier 1 literacy practices in secondary content-area classes is important to improve reading success for students with learning disabilities. We conducted an exploratory multiple-case study investigating teachers' adoption and sustained use of evidence-based Tier 1 literacy practices that benefit students with learning disabilities. The study was conducted within the context of an adolescent literacy model demonstration project funded by the U.S. Office of Special Education Programs (i.e., Promoting Adolescents' Comprehension of Text [PACT] Plus). Interviews were conducted with two administrators and seven teachers who sustained implementation of the PACT practices beyond 1 year of researcher support. Analyses revealed practice and school-level factors that influenced teachers' sustained use of the practices. We used findings from this study to propose a model of sustainability of Tier 1 evidence-based literacy practices used to improve outcomes for students with learning disabilities. Limitations and implications for future research are provided.

Secondary school administrators increasingly include students with disabilities in general education classrooms with coteaching models. Theoretically, coteaching enables two educators to attend to the learning needs of students with disabilities while exposing them to grade-level content area instruction. However, our study on teachers' perceptions of coteaching found that teachers often viewed their schools' leadership decisions as adversely affecting their ability coteach effectively. The purpose of this article is to provide administrators with an overview of common coteaching models, summarize findings from our study on teachers' perceptions of how their schools' leadership influenced their coteaching practices, and provide a set of guiding questions to consider when seeking to support coteaching.

Handwriting and spelling deficits are common struggles experienced by children with specific learning disabilities (SLD), but there is little evidence on interventions that target these areas for children with SLD. To systematically review the research investigating the effectiveness of handwriting and spelling interventions for children with SLD. A systematic review was conducted that included studies focusing on handwriting and/or spelling interventions for children with SLD. A Black and Downs checklist was completed for each included article to evaluate validity and reliability. Effect sizes were calculated of results for a unitless comparison. Eleven studies met the inclusion criteria: six examined handwriting exclusively, three spelling, and two combined spelling and handwriting. The interventions were grouped into categories of tablet-based, sensorimotor, and/or self-management interventions. Themes of occupation-as-ends versus occupation-as-means were also noted. Those interventions that promoted self-management and used occupation-as-means were found to be most effective. Utilizing the handwriting and spelling within treatment as well as encouraging a child's autonomy and participation are valuable strategies for occupational therapist to use in improving literacy outcomes for children with SLD.

School organization is a key driver for meaningful inclusion for students with disabilities. While there are promising examples of how schools organize for inclusion with intensive technical assistance, little is known about how high schools organize without such supports. In a case study of two high schools, we compare school organization by looking at their formal design and teachers' daily routines. While both schools incorporated models for supporting students into their formal design, their daily routines revealed practices that were at odds with the spirit of inclusion. Routines involved special educators helping students pass their classes, though often not through meaningful learning opportunities. We offer insight into the affordances and constraints of school organization, revealing implications for meaningful inclusion.

Management and organization studies (MOS) scholars have recently brought attention to the lack of engagement with social equity and justice in tackling grand challenges. We argue that environmental justice (EJ) can deepen MOS' engagement with social equity in addressing grand challenges, particularly climate change. Through a bibliometric analysis and qualitative review, we explore scholarly communities within EJ literature and draw connections to MOS research. We develop three bridges between EJ and MOS scholarship: (a) investigating organizational roles and processes in distributing environmental benefits and burdens within socioecological systems, (b) situating the firm within structural and historical contexts that create and perpetuate environmental injustices, and (c) prioritizing the goals, perspectives, and agency of activists and neglected voices within environmental conflicts and solutions. Ultimately, this review aims to build meaningful pathways to embed EJ in MOS research on grand challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Federal special education and accountability policies requires that educators individualize instruction for students with disabilities, while simultaneously ensuring that the vast majority of these students meet age-based grade-level standards and assessment targets. In this paper, we examine this dynamic interplay between policies through analysis of policy documents and interviews that reveal how a sample of educators grapple with their simultaneous implementation. We found that educators made sense of some facets of the policies as complementary and others as contradictory. NCLB and IDEA offered consistent and specific guidelines defining "highly qualified" teachers and educators reported a clear and accurate understanding of these policy demands. On an issue where there was no specific guidance from NCLB--the placement of special education students--educators interpreted the law as promoting the inclusion of more students in general education courses, often to an extent that contradicted the guidance offered by IDEA. With respect to fundamental issues of teaching and learning, NCLB and IDEA represent contradictory theories of action and educators perceived conflict and expressed concerns about unintended consequences for students. Based on our empirical findings, we conclude with a set of theoretical propositions regarding how the alignment of policy messages influences educators' interpretation of policies, which in turn may have implications for how they enact policies. (Contains 2 tables.)

In this qualitative comparative case study, we drew from institutional theory and cultural historical activity theory to explore how educators wrote, used, and conceptualized the role of Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for students with specific learning disabilities within secondary inclusive settings. We found that students' IEPs were responding to institutional pressures to educate students within inclusive settings. However, the content of the students' IEPs offered limited guidance on the activity of providing students with special education supports and services. With this being said, the IEPs still played distinctive roles in each school's unique activity system for educating students within inclusive classrooms. Our findings illuminate a dynamic interaction between institutional pressures and the activity of providing students with a special education.

Prior research identifies trust as critical to increase vaccine acceptance and uptake. However, few intervention studies have sought to develop or test strategies for bolstering vaccine-related trust. To address this gap, this exploratory study identifies features of COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy interventions that can promote or undermine trust across three interconnected domains: institutional, interpersonal, and product (the vaccine itself). We draw on focus groups (N = 27 participants) with community and university partners involved with hosting COVID-19 testing and vaccine events in underserved Oklahoma communities. Focus groups explored participants' experiences serving community health needs and elicited feedback on proposed vaccine hesitancy interventions. Proposed interventions included two technology-based strategies (text message reminders and tablet-based testimonials and education) and one dialogue-based strategy (anti-body test interpretation). We find that community partners perceived local universities as trustworthy institutions because of their association with popular sports programs, academic credentials, and proximity, creating opportunities to address vaccine-related distrust through community-university partnerships. The most promising intervention strategies for building interpersonal trust included engaging in one-on-one dialogue and using autonomy enhancing approaches. Finally, interventions that successfully encouraged vaccine trust did so by incorporating personalized health information about individuals' potential level of protection and susceptibility to the COVID-19 virus. These findings can inform future public health efforts to create trustworthy vaccine hesitancy interventions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this comparative case study, we draw from neoinstitutional and structuration theory to examine the individualized education program (IEP) meetings for five high school students identified with specific learning disabilities. Specifically, we examine how participants interacted during the IEP meetings and how learning, instruction, and postsecondary transition were discussed. Findings suggest that the IEP document served as the dominant script, or structure, for the IEP meetings. This dominant script established roles for participation and influenced participants' agency within the meetings. We also highlight instances of disruption when participants exerted agency and went off script, breaking from the institutionalized structure of the meetings.

Background: Oklahoma’s cumulative COVID-19 incidence is higher in rural than urban counties and higher than the overall US incidence. Furthermore, fewer Oklahomans have received at least one COVID-19 vaccine compared to the US average. Our goal is to conduct a randomized controlled trial using the multiphase optimization strategy (MOST) to test multiple educational interventions to improve uptake of COVID-19 vaccination among underserved populations in Oklahoma. Methods: Our study uses the preparation and optimization phases of the MOST framework. We conduct focus groups among community partners and community members previously involved in hosting COVID-19 testing events to inform intervention design (preparation). In a randomized clinical trial, we test three interventions to improve vaccination uptake: (1) process improvement (text messages); (2) barrier elicitation and reduction (electronic survey with tailored questions/prompts); and (2) teachable moment messaging (motivational interviewing) in a three-factor fully crossed factorial design (optimization). Discussion: Because of Oklahoma’s higher COVID-19 impact and lower vaccine uptake, identifying community-driven interventions is critical to address vaccine hesitancy. The MOST framework provides an innovative and timely opportunity to efficiently evaluate multiple educational interventions in a single study. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT05236270, First Posted: February 11, 2022, Last Update Posted: August 31, 2022. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]