Search

Implications of biobehavioral state measures for the assessment of students with profoundly handicapping conditions are discussed in relation to similar behaviors observed in infants and among persons recovering from severe head trauma. Data are presented showing different profiles in biobehavioral states among students with severe and profound disabilities. These profiles are compared with similar descriptions of physical and psychological functioning described in the head-trauma literature, with a discussion of similar education and intervention problems and the need for more exchange of information between special education and rehabilitation therapy for persons with severe neurological impairments. Additionally, biobehavioral state measures among persons with severe and profound disabilities are offered as a potentially valuable assessment tool with important implications for improved intervention strategies and future research directions.

During training of cognitive and motor skills, the effects of massed, distributed, and spaced trial sequencing were evaluated relative to performance. Eleven severely handicapped students in four isolated special education classrooms were involved. Correct, error, and refusal responses were monitored during three conditions of training: massed, distributed, and spaced trial sequencing. An overall comparison of the three conditions of trial scheduling showed no difference in the mean level or the slope of the three types of responses. A comparison of distributed and massed trial sequencing showed only the superior effect of distributed trial sequencing for the mean level of responding. These findings were significant 1) for both correct and refusal responses for an overall comparison and 2) for students living in the home rather than in an institution. The results of this study support the addition of distributed trial sequencing to the technology of instruction for severely handicapped learners.

The issue of educability, or whether or not severely handicapped persons have a right to education or can benefit from it, is examined from a legal perspective. The analysis begins with a descripti...

One-hundred fifty teachers of students with severe and multiple impairments were surveyed to identify the prevalence of health-related procedures being used in the classrooms, the person(s) routinely responsible for implementing the procedure(s), and the persons the teachers felt should be responsible for implementing the procedures. In addition, the survey identified the source of the teacher's information concerning health-related procedures for individual students, types of correspondence with the school nurse and the family physician, the teachers' awareness of the availability of school policy for implementing health-related procedures, the teachers' source of training on health-related procedures, and the relationship of the classroom location to visits by the school nurse. Seventy percent of the questionnaires were returned. Teachers indicated that all but one of the procedures listed were occurring in one or more of the classrooms. The teachers ndicated that, for the most part, they were primarily responsible for implementing the procedures on a routine basis. The teachers' responses indicated that they felt they should be responsible for a specific group of procedures with the nurse and paraprofessional, or nurse and teacher in combination responsible for a different set of procedures. The family was used most often as a source of information for the health-related procedures. Contact with the school nurse was variable. Classrooms in integrated or rural settings were reported as visited less often by the school nurse than classrooms in either more segregated or urban settings. Only 21% of all the classroom teachers responding were aware of local district guidelines for the determination of who should be responsible for the implementation of health-related procedures.