Literature Review

Inclusive Culture

Establishing an inclusive culture within a school sets the tone for each classroom and

teacher within it. In a study focusing on an urban elementary school, Arun K. Ramanathan and

company (2010) found that there are three underlying characteristics of a school that has

implemented a successful inclusion program: an inclusive leader, a broad vision of school

community, and shared language and values (p. 160). Another study found similar findings,

where principals held specific characteristics in developing inclusive cultures at their schools.

Osiname (2016) found that principals create a positive inclusive school culture if they adopted a

growth mindset, encouraged dialogue, provided a supportive environment, and established a safe

and caring environment (p. 3). The positive culture throughout the schools also came from

principals collaborating and communicating, leading with encouragement, building positive

relationships, sustaining a renewal process, and taking responsibility for students (Osiname

2016).

Teacher Training

Many studies have shown that teachers are negatively affected by inclusive classrooms

when they were not trained to work with those specific students, and/or were not provided

enough resources to properly educate those same students (Ross-Hill 2009). Teachers have stated

that they do not receive adequate support within their schools and in a study of 118 special and

general education teachers, 92% believed collaborative practices were present in their schools,

but only 57% reported actual use of such practices (Damore & Murray 2009; Ross-Hill 2009).

Even after taking instructional courses and training in inclusionary practices, teachers feel that
they do not have enough resources provided by their schools to properly educate their many

students with disabilities, to a point that “some general education teachers do not support an

inclusive model of teaching citing their own lack of training preparation for teaching in inclusive

settings” (Ross-Hill 2009).

Inclusive Practices

High Leverage Practices. ​McLeskey & Company (2017) researched effective

instruction strategies when working with students with special needs and reviewed high leverage

practices such as, identify and prioritize long- and short-term learning goals, systematically

design instruction toward a specific learning goal, adapt curriculum tasks and materials for

specific learning goals, teach cognitive and metacognitive strategies to support learning and

independence, provide scaffolded supports, use explicit instruction, use flexible grouping, use

strategies to promote active student engagement, use assistive and instructional technologies,

provide intensive instruction, teach students to maintain and generalize new learning across time

and settings, and provide positive and constructive feedback to guide students’ learning and

behavior (p. 69-92). For the purpose of this research, I will only focus on the practices of flexible

grouping, using assistive and instructional technologies, and providing positive and constructive

feedback, three high leverage practices that would benefit the school in which the research is

being conducted. Having access to these high leverage practices gives teachers effective

strategies in order to properly educate their students with special needs and give them options to

try before relying on other resources schools sometimes cannot provide.

Flexible Grouping. ​Flexible grouping is an idea used in the education system for a long

time and it is important for teachers to properly implement. When designed and carried out
accurately, small heterogeneous and homogeneous groups can greatly improve interpersonal and

academic student outcomes (Hattie 2008; Heward & Wood 2015). Homogenous groups are made

up of students with common academic strengths and weaknesses (McLeskey & Company 2017).

These kinds of groups are used when specific students need explicit and individualized

instruction. Many different studies on homogeneous groups in classrooms found that smaller

groups, as small as one to two students, are most effective in improving achievement (Erlbaum,

Vaughn, Hughes, & Moody 2000; Iverson, Tunmer, & Chapman 2005; Vaughn et al. 2003).

Heterogeneous groups are used to mix students together from all different skill levels, strengths,

and weaknesses (McLeskey & Company 2017). These groups are used when all students are

participating in grade-level work so students can work on skills like collaboration. Evidence has

shown “that small groups should be highly structured and include (a) systematic goal, task, and

material selection; (b) clear instructional directives; and (c) explicit strategies to maximize and

equalize student response opportunities” (McLeskey & Company 2017). Research has shown

that using flexible grouping improves student achievement, however, teachers need to remember

to implement other high leverage practices when using small groups, like providing constructive

feedback (McLeskey & Company 2017).

Assistive and Instructional Technologies.​ Using assistive and instructional technologies

within education has been shown to greatly benefit students with different learning needs

(McLeskey & Company 2017). Students with disabilities have been positively affected by three

specific types of technology: video self-modeling, augmentative, and alternative communication

systems (AACs), and computer-aided instruction (McLeskey & Company 2017). Video-self

modeling is when an individual observes themselves on video performing a task correctly and
has been shown to improve performance on tasks such as arithmetic, task behavior, and reading

fluency (McLeskey & Company 2017). Research has also found that alternative communication

systems, such as electronic devices with synthesized speech, picture boards, sign language, have

strong positive effects for academic and challenging behaviors, social skills, with the strongest

effects for communication skills (McLeskey & Company 2017). Mayer (2008) found that

computer-aided instruction, “when designed well, [can] reduce the cognitive load on learners and

increase their attention level, allowing for more efficient and effective learning” (p. 760).

According to McLeskey & Company (2017), using assistive and instructional technologies when

teaching students with special needs has had a “moderately positive effect with a weighted

average effect size of .35” (p.88).

Providing Positive and Constructive Feedback.​ ​Educators giving students feedback is

known to be an important part of learning, but the way educators choose to give feedback effects

whether it will benefit the student or not. In a study, it was also found that giving feedback after

an assignment is turned in is ineffective (McLeskey & Company 2017). McLeskey & Company

(2017) explain that “the longer the time between receiving feedback and recalling it, much less

using it, the more the feedback message fades from specific descriptions and suggestions to a

general memory of evaluation” (p. 94).

McLeskey & Company (2017) synthesized research on constructive feedback and found

that there are specific feedback strategies educators should be using: Focus feedback on the

process, self-referenced feedback, select one or two important points for feedback, and suggest

small steps for improvement, use simple vocabulary, and check for understanding of feedback

(p.94). Another study was done by Hattie and Timperley (2007) conducted meta-analysis
research on the effectiveness of feedback (p.81-112). They found that the most effective forms of

feedback “are in the form of video-, audio-, or computer-assisted instructional feedback; and/or

relate to goals” (Hattie & Timperley 2007). Hattie and Timperley (2007) also found that

feedback that are the least effective in enhancing performance in the forms of programmed

instruction, extrinsic rewards (p.90).