Preparing Pre-Service Teachers to Teach Mathematics in Inclusive Classrooms: A Three-Year Case Study

School Science and Mathematics

Volumn 109, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 108-115

  Burton, Dolores ^a   Pace, Darra ^b  

^a NEW YORK INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^b HOFSTRA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77649298220     PISSN: 00366803     EISSN: 19498594     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2009.tb17943.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Andrews, S., & Clementson, J. J. (1997). Active learning's effect upon pre-service teachers' attitudes toward inclusion. (ERIC Document Preproduction Service No. ED 410217).
2. Avramidis, E., Bayliss, P., & Burden, R. (2000). A survey into mainstream teachers' attitudes towards the inclusion of children with special educational needs in the ordinary school in one local education authority. Education Psychology, 20, 191–211.
3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.
4. Butler, F. M., Miller, S. P., Lee, K., & Pierce, T. (2001). Teaching mathematics to mild to moderate mental retardation: A review of the literature. Mental Retardation, 39, 20–31.
5. Campbell, J., Gilmore, L., & Cuskelly, M. (2003). Changing student teachers' attitudes towards disability and inclusion. Journal of Intellectual & Developmental Disability, 28, 369–379.
6. Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., Cook, L., & Landrum, T. (2000). Teachers' attitudes toward their included students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 67(1), 115–135.
7. Corral, N., & Antia, S. D. (1997). Self-talk strategies for success in math. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29(4), 42–45.
8. Editorial Projects in Education. (January, 2004). Quality counts 2004: Count me in: Special education in an era of standards (Vol. 23). Bethesda, MD: Author.
9. Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. Philadelphia: Falmer Press.
10. Fullan, M.D. (1982). The meaning of educational change. New York: Teachers College Press.
11. Graham, K. J., & Fennell, F. (2001). Principles and standards for school mathematics and teacher education: Preparing and empowering teachers. School Science and Mathematics, 101, 319–327.
12. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 20 USC 1400 et seq. §601 (2004). Retrieved May 2, 2008, from http://idea.ed.gov/down-load/statute.html.
13. Jitendra, A., & Xin, Y. P. (1997). Mathematical word-problem solving instruction for students with mild disabilities and students at risk for math failure: A research synthesis. Journal of Special Education, 30, 412–38.
14. Lee, J., Grigg, W. S., & Dion, G. S. (2007). National assessment of educational progress (NAEP), 2007 mathematics assessment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics.
15. Maccini, P., & Gagnon, J. C. (2002). Perceptions and application of NCTM standards by special and general education teachers. Exceptional Children, 68, 325–344.
16. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author. Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://standards.nctm.org/document/chapter2/index.htm.
17. New York State Education Department, Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities. (2001). Pocketbook of goals and results for individuals with disabilities. Retrieved May 2, 2008, from http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/pocketbook/2001/g1chart10.htm.
18. New York State Education Department Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities. (2004). New York state part B annual report 2002–2003. Retrieved July 29, 2007, from http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/sedcar/apr/apr0203data/attach3c.htm.
19. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. 6 USC §6143 (2001). Retrieved April 25, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf.
20. Raider-Roth, M. B. (2005). Trusting what you know: The high stakes of classroom relationships. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21. Salend, S. J., & Hofstetter, E. (1996). Adopting a problem-solving approach to teaching students with mild disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31, 209–217.
22. Stacey, R. D. (1996). Complexity and creativity in organizations. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
23. U.S. Department of Education (2006). Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Annual report to Congress on the implementation of The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, various years, Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) database. Retrieved July 29, 2007, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d05/tables/dt05_052.asp.
24. Wideen, M., Mayer-Smith, J., & Moon, B. (1998) A critical analysis of the research on learning to teach: Making the case for an ecological perspective on inquiry. Review of Educational Research, 68, 130–178.
25. Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods (revised edition). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.