In order to meet the needs of rural exceptional students who come from ethnically and/or linguistically diverse backgrounds, university training programs must move beyond monocultural approaches

Anderson, Peggy L.

McCray, Audrey D.

Reiff, Henry B.

English

Kansas State University

Educational Considerations Volume 17 Number 1 Article 5 9-1-1989 Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural Approach Peggy L. Anderson Henry B. Reiff Audrey D. McCray Follow this and additional works at: https://newprairiepress.org/edconsiderations  Part of the Higher Education Commons This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 4.0 License. Recommended Citation Anderson, Peggy L.; Reiff, Henry B.; and McCray, Audrey D. (1989) "Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural Approach," Educational Considerations: Vol. 17: No. 1. https://doi.org/10.4148/0146-9282.1560 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by New Prairie Press. It has been accepted for inclusion in Educational Considerations by an authorized administrator of New Prairie Press. For more information, please contact cads@k-state.edu. In order to meet the needs of ru ral excep-tional sludenl s who come from ethnically and/or linguistically diverse backgrounds, university training prog rams must move be· yond monocuilural approaches. Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural Approach by Peggy l. Anderson. Henry B. Rell/, and Audrey D. McCray Departmenl ot SpeCial Education Southeastern Louisiana Universily One 01 the g ru test challenges in prepa' in9 rural spe· clal educamrtl Is providinO training whicn r! al iBtically ad. dreSS<!B teaching exceplional students wflO come frt>m eth· nically and/o. linguisticall y diverse backgrounds (6aca. 1980; H~ber, 1960: P\:Iplin and Wright. 1983; Cunnlngh ...... Cunningh.." and O'Connsll, 1986). In Hetges(I9611 survey 01 200 ..... ~ special educa1Of1l, 97 pe"",nt reponed lhllttl>ey had nol Deen specllrcllily t",rned to work w'lh ...... tllandi· capped children. Perllaps one reason lhal 30 10 50 percenl 01 .... ral specrlll eGuc.ation reachers leave the prolession (Helge, ' 983) may be the unpreparedness to wort.. w ith cui. turllity dive. S<! eoccepllonlll $ru<lents. Both 1I>e American Anociation lor Colleges of Telr(:he' Education IAACTE) and thir National Collegoe A<;~IlIr:!I'illion 01 Teache, Education (NCATEI h;l'le acknowlBdg.ed the s lg. nificance 01 muilicu ltu ,al e<l ucation and ha'l!l p'esc ,lbGr:! standa,ds which promote mult icu ltura l teaoher Iraln lng IMCTE, 1973; NCATE, 1979). Nevertheless, in the field 01 sprK: ial ed~cat l on , a cons ide.able discrepall(:Y ex lsls be· twoon Ihe acceplane<! 01 these tenets and aclua l p,ac,ICfI, Beyond modllylng curricut a to address nondiscriminatory as!!enment 01 exceptional students, lew unlverslly Iraln· ing programs nave systematicallv tackled and Integf8ted other mul(lcuitu,al lactars such as recogni'ron 01 diUe'enl cognlll'l!l slyles at lumrng or mooilication 01 lhe currlcu · lum 10 meer lhe nee<:!S 01 cullu,ally drverse groUf)$ (Ro<.irt. Theseauthorsdevetoped iheJl.iME progra m 81 South-eas lern l ouisiana University. Dr. Anderson is now II I Mel .o College In Denver, Dr. Reiff is an IIssislanl p ro-lessor at Wes te rn Maryland College and is th, coordi· nator of graduale prOgr~ms in special educlliion, lind McCray is the coordinator of project PROMOTE, at Southeas tern Lou iSiana University. Educa llOnal COnSidera lions, Vol, 17, No. I , Fall 1989 gue~ 1962), Mamr (t9841 con'enr:led Ihat me development 01 new training curricula to be uMr:! In the preparat ion of .... ral special education tellOhers would 81IGYlate the high attri · Iron "'Ie as weJl as enhanoa the IIIrsonlllllnd prolessionat SUCcess of the ........ handlcllC)ped POpuiatron . New training cu.ricula designed to provide pluralistic prep .... ation of special education teacners lire r>ec......ary '0 enilble them to serve lhe needS 01 cullorllily dlve,se handl· capped students in .... ,aI Iocationa. Tile p,emise lollows 'hat weJl·p,epared teachers ,"nO are ettective at meeting Ihe needs 01 tlleir students will be more hkely to 'emaln In the p,olessioo. The purpose 01 this an lcle Is to illust rate the steps b)" wh ieh univers it y teacher Iral nlng programs Can re· vise curricu la,o inc l ude a m~ l t i c u Itu ral pe rspective. Project AIME IAchievement in Multi cul tura l Educat ion), a demon· Sl ral lon proj~t for th e Oeparrment of Specia l Education at SovtheaSlern louis iaoa Unlvtlrs lty. del ineates a step b)" 81<:1' e~amp le of how such 'GYlsion was aCCOmp lished in a teacher training prog.am. E,aluallon of Exisling Training P.09r .... The !irst s,ep in curricula, (GYlslon fOCUses on e'laluar· ing the existing progr,,",. Evaluation SIlOukllnclu<le a b<oad prog,ammalic needs esS<!ssmenl as well as speerlic .... atua-tron 01 each course 10' mullicullu.lII content. In Project AIME. a comprehensive needS '5!!essmentlool ""aluating muil icullu(al training competeno::les was sent to special education p'oiessionlll, lhroughout the state. The 52 ,.,. 'ponses determined high p,Io,lIles to. several ~ompete ... cies. Fa, example. ·'Melhods CoYrS<! work witll concen-tration locused on ind i.ldual t .. l1s , learning " yles, per· ceptual styles and cognlt l.e styles· was deemed Ihe most im portant pre pa.ati on lor m~ltlcull ura l ~ompe t e n cy Glimps (t965) contended Inal teachers must understand tMt cultural and IIngul$tlc dl!lere~oes In ~h ild ren aff~t learning and necessrtate flex ible approaches to teac~ing . The special ooucato,s in tnis SUIV&)' clled cooniza.nce 01 lin-guisli~ and communiCllti...., beh""lors as essential to eltec-li"le 'eaching, iArtainly. teachers need '0 distinguish a legit-Imate language deficit fmm II cultuflIlllnguistic dilterence. 6lIsed on these and similar recommendallon5. revision ot the "lIinrng program rellacted concerns 01 practrtroners who deal daily with handlcilPper:! students l rom culturally diverse backgrounds. Project AIME ulili:ed an GYaluation PIO(:US developed by Rodriguez (1982) 10 analy:e mull lcullu'aI content 01 COUrses in the spec ial e-ducatlon teacher train ing program, ~~::t~~~. ~~ ;;~~I~~~rn:'~~t7e~e~~:~~ ~~: n&nt muil icullural issues such as limited Eng lish Droli-ciency, cu l tura l va lues, disproporllonate n umbers 01 minorities in spoc ial e<lucal ion, etc. On tne basis of the g.id. each oour58 was ranked In te,ms 01 lou. levels ot mu It i-cullura l content rang ing l rom an aoS<!n~<I 01 multicu ltural content (Leve l t ) to indepln multlcullu.al Challenges and synthesis at issues (Level 41. The mean ranking 01 all courses offered by thedepanment was 2.61. Thus. although courses ove.all addresser:! multicultural issues. room to, improvement was clear1y GYrden1. Anothe. leature 01 Rod.lguel"s (tge2) approach is the cOllec, ion 01 quam at i'l!l o:Iata to ol le' inc! i. id ual inSights into how mullrculiu,al inlo,maiion I, p.esent<ld in various cou'ses. To accornpljs~ 'hi' componenl . lne two projec l co-Oldinators interview&d al l Dep~lment faculty membe,s ,"ith ,eSpol<;t to each COU," fhey laught . Durinll the strue· Pfl!P8ration 01 litis atticle Wa$ s()ppaw,d In pa rt by Qr.ln/s from th e U.S . Department 01 Educt/Ion IGf~nt No •. G008715010 and G(08715543). 1Anderson et al.: Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural APublished by New Prairie Press, 2017turOO one ~our interview, eac~ member responde<! to six quesllons conce rning tM ext~nt to w~ich multicu ltural conl6nl was integraled in each cO urse. Intern.tingly. in complying with mandalea lor NCATE accred itat ion. the 0... IW1ment ~&d embraced multicultural Oblectives as J)art of tM overall pedagogiCal mission. T~roug~ t~e interview. each Iac;ulty memoorexpressed a person.l inlerestln tutlin· i nQ th~ commitment whi ch the lac u l t~ as a group had maOO. De""lo9lnlil the Fram",ort to< Progr. ", Revision The American $peec:h-lanliluage- Hearing A$$oo;ia-Hon (ASHA) pr""ides curriculum guidelines (1987) to pro-mote the InClus ion ot multicu lturat content. OJ the d ifferent approaches r&Commended. th e Projec:t AIM E stan setected the un it and Infusion approaches to pfofassional tratnlnll. In the unit IPIlroach. uch course in the Curriculum Inctudes one Of more units which locu" on information pertaInIng to mult icultural populat ions. Based In ~tt on the data COl· lected through the needS assessment . the multicultu ral unit took tna lo rm of a OM ~our lec ture and demonstrat ion presented Dv the two project coordlnato's. The infusion lIP" proac/l empflasizes the Integration or muUicuUu,aI COntent througflout the enti ... course especlafly in ",gard to texts. lectures. and otller learning acti.ltlGS. T~e curriculum .... aI. ysis has PfOYided the tounda1ion lor Pro~ct AIME to Iota-grate mult icultural content . The eva luation of te"s. lec· tures, sylllW)i , and learning act ivit ies de lineated specif ic stn!f'lgths and weai<nGSMS. Faculty member am now In the process ot meeting the mandates of these evaluations. Integration of Mult ic~lt~ra l Objectivel and Content The mult icultura l un it was presented 10 e .. ery class 01· fered Dv the (Ie~rlment during tfle IIrsl yea, and to all Intro· ductory ctasses during tfle present SChOOl year. tn this Wl'f. every stUdent who Is malrlculating In tne special education pfOllram has par1ici~te<l in the multlcullural unil. tn Order fo r t fle unit to be ~lteetl.e. the project coo rd inato's made t~e presen tation more attract i .. e and Interesting th roug h a multi·me<lla fo,mat encompassing lecture, o"fflrheads. video, and Class discu,.lon. FIve components comprise the multicultural unit pre-tesl. loundat ions tecture •• ideo 01 demonstration pro~<t, discuulon 01 ru ral mult icultural cons iderations. and post · test . Th e pretest a~&eases . tudents· knowledge of mull i· culturaf I$$ues w~icfl a", addressed In the unit . A Lil<e,t -scale wu used to facil,tate quantitath'-e statisticat compari· sons with the posttut The lound"tlons lectu'" add,,= multicultu,al issue~ deemed imporlant through the needs assesSmQnt as well as concerns ..-oiCed In the raculty Inter· views. Focus ing on assessment. instruct ional program· mingo linguistic conslde,ations. and derno-g r~pIllc trends. the round"tions lecture utilizes o-.erheads to preMnt re· search ranging from Mercer-,; (1973) re"¥elallons 01 tile """r· representation ot minorIties In specl~1 e<lucat ion cl_ to Taylor·s (t9816) examination 01 communkat ion diSOrders in culturally diverse populat ions . A 20·mlnute . idOO. ''WMt·s the Ditference Being Ollferen!?·· (Re", .. cfl Press. t 9791 fol · lows. This documentary describes a multicultural <lemon· stration proj&ct which was developed and implemented through. partnershIp of leachers. leacher educators. ~nd community membe,s. Discuss ion 01 ru'a l multicultura l Is · sues w.s faCil itated by an ove rhead Illustrat ing th e fac tors of rural pOVerty, elhnicil y, 1I"0grapilicai im.".ct. and feli· gious Influence in teaching exceptional studen" In rural soutflentern Louisi .... ~ F,nally, as a POSltest measure. the students answered the same questions asked on tfle pretest . " Discussion The nood Is growino 10' university special education train ing programs in fural a,eas to otte r a IT\(lle pluralistic S+lproach to teacMr p,e.".ralion. Eflective t"llnlng will In· corporate issues such as IMming styles. communication "aliat Ions. beh .... iOral ch ...... teri Sl "'s .• aI U8 d 11 feren~. 1* rental parlici~lIon. and J>OYIItty. With an appropriate back· ground f rom kn Cw le<lge·based curricula. prnMrv ice teac,," arS wi ll be ab le to grow and protlt lrom expe ri ent ial training (i.e. , p,actica and student teaching) where mul ticultu ral I,· sues come to IUe. Rete,ences Amer ican As~l at i on lor CoIIOQeS or Teacfler EducatiOl'. (1983). No one model AmerlCM. Journ .1 01 Tea cher Edu· cation. 2$, 4. American Speech-Language-Huring AS~iation. (1981). Multicultural Professional Education In CommunICa-tion Disordef" Curriculum Approachee Rocl<ville. MD; Autho r. Baca. L. (1980). Issues in the educal ion of cult ura lly di"el"$e exceptional C~il dron . hceptlonal Child ren, .6, "'-"'" Cunningham. K.; Cunningham. K.; and O·Connelt. J.C ( 1996~ Im~ct or diUering cultural perceptions OIl spe-Cial ed ucatlon servi ce delivery. Rural Specl. 1 Educ.ticn Duarterly, 8( 11. 2-8. Gllmps. B.J. (t 965). Th~ challenge. in elf&<:tloel, inool. i " 1I . ..... t blaelc P11.e .. , . of tlandlcapped children. (ERtC 000;. ument Reproduction ServlC<! Ed 263 696) Harbor. J.R. (t 98O). ' ss""s in lIle assessment ot language and readIng disorders in learning disabled ch ildren. Learnin g DIsability Ou. rterly. 3, 20 -28. Hetge. 0.1. (t98tl. Problems in Implement ing comprehen. si ... speCial educat ion programming In ruraf areas. Eo· ceplional Children. 47, ~14-520. Helga, 0.1. (t963). Im.goes: tssu .. and trends In fUrel spe. cla l educatlon_JanUaf1 1963. Murray. KY; NatiO<'lal Rural Research Project, Canter for Innovat ion and Qe'lelopm"nt. Marrs. LW. (t964~ A bandwagon wlt~out music· Prepari"9 rural speCIal educators. Exception.1 Children. 5(1 . 33ot -342. Meleer. J. (1g73). Label ing the mentall, ,.t.rdod. Berl<ele')'. CA; Univers ity 01 Ca lifornia Press. National Council lor t~e AcClldltation of Teacner EdLJCa-tion. (t979) St.nda.ds to. the accreditation c t t • ...,~ .. education. WaShIngton, D.C. Authot. Poplin, M.S. and wright. P. (1963). The concept or cultural pluralism: lasubs in .peclal eQ ucation. L .. rning DIs· ability Du.,t trly, 6. 367~37 1 . Resb8rcM Pre55 (Producer). (1979). Whafs the difference be· ing dil lefent? (Film~ Cflam~ign. tL Research P",u. ROdriguez. F. (1982\. Mainst",aming ~ muttlcullural con~t 1nlo special education: Guidelines for 'eacme. trainers. Excepllonal Chi ldren, 49. 220-227 Tay lof, O.L. (1986). Nature of communioation disorders In culturally .'HI linquistici lly dioerst pOP\l lations. San ();ego. Callfo,ni'" College _Hill Press EdltOfS' Note: The Collegiate Instructional DiSCrimination Index ~as ooan rece ntl y developed by Jamea B. Boye r. Ph.D .• 01 Kansas State UniverSity. Th is se ll·Check instru· ment lists muW .... lhnic, mult ilingual . cro5s·'ac:ial. and non· se.ist criteria ror examining COurse syll.,1 ,nd instruc· t,onal deli. ery 8t the college I_I. This Instrument m"'l tie obtained from Or. James B. Boyer. Bluemont Hall. Kan$il$ State UniverSity, Manhattan. KS &6506. Educational Considerations 2Educational Considerations, Vol. 17, No. 1 [1989], Art. 5https://newprairiepress.org/edconsiderations/vol17/iss1/5DOI: 10.4148/0146-9282.1560

Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural Approach

https://newprairiepress.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1560&amp;context=edconsiderations

Curricular Revision in Rural Special Education: A Multicultural Approach

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Kansas State University