Samples and summary of faculty scholarly activities - St. John Fisher ...

Arndt, Katrina
Publications
Arndt, K. (2011). College students who are deaf-blind. Practice Perspectives - Highlighting
Information on Deaf-Blindness, 7. National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness.
Arndt, K., White, J.M. & Chervenak, A. (2010). "Gotta go now: Rethinking the use of The
Mighty and Simon Birch in the middle school classroom." Disability Studies Quarterly.
Arndt, K., Maples, J., & White, J. (2010). "Re-seeing the mighty: Critically examining one film’s
representations of disability in the English classroom." English Journal. National Council
of Teachers of English. 100(2): 77-85.
Arndt, K. and Liles, J. (Spring 2010). "Preservice teachers' perceptions of coteaching: A
qualitative study." Action in Teacher Education: The Journal of the Association of
Teacher Educators. 32(1): 15-25.
Rostetter, D., & Arndt, K. (2010). "Class action lawsuits in special education." Journal of
Disability Policy Studies.
Presentations
2010. "Success and support through co-teaching: Elementary" with Arndt, K., Cianca, M.,
Hildenbrand, S., and Wishnowski, M.W. Hilton Central School District. Hilton, NY.
November 2010. "Special education professional Ethical principles." Eighth Annual United
Nations Philosophy Day. St. John Fisher College. Rochester, NY.
October 2010. "What's in a name? The creation and evolution of an inclusive education
department." New York State Association of Teacher Educators/New York Association
of Colleges for Teacher Educators.
September 2010. "Conducting group projects." Fall Convocation and Faculty Development Day.
St. John Fisher College.
April 2010. "Perceptions of socialization by adolescents who are blind and their parents."
American Educational Research Association. Denver, CO.

"Gotta go now": Rethinking the use of The Mighty and Simon Birch in the
Middle School Classroom Katrina Arndt Special Education Department Ralph C.
Wilson, Jr. School of Education St. John Fisher College E-mail: karndt@sjfc.edu Julia M.
White, Ph.D. University of Rochester Rochester, New York Andrea Chervenak. M.S.
Rochester, New York
Abstract
Critical film analysis in the context of disability studies is introduced, and implications of disability
portrayals in film are discussed. Two films often used in middle school classrooms, Simon Birch and The
Mighty, are introduced and briefly summarized. The films are critiqued using Norden's conceptualizations
of stereotypic roles for characters with disabilities including the "sweet innocent" and "comic
misadventurer." Finally, the importance of critical screening is outlined and ways that teachers can use
these films in ways that are respectful of people with disabilities based on criteria developed by Safran
(2000) are offered.
Film is a powerful medium that can affect how students think about people, places, cultures, and issues.
Films with characters with disabilities are often shown in classrooms (for example, To Kill a Mockingbird,
Of Mice and Men, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, The Glass Menagerie, Moby Dick, Gattaca, A Beautiful
Mind). How and when movies are used in schools is important, as viewings with little analysis or reflection
may have unintended consequences, sending the message that inaccurate or exaggerated stereotypes
about disability are accurate and acceptable (Chervenak 2006; Longmore 1985; Norden 1994).
Uninformed readings of film may reinforce negative and inaccurate beliefs and stereotypes about
disability, and may perpetuate stigma status of people with disabilities. In educational settings, teachers
can foster engagement and empathy through careful choices and active reading of films (Considine and
Baker 2006).
In this article the authors critique two films commonly used in middle school classrooms, Simon Birch and
The Mighty, that portray young adolescent boys with physical disabilities as both pitiable and heroic, and
then discuss the implications of these portrayals. The Mighty, the film adaptation of Rodman Philbrick's
novel Freak the Mighty, is typically used in middle school classrooms to reinforce literature units in which
the novel is studied. Simon Birch is suggested by John Irving's A Prayer for Owen Meany, and both films
focus on friendships between two outcast boys and have been used in middle school classrooms to
reinforce themes of relationships, friendships, identity, and the heroic spirit.
In three semesters of informal surveys in one author's undergraduate elementary education course on
integrating students with disability labels into general education settings, when asked if they had seen
Simon Birch as middle or high school students, typical replies were "Awwww!" "I felt so sad for Simon!"
and "I cried so hard!" Both films are of the sentimental coming-of-age genre in which girls are largely
absent, and follow formulaic conventions of the buddy-picture, including chases, overturned fruit carts,
and "boys-will-be-boys" pranks (Ebert 1998). These films are usually presented as positive and
empowering representations of disability, as models to nondisabled students or "normates," about
overcoming adversity, leading selfless lives, and heroism. Yet these films are mired in the presentation of
these boys as both selfless heroes and pitiable individuals, whose heroism and sacrifice emanate directly
from their "afflictions."
Film is typically used in schools from a "protectionist approach" in which media audiences are considered
to be "passive victims" and print media is valued over visual media (Kellner and Share 2007, 60). In
classrooms, students often read a book and then watch the movie. While we may support critical

engagement with the print texts, students are not often encouraged to "read" the films critically. We often
do not interrogate the hidden curriculum of film, to "see underneath, behind, and beyond the texts, how
these texts establish and use power over us, over others, on whose behalf, and in whose interests"
(Molden 2007, 50).
Through uncovering the hidden curriculum in media texts, teachers and students can resist the notion that
the "only reality" is the "worldviews of those with privileged positions" (Delpit 1995, xv) and teachers can
help students understand the relationships between students' "lived experiences and structures of
domination and consent" (Giroux, 2001, 108). Critical pedagogy provides students the power to question
the status quo and hold multiple viewpoints that resist the dominant constructions presented in film. In
particular, critical examinations of Simon Birch and The Mighty can not only give students the tools to
resist the constructions of disability as selfless, heroic, and pitiable, but can also provide students with
ways to galvanize "collective political struggle around the issues of power and social determination"
(Giroux, 2001, 111). By uncovering power differentials related to disability, students can then examine
other "categories of deviance that stratif[y] students" (Apple 1995, 20).
Our purpose in this article is to challenge a construction of disability that reinforces pitying and
stereotypically negative perceptions and that juxtaposes difference with "normative." First, we explore
critical film analysis and ways to use a disability studies lens to critique film. Then, we critically examine
these two movies using Norden's conceptualizations of stereotypic roles for characters with disabilities
and discuss the ways that these films reinforce limiting stereotypes about disability. Finally, we offer ways
that teachers can use these films in ways that are respectful of people with disabilities and that are
accepting of difference in classrooms, based on criteria developed by Safran (2000).
Critically Reading Film
Regardless of the accuracy of its portrayal of disability characteristics, film functions as a major
information source on the nature of disabilities (Safran 1998). Norden (1984, x) asserts that since
audiences are consumers of movies, not only are the representations in these movies reflections of
societal values, but they are also "politically charged commodit[ies] that moviemakers are asking
audiences to buy." Thus, audiences not only buy the tickets to watch the film, they may also buy into the
representations and the values associated with them. This is particularly true if students are not helped to
develop media literacy skills that include asking critical questions about the messages in the media; this
may include making comparisons, analyzing patterns of representation, or studying adaptations of
literature (Hobbs 2006, 36).
Film both "reflects and affects our social worldview" (Pavlides 2005, 52), including our perceptions of
people with disabilities. While movies entertain, they simultaneously "provide viewers with information
about disabilities, and … project representations of how individuals fit into a nation's social and political
landscape" (Safran 2001, 223). Information about disabilities affects all viewers; in addition, for individuals
with a disability, images of themselves are especially important, as those images become the "truths"
about disability that are accepted by audiences (Darke 1998).
Critical analyses of disability characterizations and the functions they serve in film are needed to open our
minds to how we think about disability. Such analyses of filmic portrayals of characters with disabilities
can illuminate social norms and power differentials regarding normalcy and representations of what is
considered "normal" in culture. An informed reading of film in which characters with disabilities play both

major and minor parts can contest the idea that disability is an individual plight, and assert that disability
is a social and political issue that involves discrimination, negative imagery, and lack of opportunity
(Linton, Mello, and O'Neill 1995; Linton 1998). If read uncritically, a film such as Rainman, while a
somewhat accurate portrayal of some forms of autism, reaffirms the decisive separations our society
makes in "creating the normal versus the pathological, the insider versus the outsider, or the competent
citizen versus the ward of the state" (Linton 1998, 2). From the perspective of disability studies, critical
analysis of themes in film and disability imagery "puts into relief patterns of behaviors and policy that have
significant consequences for disabled people" (Linton, Mello, and O'Neill 1995). These representations
are the outcome of attitudes and beliefs that include a fear of disability and pity for people with disabilities.
Disability is around us more than we are willing to recognize or notice, and those who are temporarily
able bodied may hold anxieties about the possibilities of disablement, of themselves or someone close to
them. What we fear, we stigmatize, stereotype, and avoid (Longmore 1985; Safran 1998). Films reflect
this pattern, and often the representations of disability portrayed in film differ vastly from the lived
experience of disability. Typically, movies that depict disability often do so with the purpose of affirming
able-bodied audiences of their normality (Ellis 2003). Thus, film has the capacity to create "derogatory
stereotypes that reinforce negative social attitudes and result in prejudice and discrimination" (Safran
1998, 475). Although the intention of filmmakers is not necessarily to depict reality, these images take on
political meanings and consequently help shape the daily obstacles formed by public perceptions,
creating "negative outcomes for persons with disabilities" (Safran 1998, 475).
Stereotypic representations of individuals with disabilities in film include those that revolve around pity,
innocence, and adventure, culminating in heroic status. Norden's "sweet innocent" is a disabled character
who inspires pity, like Dickens' Tiny Tim, who is far more "reactive than proactive and seem[s] to bring out
the protectiveness of every good-hearted able-bodied person who [comes] his or her way" (Norden 1994,
33). Many disabled male characters are "comic misadventurers" (Norden 1994, 28), who may provide
comic relief, but who rarely get the girl. The inverse of the pitiable "sweet innocent" is the "civilian
superstar," or supercrip. This character is "a heroic disabled person" (Norden 1994, 28), who overcomes
his or her disability to accomplish amazing feats or to save nondisabled characters.
Characters with disabilities are usually pitied until they garner the respect of others and are then elevated
to elite status by acts of heroism. "Civilian superstars" sometimes become "tragic victims," whose deaths
are mired in the heroism of their actions, and the audience is led to believe that their deaths are
necessary; as a result, while audiences may weep for the victim, they understand that the disabled
character could not possibly remain in the world (Hayes and Black 2003). All of these conceptualizations
function to present disability as a narrative device to advance the plot of a film or to serve as foils to or
saviors of nondisabled characters (Mitchell 2002). This is certainly the case in Simon Birch and The
Mighty.
Reading Film in the Middle School Classroom
Middle school students, as adolescents, are increasingly able to "think beyond the concrete, current
situation to what might or could be … Instead of viewing problems as having black-and-white solutions,
they are capable of perceiving shades of gray" (Feldman 2008, 70). This developing skill plays an
important role as teachers help students understand that there are many ways to portray disability, and
critically reading film includes seeing multiple possibilities.

Wood (1989) asserts that films often represent "quick and simple" solutions that tell viewers the problem
is not as overwhelming as we dread, that it is controllable, or that it is not our problem to worry about, but
someone else's. These quick and simple solutions are rarely so, especially in relation to disability.
Learning to read movies with an emphasis on how disability is constructed is an important task given both
the increasing visibility of people with disabilities in American society and the increased educational focus
of providing access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities.
We propose that teachers carefully choose and assess any movie used in the classroom, and if the film is
even peripherally related to disability, prepare to provide discussion about and critique of disability and
stereotypes within the films. Hobbs (2006) notes that "media literacy skills can be developed by asking
critical questions about media messages" (36); strategies for asking critical questions can include a wide
range of strategies. Woelders (2007) proposes that preparation for discussion of film in historical inquiry
for middle school students should, ideally, include scaffolding to guide inquiry and build on prior
understandings of a topic (146). He explains that two ways to scaffold film viewing and inquiry are the use
of a know-wonder-learn chart that includes columns for each category to record whether or nor the
information was confirmed by other sources, and anticipation guides that allow students to review
material in advance of the screening. Woelders (2007) notes that good anticipation guides "use prediction
and controversy to stimulate interest and thinking about a topic" (148), confirming the importance of
preparation and critical questioning in the use of film review. Both the know-wonder-learn chart and
anticipation guide strategies can be highly effective in supporting the media literacy skill development that
is an important part of critical film analysis.
In addition to using film to reinforce material in course units, Dole and McMahan (2005) advocate the use
of film in videotherapy contexts for students with learning disabilities and emotional issues, in which
teachers and students engage with the themes and characters in the film as they relate to students' lives.
They provide a lesson plan for the film Rudy, which focuses on the themes of "being self-determined,
persevering, and overcoming odds" (152). Discussion questions focus on students' planning their goals
and persevering in the face of adversity.
The same authors suggest that The Mighty be used in videotherapy contexts with the themes of "building
on strengths" and "friendships" and that Simon Birch be used to engage with the themes of "purpose in
life," "friendship," and "faith" (2005 153). Brown (2005) provides an evaluation form that teachers can use
with film adaptations of novels that has three parts: a rationale or purpose for use, special considerations,
and a comparison and contrast of the book and the adaptation. However, analysis of film that interrogates
representations of disability perspective rarely occurs (Safran 1998; Connor and Bejoian 2006).
Safran (2000) provides several considerations in choosing movies to be shown in classrooms, including
that teacher: 1) preview films and verify the accuracy of portrayals of disability; 2) choose films that cast
people with disabilities as characters with disabilities, that portray people with disabilities as full
participants in their communities and schools, that include characters that are fully developed so that
disability is embedded in the plot and is not the primary focus; and 3) avoid films that sensationalize or
stereotype people with disabilities. Connor and Bejoian (2006) adapted Safran's evaluation tool and
constructed a form that evaluates positive and negative representations of disability, based on the
considerations listed above. Attention to positive and negative stereotypes and actively reading movies in
the context of representations of disability can assist "in unlearning pervasive stereotypes and acquiring
new and different ways to view human difference" (Connor and Bejoian 2006, 59).

However, a focus on stereotypes and representations of disability is not enough. Inextricably linked to
critical pedagogy is participatory engagement with the text, to examine "whose voices are included and
whose excluded, preferred perspectives and alternative perspectives" (Iyer 2007, 166). Critical race
theory interrogates "institutional forces that have a disparate impact on racial minority communities"
(Parker and Stovall 2004, 174); teachers engaged in critical pedagogy do this with any cultural difference
— race, class, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, ability status — that is deemed "natural." One strategy to
engage in this process is to use questioning. Skinner (2007) used the following six questions with 7th
grade girls to support their critical engagement with popular magazines and movies:
What beliefs or messages are being presented in this text? Do you agree with these beliefs or
messages? What are some of the other beliefs on this issue? Who benefits from the beliefs
presented in this text? What is marginalized (gets left out) by the beliefs presented in this text?
If you were going to write your own text addressing these issues, which beliefs would you take
up and which beliefs would you resist? (33).
All of these questions can be used to guide students in discussions critiquing disability stereotypes.
Teachers can challenge the idea that inequality is natural and help their students uncover how schools
and broader society not only manage categories of difference and deviance, but also how they create and
enforce the meanings of these categories (Fine 1997; Hayman 1998; Minow 1990).
The Films
In this section we review scenes from the films, interrogating the prevailing negative beliefs about
disability that are present, based on the typology of stereotypes developed by Norden. First, we provide a
brief synopsis of each film, followed by an examination of the ways the characters are introduced.
Second, we explore particular scenes that imply that disability is negative and pitiable. Third, we review
the ways in which each character with a disability is constructed as a harmless "sweet innocent," and an
asexual "comic misadventurer." Finally, we examine the quests that the boys take on and how the boys
are transformed into superstars and tragic victims.
Simon Birch Synopsis
Set in 1964, Simon Birch is the story of two friends who grow up together in a small New England town.
Simon Birch is physically very small, and believes he was sent by God to do something wonderful. His
best friend Joe Wentworth narrates the story as an adult, telling the audience about their childhood. At the
time of the movie the boys are 12 or 13 years old. Both boys are outcasts in their community: Simon for
his short stature and his belief that since his survival after birth was a miracle he is destined to perform a
miracle, and Joe for his illegitimate birth status. The narrative of the film revolves around a quest. Simon
is searching for his purpose and Joe seeks the identity of his father. At the end of the film, the boys find
what they are looking for. Joe finds his father and Simon performs his miracle: saving a school bus full of
young students when the bus slides off an icy road and plunges into a lake. After the rescue he falls ill
and dies, saying from his bed "Joe, gotta go now," before drifting to sleep and then into death.
The Mighty Synopsis

Set in Cincinnati, The Mighty is the story of middle school students Max Kane and Kevin Dillon. Like
Simon Birch, both main characters are rejected by their community. Max, whose father murdered his
mother in front of him, lives with his grandparents, and is very shy. Physically very large for his age, he
lumbers through school and is frequently taunted for his difficulty with reading. Kevin is gifted
academically, but has a physical disability; he needs braces and crutches to walk, is small for his age,
and is often ill. At school Kevin is assigned to be Max's peer reading tutor, and the two become friends as
Kevin introduces Max to reading about King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table. As the two
outcasts become friends, they engage in quests, roaming around Cincinnati rescuing damsels in distress
(e.g., a woman being verbally abused by her boyfriend) and standing up to the local middle school gang,
the Doghouse Boys. Ultimately, Max's father, recently released from prison, kidnaps Max and Kevin
rescues him. The film ends with Kevin's death, in part due to the stress of the rescue.
Simon and Kevin: The Introduction
Both Simon and Kevin are introduced in ways that highlight their differences and in ways that set them
apart from others. Simon Birch opens in a churchyard with a grown Joe (narrated by Jim Carrey)
reflecting how Simon is the reason he believes in God. The film cuts to a flashback of Sunday school.
There is an almost freak show quality to the beginning of the film — in a scene set to whimsical music,
Simon is lifted up and passed around in a crucifixion pose by the other kids in the Sunday school class,
while Simon demands to be put down. Simon's birth is recounted with carnivalesque background music.
Simon is born not with a contraction, but with a sneeze, and due to his very small size, he becomes an
attraction at the hospital — people gather and gasp and stare at him in the nursery. From the moment of
his birth, Simon is the object of what Thomson (1997) calls the "gaze," that is, the gaze of the normate at
the disabled figure.
Similarly, Kevin is introduced in a way that emphasizes his difference. Max and the audience first meet
Kevin as he works behind a fence; this adheres to a convention of film that alludes to the othering or
mysterious quality of a character. We first see Kevin in a gym at school as the camera turns to Kevin,
who, slightly bent over, walks into the gym using crutches. One of the Doghouse Boys takes aim at Kevin,
and using the basketball as a bowling ball, knocks Kevin over and blames it on Max.
Negative and Pitiable Constructions of Disability
In these films Kevin and Simon are constructed as different by those around them. They want
opportunities that they, and others in the films, believe are afforded only to people without disability.
However, the responsibility of seeking out these opportunities is left to them as individuals. These films
provide no critique of prevailing stereotypes about disability; in fact, negative attitudes about difference
are reified. For example, as Joe, riding a bike, and Simon, riding in an orange box sidecar, pass by two
old men who represent the townspeople, one mutters to the other "there goes the Wentworth bastard and
his granite mouse." Joe is open to attack because his mother is not married, a definitely different status at
the time and place of the film, and Simon is physically different. Similarly, The Mighty offers such
representative utterances about Max and Kevin at the beginning of the film. Max is teased as having no
brain and his coach refers to him as a Neanderthal, while one kid says to his group as Kevin walks into
the gym, "Hey, check out the March of Dimes."
The Mighty reinforces the idea that disability is pitiable and an undesired state of being through
statements by Kevin and his mother. When Kevin is assigned to be Max's reading tutor, Max states that

he won't be able to read text from King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable that is assigned to him
by Kevin. Kevin, becoming increasingly emotional, states, "You can't? Oh, you will! Or, you might end up
in one of those special schools, with kids who can't even say their own names!" In an exchange with the
school principal, Kevin's mother asserts that while Kevin lives in a "world of books and words and ideas,"
he would "trade it all to be normal!" In both of these exchanges, Kevin and his mother reinforce a pitiable
construction of disability, articulating a fear of intellectual disability and unquestioned belief that "normal"
is preferable to a diverse experience of physical or cognitive disability.
In Simon Birch a cautionary lesson is presented: that the viewer must recognize difference and prevent
those who are different from having opportunity to participate in inclusive ways, because if that is
condoned, the results could be deadly. Simon kills Joe's mother when allowed to bat in the Little League
baseball game — his first at-bat, late in the season — and the foul ball strikes her in the head. An
implication of this development is that when people with disabilities are allowed to participate in "normate"
games, the results are disastrous, and this should be prevented at all costs.
Comic Misadventurers and Sweet Innocents
Inherent in the roles of the "comic misadventurer" and "sweet innocent" are portrayals of characters as
comic relief and as asexual innocents. Both of these archetypes are present in these films, and while
episodes related to this provide comedic release, these scenes are generally viewed with little critique. In
both films, the boys with outsider status bond and become best friends. Kevin and Max become "Freak,
the Mighty" when Kevin, recognizing that "you need a brain and I need legs," rides on Max's shoulders,
becoming, in essence, a knight and Max his steed, two "deficient" boys becoming one "whole" boy.
During the beginning and middle of the film, "Freak, the Mighty" roams the seedier streets of Cincinnati
rescuing those in need, such as breaking up domestic squabbles in diners and returning lost purses. Joe
and Simon also become best friends, and spend their days engaging in "typical" small town boy play: they
go to the quarry, swim, play baseball, and share adventures.
At some points in these films, the roles of "comic misadventurer" and "sweet innocent" converge. In The
Mighty Kevin is in the lunchroom, entertaining the group by playing with his food, putting spaghetti on his
eyebrows and head, pretending to be Groucho Marx, Marlon Brando, and ultimately, a coy girl. A subtext
is that he can't possibly be expected to have a girlfriend, so he will be the class clown. As the group
laughs and responds, he continues, getting uproarious laughter from his peers. As he becomes more and
more animated, he starts to cough and choke, and Max carries him to the nurse. He ends up being
hospitalized, the innocent who cannot exceed the limits of his frail body. The scene sends several
messages: the boy with the disability is entertaining, his humor serves as a substitute for sexuality, and
he is fragile. It is revealed that Kevin has Morquio syndrome. This scene clarifies for the audience that
Kevin is different, special — not tuned to the same chronology as his peers, with an urgency born of his
awareness that he may not live into adulthood — a misrepresentation of Morquio syndrome. In fact, the
National Mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS) Society (2000, 13) states that
Those less severely affected [by Morquio's syndrome] have lived to their fifties and sixties. It is
likely that medical advances and better management of the condition will significantly increase
life expectancy. It seems sensible, therefore, for families to hope for a reasonable life
expectancy for their child. (National MPS Society, 13)

It is clear that Kevin's genetic disorder is exaggerated to provide a dramatic turn in the film and to
foreshadow his transition from supercrip to tragic hero.
In Simon Birch Simon is similarly situated as asexual and, without critique, the film reinforces the notion
that people with disabilities cannot be sexual beings and should not expect to have that opportunity. One
scene of this film, like the lunchroom scene in The Mighty, serves three purposes: comic relief,
foreshadowing the tragedy, and the innocent and asexual nature of the disabled character. The scene
begins with Joe and Simon engaging in boy play: they run to the swimming hole, Simon mimicking
everything that Joe does, such as jumping up and trying to touch the bridge beam, shedding his clothes,
and running into the water. Joe yells that the water is so cold his "balls have shrunk to marbles" while
Simon adds that his have "shrunk to BBs." Their comments highlight the differences in their physical
bodies. While one purpose of this scene is to show the normalizing activities in which Simon engages, the
other purpose this has is to neuter Simon, rendering him asexual; that is, a boy with testicles as small as
BBs cannot expect to find a girl to see him as desirable.
While the boys are hanging out on a swimming raft two girls come up in a canoe and flirt. While the girls
are there, Simon whispers to Joe that he wonders if Maryann would let him touch her breasts if he paid
her. Joe laughs and begins to tell Maryann what Simon said. Simon stops him from repeating it, and the
girls leave. After the girls are gone, Joe teases Simon, saying that Maryann likes Simon. Simon responds
that "She likes me the way girls like baby turtles. Girls don't kiss baby turtles. If you were me, you'd
know." Simon voices the stereotype that people with physical disabilities cannot be sexual beings, and in
so doing communicates this stereotype to the viewer.
However, another scene can be construed as disrupting this "sweet innocent" asexual portrayal of Simon.
At the Christmas pageant, Simon is playing the baby Jesus, the ultimate "sweet innocent," and Maryann
is Mary. He does touch Maryann's breasts by very forthrightly taking advantage of his position as she
leans over him during a pageant melee, thus asserting his sexuality. This juxtaposition is positive in that
we see Simon as a complex character; however, even though this particular scene challenges the "sweet
innocent" role, for the majority of the film, his role as the innocent is dominant.
The Quest: Superstars and Tragic Victims
These films both include plot developments that include a quest, a building tension around a problem,
and the resolution of the problem through Simon's and Kevin's sacrificing their health, their well-being,
and ultimately their lives, to save someone else. Throughout the films, Kevin and Simon recognize that
their lives are essentially quests, which suggests that people with disabilities can't just be ordinary people
living typical lives, but are extraordinary supercrips. Kevin demonstrates this through his obsession with
King Arthur and the Knights of the Roundtable and Simon through his obsession with the miracle of his
survival and what it means. Both obsessions foreshadow the climax of the films.
In The Mighty, Kevin and Max, as the symbiotic "Freak, the Mighty," engage in knightly deeds, which lead
up to the central quest of the story: Max is kidnapped by his murderer-father and Kevin, stealing a van
and driving it with his crutch, searches for and rescues Max. Simon too finds the purpose of his life when
during the winter he is on a bus with a group of children from church. The bus crashes into the river and
the adults either run away or are hurt. Simon puts his underwater breath holding — which he has
practiced throughout the film — to the test and rescues the children. Simon is convinced that the children
listened to him because of his size.

Simon and Kevin are acknowledged as heroes, but their heroism has a price. Simon is so weakened by
the rescue of the children that he dies. Kevin, in an unrealistic representation of Morquio syndrome, dies
shortly after the rescue of Max because "his heart just got too big for his body." Simon is portrayed as a
savior, as one who showed the town "what a martyr was." According to the adult narrator Joe, Simon is
the reason he believes in God. Similarly, through Max's friendship with Kevin, Max was also saved. His
life was literally saved, and Max became "cured" of his learning disability through his and Kevin's
friendship and Kevin's guidance.
The resulting message is that the characters with disabilities only have value insofar as they rescue and
redeem the normate characters — Kevin saves Max, Simon saves a busload of young children, and
"saves" Joe from a life without faith. Kevin and Simon are "supercrips," who then become tragic victims
whose utility ends when their companions are saved — and when that utility ends, they literally die. In
their consideration of disability as a cultural sign, Hayes and Black propose a "reconciliation of
confinement," in which institutionalization or other forms of confinement are considered benevolent and
protective environments (2003, 124). In these films, the reconciliation is even more confining than
institutionalization — they both die. The reconciliation from the constraints of their lived experience is one
the viewer recognizes and applauds as Simon and Kevin are freed from the confinement of their
disabilities through their deaths.
Discussion
Simon Birch and The Mighty are valuable in that they positively portray friendships between disabled and
nondisabled characters, but the damaging and limited representations of disability that these films offer
can ossify prevailing stereotypes of disability so that audiences maintain a stigmatizing viewpoint of
persons with disability labels (Biklen 1992; Kliewer 1998).
This is particularly true if the films are used in ways that are not optimal; in her study of teacher use of
video in the K-12 classroom, Hobbs (2006) found that one half of teachers using film adaptations of
literary works "included references to the word 'fun,' suggesting that video is a treat or reward after the
'heavy' work of reading literature" (45). Instead of uncritical reviews, films offer teachers the opportunity to
engage in critical literacy from a disability studies perspective in their classrooms. Students can be guided
to recognize the stereotypic and damaging ways that disability is articulated. In this way the power that
these representations have over the viewer is diminished. These films can then be understood in a
deeper context, read as the literature they are meant to reinforce.
Using these films in class can expose students to a broader examination of disability representations in
popular culture. They can also be read in the context of "social messages" from which students and
teachers draw meanings that shape their lives (Bruna 2007). It is essential that teachers approach these
films in ways that allow students to be collectively involved in the active construction of knowledge: to
read not only the word or images, but read the world through examining and questioning issues of power
and equity in the texts and coming to understand the possibilities for change inherent in this interrogation
(Freire 1970; Freire and Macedo 1987).
Finding one's identity is a common theme in adolescent literature, and the four main characters are
engaged in self-discovery through the narrative device of being outcasts. Both Kevin and Simon are
outsiders because of their disability. Disability is a difference that matters (Minow 1990), and their
disability is a metaphor that establishes their construction as outsiders. Both boys are fully engaged in

their friendships with Max and Joe, who are also outsiders in their communities, and all four boys are
engaged in self-discovery. Both Max and Joe are outsiders in part because they do not have "typical"
families.
In The Mighty, Kevin and Max are friends explicitly because of their rejection due to their perceived
disabilities: Kevin because he has a physical disability, Max because he is perceived as intellectually
slow. The friendship could be considered problematic, in that they see themselves as a whole person only
by combining: they are not seem as having individual personhood, and only by combining their physical
and intellectual strengths are they able to transform into one "whole" person. In Simon Birch, however,
both boys, while outsiders and rejected by the majority of adults in their community, maintain their status
as "whole" persons. Simon is friends with Joe, a fairly typical boy, and while Joe is the "town bastard," he
is portrayed as an accepted member of his peer group. Simon benefits from his friendship with Joe in that
Joe's acceptance of Simon as his best friend offers Simon membership in the community of his peers.
The relationship is mutually beneficial, as Simon is Joe's confidant and partner in the discovery of the
identity of Joe's father.
Both movies use disability as a major — or even sole — facet of Simon and Kevin's characters; it is their
disability that drives the plot and informs their roles as innocents and superstars, then, finally, tragic
victims. Their deaths at the end of the movies are almost laughable when we consider the role of the
tragic victim. The viewer is essentially told that Simon and Kevin's deaths are inevitable and necessary.
An audience that does not critically explore this narrative may feel pity and satisfaction that Kevin and
Simon redeem their friends, serve their purposes, and then gallantly pass on to a better world. Both films
conform to the discourse of disability pity outlined by Hayes and Black (2003). The literal and
metaphorical elements of this discourse include confinement, hope for rehabilitation, denial of
rehabilitation, and reconciliation of confinement. Interrogating these films using these elements may allow
the viewer to deeply explore the representations of disability in the films.
In Simon Birch, Simon is "confined" by the limits of his physical body; he is not seen as a viable dating
partner for Maryann, he is sometimes patronized by his peers, and is rejected by most adults, including
his parents. He has hope for rehabilitation, for finding his identity, in that he believes he is called to do
great things, and hopes that by performing a miracle, he will be rewarded with the respect and
acceptance of the normate community. Throughout the movie he is denied this "rehabilitation," and is
mocked by his Sunday school teacher and other adults for what they perceive to be his inflated sense of
self. Near the end of the film he rescues the children. This fulfills his "hope for rehabilitation," as he
discovers his purpose and identity through this act. Simon also experiences the ultimate denial of
rehabilitation and reconciliation of confinement through his death.
Kevin similarly is confined by his physicality and the expectations of others in The Mighty. This is
confirmed by his mother pleading with the principal to allow him to participate in physical education and
by his own comments about being mostly alone and finding a refuge in books. He is stymied by his
physical limits and is often cautioned by his anxious mother not to overdo. He hopes for rehabilitation in
the form of a cure for his syndrome. This is cleverly portrayed through the construction of the "brave sick
boy." At one point in the film, Kevin shows Max a "research center" which Max later discovers is an
industrial laundry facility. Kevin harbors a secret hope that a cure will be found and he will live to
adulthood — a convenient yet inaccurate representation of Morquio syndrome. He is denied this hope,
and because he rescues Max, his purpose has been served and the viewer is satisfied with the
resolution: Kevin saves Max, Max emerges from his basement bedroom into full personhood, and Kevin

can fade from the film and from life. These representations of disability and the messages about the utility
and purpose of people with disabilities in these films provide ways for teachers to engage their students
with media texts and resist the protectionist approach to media inherent in them.
Recommendations for Using Film
In order to be successful in reframing students' attitudes towards outcomes for characters with disabilities,
Chellew (2000, 28) notes that two elements are necessary: "the appropriate selection of films with
sympathetic and accurate depictions of characters and situations; and an ongoing examination of the
potential consequences of negative imagery on public attitudes." Similarly, Safran (2000) recommends
that teachers use films that accurately portray disability, and, ideally, films that feature performers with
disabilities who are full members of their communities and who are not portrayed in stereotypical ways.
Simon Birch and The Mighty meet many of these criteria, but these films also articulate the stereotypes of
disability representations often perpetuated in Hollywood film. In Simon Birch, Simon is played by Ian
Michael Smith, an actor with Morquio syndrome, while in The Mighty, the actor does not experience
disability; moreover, the disability that Kevin has, Morquio syndrome, is portrayed inaccurately.
When introducing characters with disabilities, it is essential that they are presented as nuanced
characters who contribute more to the narrative than simply serving as a plot device. Many films,
including these two that include disability share a common narrative arc that includes the character with a
disability humanizing or saving a companion and then either dying or returning to a confined life.
Rainman, for example, includes Raymond, the character with autism, humanizing his estranged brother
then returning to life in an institution that substantially underestimates his abilities and limits his choices.
Smith notes that Raymond is a "miraculous healer" who cures his brother, who then is "no longer
avaricious, and reunites with his girlfriend as a newly reformed, caring, and sensitive lover" (Smith, 1999,
43). A second example is found in the science fiction movie Gattaca, which includes a man with a
significant physical disability giving his tissue samples to an able-bodied but less academically talented
friend, and then literally incinerating himself when the able-bodied character leaves the planet for new
adventures.
Making connections to students' lives and their prior knowledge engages them in ways that allow them to
create "discourses of their own that launch a study about subject matter not yet their own" (Shor 2005,
165). Molden (2007) provides questions for engagement in critical literacy, and two of the questions are
"How are children, teenagers, or young adults constructed in this text?" and "How are adults constructed
in this text?" One example of this process is guiding students to examine scenes in these films that
construct teenagers and adults as bullies.
In Simon Birch, two old men call Joe and Simon "the Wentworth bastard and his granite mouse," and in
The Mighty the gang the Doghouse Boys knock Kevin over by rolling a basketball at him in physical
education class. Students can discuss what these scenes mean to them, and could be encouraged to talk
about analogous experiences with bullying and ways that they have resisted bullying. A second way that
students could engage critically would be to read Danforth's (1996) "Peanut Butter and Jelly," about his
own participation in, then reflection upon, political (class) oppression. This reading could be used as a
springboard for student discussion — either in journal entries or verbal discussion — of their own
experiences. Extensions from this could include an examination of bullying on a larger scale, racial
oppression, and the resistance of the Civil Rights Movement. Teachers could then show students clips
from YouTube (http://www.youtube.com) of ADAPT protests and the American Medical Association

offices in Chicago in 2007, or use other current ADAPT videos. Starting at the individual level, exploring
bullying, to making connections to civil rights issues, expands students' analyses of both texts and of the
larger social issue of disability rights.
Resisting a narrative that emphasizes overcoming a disability is essential — Clare (1999, 2) notes that
"the dominant story about disability should be about ableism, not the inspirational supercrip crap, the
believe-it-or-not disability story" (Clare, 2). One way to avoid this "supercrip crap" is to select films with
depictions that educate students about individual abilities and societal barriers, and inform students about
issues such as "accessibility, sexuality, and independent living" (Safran 1998, 467). These broad topics
can be introduced to students by being infused into units of literature study, and students can be taught to
view film critically; Considine and Baker (2006, 26) note that "in short, for learning to occur the focus has
to shift from what they watch to how they watch."
One example of how to use films to identify and challenge a passive viewing of disability in film was
explored by Connor and Bejoian (2006, 57); they taught an elective graduate course in which teachers
were asked to develop units of study for use in elementary, middle, and high school classes, to
"introduce, extend, invert, or subvert traditional notions of disability." They found that teachers were
excited, and sometimes daunted, at the thought of creating such a unit. One teacher used the movie
Babe to incorporate math skills, activities about being valued and being part of a community, and
interdependence. Another group of teachers used excerpts from three pirate movies: Muppet Island,
Hook, and Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl to develop lessons around metaphors
related to disability and how metaphors affect our thinking.
One of the strongest metaphors in The Mighty is the image at the end of the film, of Max's setting loose
the mechanical bird that Kevin worked on in his opening scene. The mechanical bird flies through the sky,
and the Knights of the Round Table — who appear throughout the film to reinforce the quest metaphor —
appear to either say goodbye to Kevin as he ascends into heaven to become an angel, or to usher him to
Avalon, where he will be the Once and Future King. In either interpretation, Kevin sacrifices his earthly
personhood so that Max can fulfill his own personhood.
There are so many films that include characters with disabilities that it would not be useful to list them;
instead, we suggest using some form of evaluation when considering using films that include
representations of disability, such as the form used by Connor and Bejoian (2006), in which they provide
a checklist of how to determine positive or negative representations of disability in media. Additionally, it
is essential that teachers perceive the pedagogical use of films less as a passive activity with unexamined
themes and little analysis, and more as a powerful manner in which to teach media literacy. Considine
and Baker (2006, 26) acknowledge that teachers may be nervous about their own familiarity with teaching
media literacy, but encourage teachers, noting that in their experience, teachers become quite
comfortable with using new language related to the "codes, conventions, and language of cinema."
Teachers can also apply these codes and conventions to examining the possibilities of civil and political
resistance to disability oppression in media.
As advocates and educators who stress independent life skills and community integration, we recognize
that students can be taught to contest and reexamine the disability stereotypes so prevalent in films used
in classrooms. By using film as another text used for analysis, we can facilitate students' reading film in
more appropriate ways, that affirm and celebrate difference, and that challenge the standard trope of
disability: disabled character = savior = death. Students, and their teachers, can become transformative

agents who read their texts in the context of social justice and equity and who will act in their worlds in
those same contexts.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Doug Biklen for introducing us to the critical examination of film, Rebecca Burns,
Lauren Lieberman, Zach Rossetti, and Kati Fowler for their thoughtful comments and editing, and the
editors and anonymous reviewers for their rich and constructive feedback.
Works Cited
Apple, Michael. 1995. Education and power. New York: Routledge.
Biklen, Douglas. 1992. Schooling without labels: Parents, educators, and inclusive education.
Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Brown, Jean. 2005. "Film in the classroom: The non-print connection." ALAN Review Winter,
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa4063/is_200501/ai_n13486914/print (14 Dec. 2007).
Bruna, Katherine. 2007. "Finding new words: How I use critical literacy in my multicultural teacher
education classroom." Journal of Education for Teaching 33: 115-118.
Chellew, Kyle. 2000. "Inclusion not exclusion." Australian Screen Education 24: 26-30.
Chervenak, Andrea. 2006. "Depicting Disability in Film." Unpublished master's thesis, St. John Fisher
College, Rochester, New York.
Clare, Eli. 1999. Exile and pride: Disability, queerness, and liberation. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.
Connor, David, and Lynne Bejoian. 2006. "Pigs, pirates, and pills: Using film to teach the social context of
disability." Teaching Exceptional Children 39, no. 2: 52-60.
Considine, David, and Frank Baker. 2006. "Focus on film: They learn it thru the movies." The Journal of
Media Literacy 53, no. 2: 24-32.
Danforth, Scot. 1996. Autobiography as critical pedagogy: Locating myself in class-based oppression.
Teaching Education 9:3-14.
Darke, Paul. 1998. "Understanding cinematic representation of disability." In The Disability Reader: Social
Science Perspectives, ed. Tom Shakespeare, 181-200. London: Cassell.
Delpit, Lisa. 1995. Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.
Dole, Sharon, and Joanna McMahan. 2005. "Using videotherapy to help adolescents cope with social and
emotional problems." Intervention in School and Clinic 40, no. 3: 151-155.
Ebert, Roger. 1998. Roger Ebert's video companion 1998. Kansas City, MO: Andrews McMeel.
Ellis, Katie. 2003. "Reinforcing the stigma: The representation of disability In 'Gattaca'." Australian Screen
Education 31: 111-115.
Feldman, Robert. 2008. Adolescence. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Fine, Michelle. 1997. "Witnessing whiteness." In Off white: Readings on race, power, and society, eds.
Lois Weiss, Linda Powell, and L. Mun Wong, 57-65. New York: Routledge.
Freire, Paolo. 1970. Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: The Seabury Press.
Freire, Paolo, and Macedo, Donald. 1987. Literacy: Reading the word and the world. Westport, CT:
Bergin & Garvey.
Giroux, Henry. 2001. Theory and resistance in education: Towards a pedagogy for the opposition .
Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Hayes, Michael, and Rhonda Black. 2003. "Troubling signs: Disability, Hollywood movies and the
construction of a discourse of pity." Disability Studies Quarterly 23, no. 3: 114-132.
Hayman, Robert. 1998. The smart culture: Society, intelligence, and law. New York: New York University
Press.
Hobbs, Renee. 2006. "Non-optimal uses of video in the classroom." Learning, Media, and Technology 31,
no. 1: 35-50.
Iyer, Radha. 2007. "Negotiating critical, postcritical literacy: The problematic of text analysis." Literacy 41,
no. 3: 161-168.
Kellner, Douglas, and Share, Jeff. 2007. "Critical media literacy is not an option." Learning Inquiry 1: 59-
69.
Kliewer, Christopher. 1998. Schooling children with Down syndrome: Toward an understanding of
possibility. New York: Teachers College Press.
Linton, Simi. 1998. Claiming disability: Knowledge and identity. New York: New York University Press.
Linton, Simi, Susan Mello, and John O'Neill. 1995. "Disability studies: Expanding the parameters of
diversity." Radical Teacher 47: 4-10.
Longmore, Paul. 1985. "Screening stereotypes: Images of disabled people." Social Policy 16: 31-37.
The Mighty. 1999. DVD. Directed by Peter Chelsom. Hollywood, CA: Walt Disney Video.
Minow, Martha. 1990. Making all the difference: Inclusion, exclusion, and American law. Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Press.
Mitchell, David. 2002. "Narrative prosthesis and the materiality of metaphor." In Disability studies:
Enabling the humanities, eds. Sharon Snyder, Brenda Brueggemann, and Rosemarie Garland Thomson,
15-30. New York: Modern Language Association of America.
Molden, Kellie. 2007. "Critical literacy, the right answer for the reading classroom: Strategies to move
beyond comprehension for reading improvement." Reading Improvement 44: 50-56.
National MPS Society. 2000. A guide to understanding Morquio Syndrome. National
Mucopolysaccharidoses Society. http://www.mpssociety.org/content/4064/MPS__ML_Booklets/ (15 Feb.
2008).
Norden, Martin. 1994. The cinema of isolation: A history of physical disability in the movies. New
Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

Parker, Laurence, and Stovall, David. 2004. "Actions following words: Critical race theory connects to
critical pedagogy." Educational Philosophy and Theory 36, no. 2: 167-182.
Pavlides, Merope. 2005. "Whose choice is it, anyway? Disability and suicide in four contemporary films."
Journal of Disability Policy Studies 16, no. 1: 46-53.
Safran, Stephen. 1998. "The first century of disability portrayal in film: An analysis of the literature." The
Journal of Special Education 31, no. 4: 467-480.
---. 2000. "Using movies to teach students about disabilities." Teaching Exceptional Children 32, no. 3:
44-47.
---. 2001. "Movie images of disability and war: Framing history and political ideology." Remedial and
Special Education 22, no. 4: 223-232.
Shor, Ira. 2005. "Why teach about social class?" Teaching English in the Two Year College 33, no. 2:
161-170.
Simon Birch. 1999. DVD. Directed by Mark Steven Johnson. Hollywood, CA: Walt Disney
Skinner, Emily. 2007. Writing workshop meets critical media literacy: Using magazines and movies as
mentor texts. Voices from the Middle 15, no. 2: 30-39.
Smith, Claude. 1999. "Finding a warm place for someone we know: The cultural appeal of recent mental
patient and asylum films." Journal of Popular Film & Television 27, no. 1: 40-47.
Thomson, Rosemarie Garland. 1997. Extraordinary bodies: Figuring physical disability in American
culture and literature. New York: Columbia University Press.
Woelders, Adam. 2007. "It makes you think more when you watch things": Scaffolding for historical
inquiry using film in the middle school classroom." The Social Studies 98, no. 4: 145-152.
Wood, Michael. 1989. America in the movies. New York: Columbia University Press.
Return to Top of Page
Copyright © 2000-11, The Society for Disability Studies.
If you encounter problems with the site or have comments to
offer, including any access difficulty due to incompatibility with
adaptive technology, please contact the Web Manager, Henry
Griffy.
Disability Studies Quarterly acknowledges and appreciates the Ohio State
University Libraries for publishing DSQ as part of the University's
Knowledge Bank initiative.

“I’m So Excited About This!”
A Shared Administrative Vision for Inclusive Practice
Katrina Arndt and Laura Whitcomb
The title for this essay is a quote from the Village Elementary School principal in Hilton
who was very pleased to be engaged in the work of changing a 15:1:1 self-contained special
education program for grades five and six to an integrated-co-teaching program. This work is
the focus of our essay, which explores the success that can evolve with shared administrative
support for inclusive practices. In Hilton supporting inclusive practice at all grade levels is
ongoing. Our focus on the fifth and sixth grade classrooms reflects our commitment to exploring
the experiences of one group of teachers and administrators.
Hilton Central School District in Western New York is a midsized school district adjacent
to the Rochester area. Hilton has three elementary schools, one middle school, and one high
school; the high school serves around 1500 students, the middle school has about 700 students
in grades 7-8, and the three elementary schools serve around 2200 students between them
(About Hilton Schools, n.d.). Hilton has a long history of low turnover for teachers and
administrators; the result is a faculty strongly committed to the district. The security of long
relationships has created a strong foundation for innovation and risk-taking in many areas,
including exploring how to best serve students with disabilities. In this essay, we review the
history of inclusive practice in Hilton, discuss how the district has developed inclusive practices,
and provide recommendations for practice.
Inclusive Practice in Hilton
In the last thirty years – from 1980 to 2010 - Hilton’s inclusive practice has shifted from
a reliance on special education services provided by private schools and Board of Cooperative
Educational Services (BOCES) programs to retaining most students with disabilities in district.
Before the late 1980s, Hilton –like many surrounding districts - utilized BOCES and approved
private schools for services for students with disabilities who needed levels of specialized
instruction or support not available through the district. This involved relying on these agencies
to recruit, hire, and supervise special education teachers, who were then assigned to teach
classes of students with disabilities who came from Hilton and other local districts.
Just as special education law and practices evolved from its beginnings in the 1970s,
Hilton’s special education service delivery model evolved as well. Students with significant
learning disabilities, emotional disabilities and developmental delays were gradually brought
back to the district beginning in the late 1970’s. Students who had been attending approved
private schools and BOCES classrooms began attending district-based special classes as
programs were developed in Hilton to meet their needs. Programs included self-contained
classrooms with ratios of students, teachers, and teacher assistants of 15:1:1, 12:1:1, 8:1:1,
and 6:1:1. Some of those classrooms continue, while other classrooms have been dissolved as
more co-teaching and inclusive practices have been instituted. A new model of service delivery
19

in many states is co-taught classrooms with a general education teacher and a special
education teacher together for the full day. Over time, the Hilton school community has
become accustomed to integrating students with disabilities in local school buildings and
programs. As the district’s capacity to deliver specialized instruction grows, fewer students are
referred to out of district placements and more students received their special education
services in the general education classroom.
The New York State Department of Education is clear that there are important reasons
for students with disabilities to be part of State assessment and accountability systems. The
New York State Department of Education notes that:
Including students with disabilities in accountability systems has resulted in parents,
teachers, and administrators paying more attention to grade-level standards and
ensuring that students with disabilities have access to the general curriculum and an
opportunity to learn grade-level content. Together, the IDEA and NCLB work to provide
the specialized and individualized instruction and school accountability that is critical to
improving achievement for students with disabilities. (Modified Academic Achievement
Standards, 2007)
As Hilton examined ways to help students with disabilities meet higher expectations, it
became evident that self-contained classroom options did not ensure students access to the
content and skills that define the general education curriculum. So, new settings and models of
inclusive practice were developed, including less reliance on the in-district special classes and
more provision of consultant teacher services designed to push into general education
classrooms and resource room services to support skill and content.
Hilton Central School District’s ongoing assessment of special education programs led to
phasing out the district-based 15:1:1 special class option at both the middle school and high
school level several years ago. These special classes had been designed for students with
significant learning and or language disabilities. With the strong support of the middle and high
school principals, students were successfully integrated in general education classrooms and
are achieving at higher rates than when they were in self-contained programs. This successful
integration at the secondary level has been supported by a strong consultant teacher and
resource room model. Students formerly in self-contained programs receive support,
accommodations and case management by special education teachers working collaboratively
with general education teachers.
The natural next step for Hilton is to continue phasing out the 15:1:1 special class selfcontained
model at the intermediate level of elementary school. So, in 2009-10, with
enthusiastic support from the elementary building principal and assistant principal, a yearlong
staff development plan was implemented in order to enhance inclusive practices for all
teachers working in a consultant teacher-general education teacher partnership and to prepare
specific teachers for an integrated co-teaching model. In 2010-11 the district will not operate
the 15:1:1 special class at grades 5-6 and will instead provide integrated co-taught classrooms
at both grade levels. Students formerly in the self-contained classroom will now be educated
20

with their nondisabled peers in an instructional setting that provides a general education
teacher and a special education teacher and a teacher assistant for the full day.
Inclusive Practice in Action
In our discussions about this essay, we realized that underlying all the practical realities
of inclusive education in the Hilton Central School District are three strong beliefs, shared by
building and district administrators. First, a sense that children from Hilton should be educated
in Hilton is explicit; second, the “earn your way in” mentality that can be a barrier to inclusive
classrooms is challenged; and third, the idea that special education is specialized instruction –
not a particular classroom setting or particular teacher’s services - is clearly articulated and
repeated. Professional development for building teachers and staff is aligned with these
foundational ideas about what inclusion can and should be.
We Want Our Kids
The history of BOCES in the late 1970s is one of service provision for smaller districts
with few resources for students with disabilities. BOCES served an important role in helping
districts educate previously excluded students. As more districts recognized the possibility of
including children with disabilities, BOCES has evolved into new roles in consulting services,
professional development, and continuing to serve students with the most severe disabilities.
Hilton has gradually brought more and more students with disabilities back into the district,
supporting the belief that children from the community should be served with their non
disabled peers, in their home district.
This philosophy grounds inclusive practices in the elementary, middle, and high school,
and focuses discussion about students with disabilities on practical solutions at the building
level. The shared commitment to “all means all” leads to productive discussion about shifting
classroom composition, educating teachers, and continually adjusting how instruction is
provided for all learners. While this is not always easy, the shared commitment to inclusive
practices between the superintendent, special education director, other instructional directors,
and the principals focuses discussions on solving problems and moving forward.
This experience confirms what Tomlinson, Brimijoin, and Narvaez (2008) note about the
nature of leadership – that at the building level, “the pivotal leader for change is the principal”
(p. 23). In Hilton, there is a shared mission and vision among all stakeholders with respect to
meeting the needs of each individual learner. This shared mission and vision, coupled with
strong district-office administrative supports and enthusiastic building leadership has led to
ongoing change and improvements in inclusive practices across the district.
Grades Do Not Always Reflect Learning
Affirming that students with disabilities need access to the general education curriculum
is key to supporting inclusive practice. In Hilton, an understanding that the general education
classroom is the best place to access the richness of the full curriculum is evident. The Director
of Special Education believes that we may not always know what a student is capable of
21

learning; unfortunately, in the absence of traditional measures of success, students with
disabilities have often been segregated in self-contained classrooms.
Instead of this traditional and limiting practice, the Director of Special Education helps
teachers focus on individual achievement – and notes that grades are just one measure of
success. Her philosophy is based on current recommendations about effective differentiation.
Tomlinson & McTighe (2006) noted that shifting grading practices toward effective assessment
includes thinking of assessment as “a photo album – a collection of evidence - rather than a
single snapshot” (p. 135).
Special Education = Specialized Instruction
Special education is not a place; it is a service. The misconception that “those kids”
belong somewhere other than the general education setting is a long standing one, and one
that we continue to challenge. Teachers need to be prepared to provide high quality
differentiated instruction for all students – and with appropriate supports and services, we
believe this is possible. A concern for many teachers is that they are not prepared or
knowledgeable about how to provide instruction to meet the needs of students with
disabilities. Integrated classrooms help address this concern and there are far reaching benefits
to everyone in the classroom when two highly qualified teachers are available to help a
heterogeneous group of students.
Recommendations for Practice
Other districts considering how to move inclusive practices forward may consider this
recommendation from Hilton: know and accept what your district’s capacities are. That is, be
willing to examine what your district is doing well, what could change, and how to begin to
implement change in deliberate and thoughtful ways. Hilton’s Director of Special Education
notes that there is still a small group of Hilton students who have complex and severe needs.
The complexity of these needs is more than Hilton is able to support in district based programs
at this point.
While she is not pleased that some Hilton students are placed out of the district, the students
are well supported and are getting what they need in their specialized programs. Trying to
effect change in too many places at one time is often not useful; instead, Hilton is focused on
manageable, measurable goals related to inclusion. In 2009-2010, the focus is on supporting
the development of integrated co-taught classrooms in 5 th and 6 th grade.
Information about the authors: Katrina Arndt, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Inclusive
Education Program at St. John Fisher College. Laura Whitcomb is Director of Special Education
for Hilton Central Schools in Hilton, NY.
22

References
About Hilton Schools. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.hilton.k12.ny.us/Hilton-schools.htm
Modified Academic Achievement Standards. (2007). No Child Left Behind Non-regulatory
Guidance. Retrieved from:
http://find.ed.gov/search?client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet
=default_frontend&q=NCLB+and+IDEA
Tomlinson, C., Brimijoin, K., & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making
revolutionary changes in teaching and learning. Alexandria,VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding
by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
“I’m So Excited About This!”
A Shared Administrative Vision for Inclusive Practice
Extended Learning Opportunities
1) What are the apparent strengths of the dissolution of the 15:1:1 classrooms and their
replacement by an integrated consultant teacher-general education teacher partnership?
2) What do the authors suggest about the need to rethink our traditional view of assessment
when they claim that “Grades do not always reflect learning?”
3) Why do you believe that it has taken nearly thirty years for many schools in this region to
accept more direct responsibility for educating all students in the home district?
4) How might you personally help to promote what the authors describe as “a shared vision
among all stakeholders?”
5) Can you envision a time when even students with “complex and severe needs” would be
educated in their neighborhood schools? If so, how do we get there?
23

Original Research
College Students Who Are Deafblind:
Perceptions of Adjustment and
Academic Supports
Katrina Arndt, PhD*
St. John Fisher College
Rochester, NY
Abstract
This descriptive qualitative interview study investigates the perspectives of college students who are
deafblind. The purpose of the research was to investigate participants’ perceptions about being college
students and deafblind and to gain insights into their experiences. Qualitative methods were used to
conduct videotaped interviews with 11 students. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed. Results of
the study indicate that students had to manage both adjustments to visual impairment and academic
supports. Implications for practice include being knowledgeable about deafblindness and supporting selfdetermination
skills.
Keywords: deafblind, college, adjustments, supports
Introduction
Students with disabilities are attending college in
increasing numbers. In a report on the changes
between 1987 and 2003 in the postsecondary
education participation of youth with disabilities,
youth classified as having multiple handicaps or
being deafblind demonstrated increases of participation
in 2-year and 4-year colleges (Wagner, Newman,
Cameto, & Levine, 2005). However, there is very little
research about college students who are deafblind.
Petroff (2001) noted ‘‘only limited research has been
conducted to date on the postschool outcomes and
community adjustment of young adults with severe
disabilities and even less for the subset population of
youth who are deaf-blind’’ (p. 38).
College students who are deafblind are a small
and unique group, and there is little research
reporting their perspectives. A search of the literature
* Please address correspondence to
karndt@sjfc.edu.
12 | Received August 9, 2009; Accepted November 13, 2009
specifically about college-age students revealed firstperson
reports of those who are deafblind in college
(Leclair, 2001; Talbot-Williams, 1996), recommendations
for students and colleges (Bhattacharyya, 1997;
Everson & Enos, 1995; Ingraham, Belanich, &
Lascek, 1998; Lago-Avery, 2001/2002; Nelson,
2005), and information on self-determination and
transition (National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness
[NCDB], 2009; National Family Association for Deaf-
Blind, 2002). Related work about younger students
who are deafblind includes examinations of social
experiences in educational settings (Correa-Torres,
2008; Romer & Haring, 1994). This relative paucity of
research may be because many people who are
deafblind also are affected by other disabilities, and
their schooling often includes ‘‘life skills’’ training and
attention to transition planning from the school setting
to community involvement (Huven & Siegel, 1995)
instead of trajectories toward higher education.
A possible negative outcome associated with the
lack of research on the needs of college students
who are deafblind is that service providers may not
have the knowledge and skills they need to provide

adequate services to this population of students. In
1979 Yoken commented that ‘‘a primary shortcoming
of rehabilitation services for deafblind people is the
lack of specific training for the counselor or social
worker entering the field’’ (p. 2). This continues, and
the literature has consistently maintained that deafblindness
is not generally understood (McInnes,
1999; McInnes & Treffry, 1982; Riggio, 2009;
Sauerburger, 1995); efforts must be made to inform
people who are deafblind and their communities
about deafblindness and how to provide supports.
Understanding deafblindness and the needs of
students who are deafblind is especially important for
supporting inclusive educational opportunities. Killoran
(2007) reported that based on the National
Deaf-Blind Child Count, the number of students who
are deafblind in inclusive settings has not increased
substantially between 1998 and 2005:
On the average, only 8% of school-aged students
with deafblindness have been served in regular
classrooms and only 7% in resource settings.
Interestingly there has been little variability in
these settings throughout the years, despite the
federal emphasis on the provision of services to
students in least restrictive settings and the
inclusion of students in the general education
curriculum. These data indicate that more
intensive and effective efforts to include children
with deafblindness within the general education
setting are very necessary. (p. 12)
Educating school professionals about how to
successfully integrate students who are deafblind
must happen: Students who are deafblind need to
have access to their peers, to high standards, and to
high expectations about educational achievement.
The result of such efforts, it is hoped, will be inclusive
educational opportunities in colleges and universities.
To this end, Correa-Torres (2008) called for more
research to be undertaken with students beyond
elementary school age who are deafblind; this study
is one response to that need.
The purpose of this study was to investigate
participants’ perceptions about being college students
and deafblind and to gain insights into that
experience. The findings presented here are taken
from a 2-year interview study and report on student
experiences with adjusting to deafblindness and
accessing supports. The research question ad-
College Students Who Are Deafblind
dressed in this article is the following: What do
college students who are deafblind report about their
adjustment to deafblindness and their experiences
with academic supports?
Method
Methodological decisions were based on several
assumptions of the qualitative tradition. Theoretical
assumptions of the qualitative tradition grounding this
work include (a) that the meaning people use to
describe their lives is crucial to understanding human
action, (b) that interviewing is a dynamic process, (c)
that analysis is inductive, and (d) that being present in
the research is not a barrier to conducting research.
Participants
Eleven participants were interviewed for this
study: eight men and three women. Ten participants
ranged in age from 18 to 23, whereas one participant
was 35 years old, having returned to college after a
career in the workforce. Among participants, 10 have
Usher syndrome and one has cortical deafness and
blindness. Racial identity was predominantly European
American; eight participants were White. Two
participants were Asian American, and one was
African American.
Of the participants with Usher syndrome, four
knew they had Usher syndrome before entering high
school. Three learned about Usher syndrome in high
school, and two learned about Usher syndrome after
entering college, when they noticed their visual fields
changing. One participant did not report when he
learned about having Usher syndrome, but it was
clear that he had been aware of having the
syndrome for some time.
Usher syndrome affects both hearing and vision.
Three types of Usher syndrome have been identified,
all involving varying degrees of hearing loss and vision
loss caused by retinitis pigmentosa. Retinitis pigmentosa
causes night blindness and an ongoing and
progressive loss of peripheral vision. Many people with
Usher syndrome also have severe balance problems
(National Institutes of Health, n.d., p. 1).
Setting
Maintaining confidentiality in the field of deafblindness
is challenging due to the limited number of
people involved in the field (Jones, 2001, p. 41).
However, the college is not named here in an effort
to maintain as much confidentiality as possible.
Volume 3, Number 1, Winter 2010 | 13

College Students Who Are Deafblind
The setting for this study was a technical college
(‘‘Sunnyside College’’) for students in the northeast
United States who are deaf or hard of hearing.
Sunnyside College is housed on the campus of
‘‘Parent University.’’ The campus population includes
13,000 students who are hearing and 1,100 who are
deaf. Students who are deaf typically enter Sunnyside
College, completing an associate degree.
Transferring to Parent University for coursework
toward a bachelor degree is common.
Procedure
Theproceduresusedinthisstudy,asreportedin
Arndt (2005), were reviewed and approved by the
institutional review board of the researcher’s institution
and Sunnyside College. Participants were solicited
through an initial contact on campus, and then
interviews were arranged by e-mail. Snowball sampling—getting
to know participants and then having
them introduce the researcher to others (Taylor &
Bogdan, 1998)—was used to add new participants.
Participants were interviewed and videotaped in a
room equipped with split-screen videotape-recording
capacity, and all interviews were conducted in the
language and mode the participant chose. Language
forms included American Sign Language (ASL), signed
English, spoken English, or a combination. An
interview guide was used (Taylor & Bogdan, 1998,
p. 106) and opened with ‘‘tell me about college,’’ with
follow-up questions. The conversation dictated the
topics discussed, following Bogdan and Biklen’s (1998)
tenet that interview schedules ‘‘generally allow for
open-ended responses and are flexible enough for the
observer to note and collect data on unexpected
dimensions of the topic’’ (p. 71). Interviews ranged in
length from 20 minutes to 1 hour.
All participants were interviewed at least once; two
were interviewed twice each, one individual was
interviewed three times, and one was interviewed
four times. The number of interviews was determined
by participant interest and availability. All interviews
were transcribed by the researcher into English text,
in some cases interpreting them from ASL to English.
Transcripts comprised 400 pages of data.
Data Analysis
Interviews were completed in three batches over
an 8-week period, followed by a break of several
months for transcription and data analysis before the
fourth and final batch of interviews was conducted.
This process allowed for an inductive process of close
reading and analysis; during each analysis cycle all
data were read in undisturbed periods by the author to
gain a sense of the totality of the data (Bogdan &
Biklen, 1998). Analysis included careful reading of field
notes and interview transcripts, writing and analyzing
comments within the field notes and interviews, writing
and analyzing reflective memos, and frequent
discussion with participants and fellow researchers
familiar with the field notes and interview transcripts.
Member checks were used when participants were
available to ensure the accuracy of transcripts. This
included providing a transcript of the interview to the
student, either electronically or in print according to his
or her preference, for review and correction.
Data were coded and trustworthiness established
using inductive analysis to develop themes that
reflected relationships represented in the data
(Hatch, 2002, p. 164). Themes were refined and
the data evaluated for quality, including counterevidence
(Hatch). In addition, two peer researchers
participated in the development of themes and
confirmed the analysis.
Discussion
14 | AER Journal: Research and Practice in Visual Impairment and Blindness
Finding that participants were concerned about their
vision and accessing academic supports was not
surprising: Participants were strongly affected by their
daily life experience with visual impairment, which
included both psychological adjustment and adaptation
to their daily lives and the search for supports to be
successful in the academic environment. This confirms
Aitken, Buultjens, Clark, Eyre, and Pease (2000), who
assert that deafblindness significantly affects access to
information and engagement with people and things in
the environment.
Adjusting to Visual Impairment
Brennan (1994) noted that ‘‘deteriorating vision
presents the overwhelming task of developing skills
and resources necessary to maintain independent
living. Many people who become Deaf-Blind experience
a ‘grieving’ process that can span many
years’’ (p. 7). This was confirmed by participants in
this study, who spent time and energy learning about
their vision loss and accommodating to it. One
participant, who had learned about his visual
impairment just months before being interviewed,
said, ‘‘I refused to believe that I was legally blind….

I’m trying to accept it. I have ups and downs
sometimes. I want to yank my eyeball out, and kind
of polish it.’’ Denial is an important part of grieving
the loss of vision; however, Brennan warns that
denial ‘‘is perhaps the easiest [phase] to become
stuck in’’ (2002, p. 28). Emerging from denial may
allow a focus on learning skills necessary for
independent living. This was evident in participants
who had learned about their visual impairment before
coming to college; they were well past initial grief and
denial and had matter-of-fact attitudes about their
abilities and plans.
As participants’ visual acuity changed, so did their
need to adapt to their environments, including the
people around them, in new ways. For example, one
young man felt strongly about planning for an
independent life. His mother was concerned, however,
and was not sure this was possible. Miner (1995), in
her interviews with people with Usher syndrome type I
and their families, also found that parents were
concerned about their child’s future. In this case, the
participant was frustrated with his mother’s perception
that he would not be able to live independently:
Can’t can’t can’t. That’s wrong. I know that I can
do many things. I can learn to do each thing in a
different way. I can cook, I can clean, I can wash,
and I can do a whole list of things. I can be
independent in my own house. I will be just fine.
He believed that he could learn the skills he needed,
even though he might complete tasks in a ‘‘different
way’’ than people who are hearing and sighted. This
conflicted with his mother’s perspective. He adapted to
his changing vision by planning to learn new strategies;
this attitude of coping and finding solutions instead of
accepting living at home was common.
A second example of finding solutions involves a
participant who had difficulty seeing in the dark, which
limited her participation in crew (which involved
practice before dawn). Her coach urged her not to
quit when her vision changed, and she continued with
crew for a time. What she found, though, was that
getting to practice and then trying to synchronize
rowing with her teammates was exhausting and took
more energy than she was willing to expend. Instead,
she quit the team and found other outlets for physical
activity. Her decision was deliberate and matter-offact:
She noted that although she enjoyed being on the
team and the camaraderie of her teammates, the
College Students Who Are Deafblind
energy it took to navigate getting to the boathouse,
then trying to match her teammates’ motion, was
simply not worth it.
A final example of ways that participants adjusted to
visual impairment is a young woman who left an
independent living program to attend college. In
describing her decision to leave a residential independent
living program to come to college, she noted:
I will get more training about blindness later, but I
want to have the time for my education first, then
maybe I’ll be blind . . . and transfer into independent
living programs later if I want. Right now I
want to get my degree before my vision deteriorates.
In this example, as in the first two, the participant is
deliberate and matter-of-fact about the vision she has
now and how she can make the best use of the
resources around her.
Academic Supports
The second finding was the importance of academic
supports in participants’ lives. All participants discussed
academic supports and negotiating with their
instructors at Sunnyside College. Although Sunnyside
College serves a population of students who are
audiologically deaf, the population of students who are
deafblind is small, and supports were individually
determined. This aligns with best practice recommendations
of individualized supports (Lago-Avery, 2001/
2002; Lieberman & Stuart, 2002; Miles, 2003; NCDB,
2009; Riggio & McLetchie, 2008).
Adaptations for individuals who are deafblind are
different from those used for people who are
primarily or only deaf (Correa-Torres, 2008). At
Sunnyside College and Parent University, academic
supports included one-to-one interpreters, small
personal televisions that reproduced images from a
PowerPoint presentation or overhead projector, C-
Print, and note-takers. The range of supports
reported by participants is similar to the range listed
in 2001 by Jordan; that list also includes assistive
listening devices, tutors, readers, large-print and
braille texts, and reading machines. In a review of
how New York University supported a student who is
deafblind, Bourquin (1994) noted there were two
major factors that led to successful service delivery.
First, planning was integral: needs were anticipated
when possible and identified as early as possible.
Second, and harder to quantify, was the attitude of
Volume 3, Number 1, Winter 2010 | 15

College Students Who Are Deafblind
the university. Bourquin noted that ‘‘the employees of
the university were consistently cooperative, understanding,
and willing to assist’’ (p. 37). These two
factors continue to be essential to responsive and
flexible service provision.
Participants in this study discussed the supports
they used and how their instructors responded to them;
comments were largely positive and included statements
that instructors provided large-print copies of
materials and copies of PowerPoint presentations and
were accepting of students selecting seating that best
supported their vision needs. One participant was
pleased with the supports he accessed and responses
he had from instructors:
I’ve informed all my teachers that I have Usher
syndrome, so I might have a hard time reading
normal print or something like that. Teachers will
say, ‘‘Oh, fine!’’ and they have things ready for me.
Or if they use the overhead and I can’t see it, they
make a copy and give it to me. Some teachers are
really motivated and willing to help me out to
improve my education.
In this instance, the participant was supported in
positive ways and had access to materials; this was
not always the case.
Several students were vehement that supports
were difficult to get, difficult to sustain, and limited
their ability to achieve in their classes. One issue
was the need to educate instructors about deafblindness.
This is not unusual; given the low
incidence of deafblindness, most college instructors
will not have had a student who is deafblind.
A participant’s comments about the difficulties he
faced illustrates why this can be problematic:
Understanding Usher syndrome means knowing
what you need to do to provide support, knowing
how to help with tactile sign, or lighting, or things
like that. But others don’t understand, and have no
idea, no understanding of what to do with a person
who has Usher syndrome. . . . Some teachers
had no idea what to do, or how to do it. It was
hard, I had to teach them. I felt like I was always
explaining all the different variables.
A tip sheet for teaching students who are
deafblind (Jordan, 2001) states that every student
has different needs and that it is important for
16 | AER Journal: Research and Practice in Visual Impairment and Blindness
teachers to meet with the student to determine what
supports are useful. Student experiences highlight
the need for service provision to be responsive and
timely, as well as the need to be flexible about
timelines for course completion.
All participants managed having a visual impairment
and progressing through college in ways that
can inform practice for future students. The need to
individualize accommodations through discussion
with the student who is deafblind and treating him
or her as expert in what he or she needs are
recommendations from this study and are confirmed
in the literature (Bhattacharyya, 1997; Jordan, 2001;
NCDB, 2009; Olson, 1999).
Implications for Practice
This study provides confirmation that many
recommendations align with what students themselves
report about their experience. Riggio (2009)
noted that service providers must be knowledgeable
about deafblindness, must solicit guidance from a
deafblind specialist, and must treat communication
with the student who is deafblind as a primary need.
Participants in this study managed adjusting to visual
impairment and accessing supports in ways that
demonstrate the importance of supportive family and
service providers.
The challenge for practitioners in the collegiate
setting is to adopt strategies that support both the
individual and the surroundings. In her comprehensive
review of guidelines for working with people who
are deafblind, Smith (2002) recommended that
professionals remember that ‘‘Deaf-Blind people
are competent to run their own lives’’ and that ‘‘help
without understanding and involvement of Deaf-Blind
people is just more oppression’’ (p. 6).
Implications from this study include four recommendations
for service providers (Table 1). First,
service providers need to be willing and able to
provide assistance to students in accessing supports
within the college and with agencies beyond the
college. Young adults who are deafblind are not
always fluent in expressing their needs or even in
understanding what they might need; Lago-Avery
(2001/2002) suggested, in fact, not assuming that
young adults with Usher syndrome have a strong
familiarity about the syndrome or possible services
and recommended a series of questions to ask to
help a student understand what services might be
helpful. Knowledgeable resources include the Helen

Table 1. Recommendations for Service Providers
Provide assistance in accessing supports within
the college and with agencies beyond the
college
Be flexible in expectation of time it takes to earn a
degree
Be knowledgeable about deafblindness
Foster self-determination and advocacy skills
Keller National Center (HKNC) and the NCDB. The
HKNC Web address is http://www.hknc.org, and the
NCDB Web site is http://www.nationaldb.org.
Second, service providers need to be flexible in
expectations of the time it takes to earn a degree.
That is, a student who is deafblind may need to take
a reduced course load to effectively balance the
demands of college coursework with time and
energy. The time it takes a student who is deafblind
to complete a degree may be extended beyond a
typical student progression or may be interrupted by
periods of time that might include training at the
HKNC or travel while vision is good.
Third, college personnel need to be knowledgeable
about deafblindness and, just as important, disseminate
this information on campus to faculty, staff, and
students. Becoming familiar with Usher syndrome or
deafblindness is possible now through online resources,
including NCDB’s information services, DB-LINK, at
http://www.nationaldb.org/ISDefault.php; 800-438-9376
(voice); or 800-854-7013 TTY.
Finally, Smith noted that it is possible for people who
are deafblind to appear ‘‘less competent than they
actually are because of a lack of information or
confidence [or] because of a lack of appropriate
support’’ (Smith, 2002, p. 6). College personnel must
be aware of this possibility and actively work to foster
the self-determination and advocacy skills of students.
Practical ways to do this include being available to
provide support, being flexible and trusting the student,
and building strong connections with other agencies.
Limitations of the Study
There are two primary limitations of this study. First
is the nature of the analysis, which was conducted
primarily by a single researcher. The strategy of
reviewing the development of themes supported
inductive data analysis. An alternate way of completing
this research, and a possible direction for future
College Students Who Are Deafblind
research, would be to gather multiple forms of data,
such as interviews from participants, their teachers,
and their families. This triangulation of several
perspectives could further strengthen the findings.
A second limitation is that the unique nature of
Sunnyside College and Parent University made
student experience a similarly unique one; there are
college students who are deafblind in institutions of
higher education all over the world without access to
a student population of students who are deaf. Those
students may face different experiences and levels of
familiarity with deafblindness.
Suggestions for
Future Research
Directions for future research include continuing
this study, following a small group of young adults as
they graduate, relocate, and begin to explore
working. This direction is informed by the experiences
of one student in this study; as he entered an
internship setting, it was clear that challenges were
present in identifying and securing needed supports
(Arndt, 2008). Information from a range of young
adults entering the workplace could inform practice;
understanding service provision from the perspective
of the consumer is essential, and this type of
investigation might add to the literature around
workplace supports for adults who are deafblind.
A second direction for future research would be to
explore the experiences of college students who are
deafblind before they enter college; understanding
the school, community, and family experiences that
helped young adults who are deafblind in their
planning toward higher education might aid in
refining our understanding of best practices for
service providers and families.
A third suggestion for future research is to conduct
interview research about life experience with students
who are deafblind in colleges that do not include a
strong deaf community; the particular circumstances
of students in this study limit the ways that information
can be applied to other campuses. As students who
are deafblind consider college, it may be that they
select a college that is unused to providing services for
someone who uses sign language and is even less
familiar with someone who uses sign language and
has needs related to visual impairment as well. The
experiences of these students would be a useful
addition to existing research about supporting
students who are deafblind in college.
Volume 3, Number 1, Winter 2010 | 17

College Students Who Are Deafblind
Finally, future research might include surveying
service providers at colleges throughout the United
States and internationally to determine where students
who are deafblind are attending college, what services
are currently in use, and what needs exist for
information or training. The general census information
that could be gathered would be a useful source of
information for students who are deafblind and
considering college, for service providers advising
high school students, and for the colleges themselves
to network with each other about ways to support
students who are deafblind on campus.
Acknowledgments
The author thanks Doug Biklen, Marj DeVault, and
Steve Taylor for their guidance and support, and the
reviewers and editor for their supportive feedback.
References
Aitken, S., Buultjens, M., Clark, C., Eyre, J., & Pease, L.
(2000). Teaching children who are deafblind. London: David
Fulton Publishers.
Arndt, K. (2008). ‘‘Use what you have, be thankful you
have it’’: Work and the promise of social inclusion for
students with disabilities. In M. Devault (Ed.), People at
work: Life, power, and social inclusion in the new economy.
New York: New York University Press.
Arndt, K.L. (2005). ‘‘They should know they have Usher
syndrome around here’’: College students who are deafblind.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Syracuse University,
Syracuse, New York.
Bhattacharyya, A. (1997, September). Deaf-blind students
seek educational opportunities. Paper presented at the
Sixth Helen Keller World Conference, Paipa, Colombia.
Bogdan, R.C., & Biklen, S.K. (1998). Qualitative research
for education (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Bourquin, E. (1994). Providing support services for a deafblind
student in a mainstream university environment.
Journal of American Deafness and Rehabilitation, 28, 31–39.
Brennan, M. (1994). The deaf-blind community: A tale of
two cultures. Usher Family Support, Spring, 5–7.
Brennan, M. (2002). Psychological issues of deaf-blindness.
Deaf-Blind American, 41, 23–33.
Correa-Torres, S.M. (2008). The nature of the social
experiences of students with deaf-blindness who are
educated in inclusive settings. Journal of Visual Impairment
and Blindness, 102, 272–283.
Everson, J., & Enos, J. (1995). Postsecondary education:
Opportunities and challenges for students who are deafblind.
HKNC-TAC News, 8, 1–11.
Hatch, J.A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education
settings. Albany: State University of New York Press.
18 | AER Journal: Research and Practice in Visual Impairment and Blindness
Huven, B., & Siegel, S. (1995). Joining the community:
Planning for adult life. In N.G. Haring & L.T. Romer (Eds.),
Welcoming students who are deaf-blind into typical classrooms
(pp. 17–35). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
Ingraham, C.L., Belanich, J., & Lascek, S. (1998). Effective
transition planning for successful postsecondary outcomes for
students who are deaf-blind. Proceedings of the Biennial
Conference on Postsecondary Education for Persons
Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: Empowerment
Through Partnerships: PEPNET’98 (pp. 282–289). Knoxville,
TN: University of Tennessee.
Jones, M.A. (2001). Support services for individuals with
acquired deafblindness: A comparison of perspectives in
the United Kingdom. (Doctoral dissertation, University of
California, Berkeley, 2001). Dissertation Abstracts International,
62, 3015.
Jordan, B. (2001). Teaching students who are deaf-blind.
NETAC Teacher Tipsheet. ACC-99-004. Rochester, NY:
Rochester Institute of Technology, Northeast Technical
Assistance Center.
Killoran, J. (2007). The National Deaf-Blind Child Count:
1998–2005 in review. The National Technical Assistance
Consortium For Children and Young Adults Who Are Deaf-
Blind. Retrieved November 5, 2009, from: http://nationaldb.
org/documents/products/Childcountreview0607Final.pdf
Lago-Avery, P. (2001/2002). Strategies for postsecondary
educational and support service personnel serving college
students with Usher syndrome. Deaf-Blind Perspectives,
9(2), 8–11.
Leclair, P. (2001). Profile. Intervention, 26(2), 31.
Lieberman, L.J., & Stuart, M. (2004). Self-determined
recreational and leisure choices of individuals with deafblindness.
Journal of Visual Impairment and Blindness, 96,
724–735.
McInnes, J.M. (1999). A guide to planning and support for
individuals who are deafblind. Toronto, ON: University of
Toronto Press.
McInnes, J.M., & Treffry, J.A. (1982). Deaf-blind infants and
children: A developmental guide. Toronto, ON: University
of Toronto Press.
Miles, B. (2003). Overview on deaf-blindness. Monmouth,
OR: DB-LINK.
Miner, I.D. (1995). Psychosocial implications of
Usher syndrome, type I, throughout the life cycle. Journal
of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 89, 287–
296.
National Consortium on Deaf-Blindness (NCDB). (2009).
Retrieved December 14, 2009, from: http://nationaldb.
org/ISSelectedTopics.php?topicCatID512 and http://
nationaldb.org/ISSelectedTopics.php?topicCatID522
National Family Association for Deaf-Blind. (2002). Selfdetermination.
News from Advocates for Deaf-Blind, 7(2), 1,
19.
National Institutes of Health. (n.d.). What is Usher
syndrome? Retrieved November 11, 2009, from: http://
www.ushersyndrome.nih.gov/whatis/fulltext.html

Nelson, B. (2005). Creating positive outcomes for deafblind
youth and young adults: A personal futures planning
transition model. RE:view, 36, 173–180.
Olson, J. (1999). Understanding deafblindness: Supporting
students with deafblindness in the inclusive classroom.
Canadian Association of Educators of the Deaf and Hard of
Hearing, 25(1–3), 36–43.
Petroff, J.G. (2001). National transition follow-up study of
youth identified as deafblind: Parent perspective. Monmouth,
OR: The National Technical Assistance Consortium
for Children and Young Adults Who Are Deaf-Blind.
Riggio, M. (2009). Deafblindness: Educational service
guidelines: A product of our strengthening field. Deaf-
Blind Perspectives, 16(2), 1–2.
Riggio, M., & McLetchie, B. (Eds.). (2008). Deafblindness:
Educational service guidelines. Watertown, MA: Perkins
School for the Blind.
Romer, L.T., & Haring, N.C. (1994). The social participation
of students with deaf-blindness in educational
College Students Who Are Deafblind
settings. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and
Developmental Disabilities, 29, 134–144.
Sauerburger, D. (1995). Independence without sight or
sound: Suggestions for practitioners working with deafblind
adults. New York: American Foundation for the
Blind.
Smith, T. (2002). Guidelines: Practical tips for working and socializing
with deaf-blind people.Burtonsville,MD:SignMedia.
Talbot-Williams, S. (1996). Further and higher education for
people with Usher syndrome. Talking Sense, 42(3), 24–26.
Taylor, S.J. & Bogdan, R. (1998). Introduction to qualitative
research methods (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley & Sons.
Wagner, M., Newman, L., Cameto, R., & Levine, P. (2005).
Changes over time in the early postschool outcomes of youth
with disabilities: A report of findings from the National
Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA:
SRI International. Retrieved November 2, 2009, from:
www.nlts2.org/reports/2005_06/nlts2_report_2005_06_
complete.pdf
Volume 3, Number 1, Winter 2010 | 19

Bradstreet, Lauren
Presentations
2010. "Using words their way for assessment." District Reading Specialists Workshop.
2010. "Literacy data walls." Wayne Finger Lakes BOCES Administrators. BOCES Professional
Development.
2010. "Balanced literacy framework." District Level Professional Development. Grades K-2.
2010. "Interactive read alouds." District Level Professional Development. Grades K-8.
2010. "Lucy Calkins' units of study." District Level Professional Development. Writing
Workshop for K-8.
2009. "Planning and developing integrated ELA units." District Level Professional
Development. Grades 1-5.

Broikou, Kathy
Presentations
December 2011. Preservice Teachers' Field Experiences in Urban-Based Professional Development
Schools: Ideals and Realities. Paper to be presented at the Literacy Research Association,
Jacksonville, Florida.
April 2011. Learning our way Through: Collaborative Self-Study in an Evolving Professional School
(PDS) Partnership. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, LA.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Cianca, Marie
Publications
Cianca, M. (2011) Special Education (Section 7). In Bradley, Robert L. (ed.) The
Administrator’s Handbook. Latham: Magellan Foundation.
Cianca, M. & Freytag, C. (Eds.). (2010). Duets and dialogue: Voices on inclusive practices in
our schools. Syracuse, NY: Higher Education Support Center Task Force for Quality
Inclusive Schooling, Syracuse University.
Cianca, M. and Mascitti-Miller, E. (2010) Are we there yet? Making inclusive schooling part of
our daily journey. Duets and dialogue: Voices on inclusive practices in our schools.
Syracuse, NY: Higher Education Support Center Task Force for Quality Inclusive
Schooling, Syracuse University.
Cianca, M., Wischnowski, M. W., Hildenbrand, S., & Kelly, D. (2010). Collaboration for
inclusion: Authentic experiences in teacher preparation. Excelsior: Leadership in
Teaching and Learning, 5 (1), 19-34.
Presentations
Accountability Framework and Board Responsibilities, Board of Trustees Workshop, University
Preparatory Charter School for Young Men in Rochester, NY. January 29, 2011.
Accountability Framework and Renewal Benchmarks, for teachers, University Preparatory
Charter School for Young Men in Rochester, NY. January 18-19, 2011.
Executive Leadership Seminar Series, for Executive Level Leaders in the Rochester City
School District at St. John Fisher College in Rochester, NY. January 10, 2011 and
November 15, 2010.
Inclusive Practices and Schools with Special Needs. Board of Trustees and Faculty Members at
University Charter School for Young Men. Rochester, NY. August 24, 2010.
Maximizing K-12 & Community Partnerships to Share Best Inclusive Practices, Poster Session
at NYSATE/NYACTE and TFQIS Annual Fall 2010 Conference in Saratoga Springs,
NY. October 21, 2010.
Parents as Instructors in Teacher Education, for higher education faculty at the
NYSATE/NYACTE & TFQUIS Annual Fall 2010 Conference in Saratoga Springs, NY.
October 21, 2010.

Planting the seeds of partnership: Parents as instructors in teacher education. Leadership for
Equity and Excellence Forum. Phoenix, AZ. February 2010 with Cianca, M., Gladstone-
Brown, W., and Wischnowski, M.
Preparing Teacher Candidates for Parent Partnerships: An Evaluation of a Preservice Course
in Teacher Education, Round Table Session, American Evaluation Association
Conference in San Antonio, Texas. November 13, 2010.
Summer 2011 Retreat For RCSD Cabinet Members on Strategic Planning and Implementation
in Rochester, NY. July 19 – 20, 2011.
Success and Support through Co-Teaching: Elementary and Secondary. Arndt, K., Cianca, M.,
Hildenbrand, S., and Wishnowski, M.W. (2010). East Rochester Central School District.
East Rochester, NY.

Duets and Dialogue:
Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools
Edited by Marie Cianca and Cathy Freytag
Caleb, Grade 4
World of Inquiry School
Rochester, NY

Duets and Dialogue:
Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools
Edited by Marie Cianca and Cathy Freytag
www.inclusion-ny.org/duet-dialogue
1

Higher Education Support Center for Quality Inclusive Schooling
Midwest Region
New York Higher Education Support Center for SystemsChange
The Midwest Region Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling(TFQIS) is supported through a
partnership between the New York State School Improvement Grant Activities and the New
York State Higher Education Support Center for Systems Change, located at Syracuse University.
This booklet is made possible through the ongoing support of Matt Giugno, Gerry Mager,
Wilma Jozwiak, Steve Wirt, Peter Kozik, and Iris Maxon.
The HESC is committed to three goals:
To plan and implement quality teacher preparation programs, or to enhance the quality of
those already implemented in order to prepare high quality teachers in accordance with
federal and state requirements that will serve the diverse student population of the State;
To engage in and support the professional development of selected high needs schools to
improve student outcomes as identified by the New York State Performance Plan; and
To build the capacity of multiple stakeholder groups to examine data, identify, create
and/or develop strategies for advancing indicators in response to the New York State
Performance Plan.
New York Higher Education Support Center (HESC) for SystemsChange is an initiative of the
Office of Vocational and Educational Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) within the
New York State Education Department. The HESC was established at Syracuse University in
2001 as an outgrowth of the NY Partnership for Statewide SystemsChange. The HESC currently
coordinates the Higher Education collaboration with the S³TAIR Project.
Additional copies of this monograph can be downloaded from:
www.inclusion-ny.org/duet-dialogue
2

Dedication
For all the children, young adults and families we serve.
3

Foreword
Ann Monroe-Baillargeon, Ph.D. Alfred University
Higher Education Support Center for Quality Inclusive Schooling
Regional Liaison: Midwest Region
This monograph, Duets and Dialogue: Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools, has been a
very exciting project for the Midwest Region of the HESC task force, and is a product which represents
what we value and believe in as an organization. The Midwest regional task force includes individual
faculty representative from Institutions of Higher Education (IHEs) from Rochester, NY, south to the
Pennsylvania border and partnership network representatives from The Advocacy Center, Teacher
Center, school administrators, S 3 TAIR, and Regional School Support Center (RSSC) initiatives. We have
been meeting regionally on a regular basis for the past 10 years.
Serving as regional liaison for the Midwest region, I have seen over and over again, the
commitment this group of diverse professionals has to inclusion and collaboration, this project being our
most recent product of those commitments. Our commitment to inclusion is represented in the open
attendance and involvement at our regional meetings; all are invited and welcome to participate. Our
commitment to inclusion is also seen in our IHEs’ commitment to inclusive teacher education programs,
and our partnerships’ initiatives to develop, support and sustain inclusive practices.
Our commitment to collaboration is reflected in the ongoing partnerships between IHEs,
schools, and network organizations across our region. It is the foundation of the research, teaching, and
initiatives we participate in as professionals. It is also the basis for the distributed leadership model we
have recently adopted which laid the foundation for this powerful project. In regional meetings over the
past two years, we have explored the individual expertise each of us brings to our collaborative work,
and specific initiatives we might propose and lead. It was out of this discussion that the monograph
“Duets and Dialogue” was proposed by Marie Cianca at St. John Fisher College and Linda Ware at SUNY-
Geneseo. Their initiative, along with the unending support of the peer review process by Cathy Freytag
at Houghton College and the participation of many task force members, has resulted in this monograph.
The opportunity to create this monograph has enriched our professional lives, and we hope that
your reading it will enrich yours. We welcome your feedback, and should you wish to attend our
regional meetings, or participate in our initiatives, please know, you are always welcome. On the back
cover of this monograph is a map showing the Higher Education Task Force regions in New York State
and contact information for the Mid-West Region.
4

Acknowledgements
The Editors would like to express their thanks to the following colleagues who graciously served as
reviewers for this monograph:
Christina Belcher, Ph.D. (Cand)
Associate Professor of Education
Redeemer University College, Ontario, CAN
David T Cantaffa, Ph.D.
Director, Teacher Education Institute
University at Buffalo, The State University of New York
Anne-Claire Fisher, Ed.D.
Assistant Professor, Masters Program in Differentiated Instruction
St. Bonaventure University
René E. Garrison Wroblewski, Ph.D.
Associate Professor, Director – Advanced Inclusive Processes
St. Bonaventure University
Kathleen Gradel, Ed.D.
Associate Professor, Language, Learning & Leadership Department
College of Education, SUNY Fredonia
Peter Kozik, Ph.D.
Project Coordinator, New York Higher Education Support Center
Chairperson, Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling
Syracuse University
Kevin J. Miller, Ed.D.
Associate Professor, Chair
Exceptional Education Department
Buffalo State College
Maria D. Miller, Ed.D.
Former Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum and Instruction
Western New York
5

Duets and Dialogue: Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools
CONTENTS
Introduction: ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...... 7
Guiding Questions: ...................................................................................................................... 9
Reading 1: A Principal’s Lesson: Implications for School Leadership………………………………………...10
Mary E. Haggerty and Susan M. Schultz
Reading 2: “I’m So Excited About This”: A Shared Vision for Inclusive Practices ………………………18
Katrina Arndt and Laura Whitcomb
Reading 3: Are We There Yet? Making Inclusive Schooling Part of Our Daily Journey……………..24
Marie Cianca and Beth Mascitti-Miller
Reading 4: A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey Toward Inclusion……………………..34
Susan Hildenbrand and Harold Leve
Reading 5: Looking Backward, Looking Forward: One School’s Story of Co-Teaching……………...41
Jeffrey Linn and John O’Kane
Reading 6: Listening First: Designing and Implementing Middle School Inclusion……………………50
Peter Kozik, Peter Osroff, Susan Lee & William Marr
Reading 7: An Administrator’s View of Inclusion as a Parent of a Child with Special Needs…….59
Christopher Manaseri, Eun-Joo Kim & Jie Zhang
Reading 8: Billy’s Story: The Power of Collaboration………………………………………………..………………70
Julie Buick and Stephanie Scism
Reading 9: Creating and Sustaining Partnerships with an Inclusive Childhood Graduate Program:
Learning from our Journey………………………………………………………………………………………80
Kerry Dunn and Debbie Godsen DePalma
Reading 10: Exploring Disability in Young Adult Literature………………………………………………………..89
Linda Ware and Natalie Wheeler
6

Introduction
Duets and Dialogue: The Vision and Rationale behind the Project
Marie Cianca, Ed.D., St. John Fisher College
Cathy Freytag, Ed.D., Houghton College
Over the past several decades, the field of inclusive education has experienced a significant
evolution. In the 1970s, after the passage of PL 94-142, “mainstreaming” was the buzz word of the day.
Students were beginning to experience physical inclusion with their non-disabled peers in general
education settings, but the realization of true academic and social inclusion has taken much longer to
accomplish and, in some places, teachers, administrators, parents, students and stakeholders continue
to struggle to attain the kind of inclusive social reform that all students deserve.
Meaningful inclusion of all students continues to be a topic of significant interest and relevance.
In addition, many educators continue to exert great effort to find ways to effect positive, productive and
lasting inclusive reform in their districts. Because of these factors, the members of the Midwest Region
of the Task Force for Quality Inclusive Schooling (TFQIS) have enthusiastically embraced this Duets and
Dialogue project.
The members of the of the Midwest Region of the Task Force have experienced tremendous
interest as we have actively sought to collaborate with K-12 partners and community advocacy agencies
to promote the advancement of effective inclusive practices across New York state. While many of the
Task Force participants are affiliated with college or university teacher education programs, our
interactions with our K-12 partners and various community stakeholders have allowed us, corporately,
to share significant gains in the advancement of effective inclusive education for all students. Because
we have enjoyed such rich, meaningful collaborative partnerships, we felt it would be advantageous to
invite colleagues from each of these constituencies to submit collaboratively-authored articles
describing their best inclusive practices for publication in this Duets and Dialogue monograph.
Each of the peer-reviewed readings included in this monograph was co-authored by a combination
of teacher educators, school-based practitioners and parents. The articles themselves symbolize the
“duet” – the perspectives of two or more inclusive educators representing different, but
complementary, viewpoints with regard to the advancement of effective inclusive education. Each
reading is preceded by an introduction and followed by a set of discussion questions posed by a member
of the Task Force. These introductions and follow-up activities are designed to foster extended
“dialogue” between the reader and his or her colleagues. We envision many possible uses for this
monograph: a reference for school principals, content for professional literature circles, discussion
7

topics in teacher education courses, impetus for advancing inclusive practices in one’s own district….and
the list goes on and on.
We trust that you will find this resource to be of significant benefit to you and your colleagues as
you continue to work toward the realization of best inclusive practices in your own district. As you use
this resource, please take a few moments to provide us with your feedback by responding to the brief
survey, which can be found at the web link below. Together, we can effective positive inclusive change
for all students – thank you for your shared commitment to the attainment of this all-important goal!
COPIES
Copies of this monograph can be downloaded from the following link:
www.inclusion-ny.org/duet-dialogue
FEEDBACK
We encourage readers to give us feedback on the monograph and its articles by accessing the
following link and filling out a brief feedback form. Your ideas and input are very important as
we move forward. Please enter your feedback at:
www.inclusion-ny.org/duet-dialogue/eval
CITATION
When citing this monograph, please use the following format:
Cianca, M. & Freytag, C. ( Eds.). (2010). Duets and dialogue: Voices on inclusive practices in our
schools. Syracuse, NY: Higher Education Support Center Task Force for Quality Inclusive
Schooling, Syracuse University.
ARTICLE MARKER
Caleb's fish rendering (right) will mark the
introduction page for each of the ten essays in
this monograph.
Caleb, Grade 4
World of Inquiry School
Rochester, NY
8

Duets and Dialogue:
Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools
Guiding Questions
The following questions/statements are provided as general inquiries that pertain to all of the
readings. Specific questions about each reading are included in the “additional learning
opportunities” section following the reference page for each essay. As you read each essay,
you might wish to:
Highlight new terms or concepts learned or reviewed in the selected reading.
Explain why these terms or concepts may be important for educators to know
and understand.
Describe the essential points in the selected reading. Explain their relevance and
importance to current educators and to those preparing to enter the profession.
Invite others to read, discuss, and evaluate the essential ideas and issues
presented in the selected reading and ask about the extent to which they agree
or disagree with the authors’ opinions and viewpoints.
Consider how the content learned and reviewed relates to prior knowledge,
experience and assumptions. Have prior perspectives changed at all?
9

Reading 1: A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Introduction by: Ann Monroe-Baillargeon, Ph.D. Alfred University
Mary Haggerty and Susan Schultz in “A Principal’s Lessons Learned” provide for us professional insights
from their interactions with parents of students with special needs. It is a powerful statement to lead off
our monograph, Duets and Dialogue: Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools, with a focus on the
relationship between school administrators and parents. All too often, our focus on parents comes at the
end of a long list of other priorities, curriculum, instructional practices, student needs, etc. It is exciting to
see that a focus on parents and the importance of school leadership to listen with the purpose of
understanding, developing trust, and engaging parents in the change process help to frame our
understanding of inclusive practices right from the beginning, rather than waiting to the end. Thank you
to Mary Haggerty, Susan Schultz and the parents who generously shared their insights in getting our
Duets and Dialogue monograph off to a great start!
10

A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Mary E. Haggerty and Susan M. Schultz
“Mrs. Haggerty, we have a problem!” These five words can generate concern, stress,
and outright fear in even the stoutest heart of the most effective administrator. When shared
by the parent of a student in special education, the level of concern, stress, and fear can
multiply, sometimes exponentially. When I made the decision to become an administrator, the
last thing I was worried about was my ability to work with parents of students with special
needs. Yet, after three years as a school principal, I found myself wondering why it was that
sometimes interactions with parents of students with special needs went smoothly, and why
did they sometimes go terribly awry?
To complete a course requirement, I decided to engage in a study that I hoped would
answer my question. Drawing upon many interactions with parents of students with disabilities,
I also interviewed three sets of parents (one father and two mothers) of students with
significant disabilities, (two boys and one girl) all of whom were in high school. The children of
these parents were enrolled in an urban school district, and they responded to an email request
sent out to a local parent support group. Parents were interviewed at their convenience and in
the location of their choice (two in their home, one in an office setting). Each interview took
approximately 45 minutes. I also worked with a focus group of three mothers of four
elementary students with mild disabilities (two girls, two boys). These parents represented
suburban school district experiences and were recruited from a list provided by the Director of
Pupil Personnel of the school district. They were interviewed at a McDonald’s (so their children
could play while we talked) for about one hour.
The results of that study did lead me to three important lessons that did not necessarily
answer my question, but did lead me to challenge some of my assumptions and change my
practice.
The First Lesson: Understanding
Seek first to understand, then to be understood. (Stephen Covey)
There is an expectation among professionals that parents will seek to understand the
special education process. We teach them acronyms like IEP, show them data we collected
about their children, and cite regulations and education law, in order to help parents become
effective collaborators. Fish (2008), investigating parent perceptions of the IEP process,
indicates “through persistence and becoming knowledgeable on special education law, (the
parents in his study) were able to properly assist their children in acquiring the services and IEP
implementation necessary for them to succeed” (p.13). Fish concludes that educators should
seek parental input and collaboration so we can effectively serve students with special needs.
Just as parents can become more active participants when they are knowledgeable about the
process, educators can become more effectual participants when they have an understanding
of the parents and children they work with.
11

I had hoped, and even expected, that during the course of collecting and examining the
results of the parent interviews, I would come across some pithy quote from a parent that
would provide a framework, or summary of what was the essential learning from this
undertaking. Although I did come across such a phrase, it did not come from any of the parents.
It came from the woman who was transcribing the tapes of the interviews for me. As she
returned the last of the tapes she said, “You know, they’re not answering your questions,
they’re just telling you stories.”
As I reflected on her statement, I realized that, yes indeed, they had shared many stories
about their children. In fact, they were eager to share; it was fascinating to listen to parents
who were able to recite the timelines of their children’s educational experiences with such
facility and speed that I could scarcely keep up in my field notes. Reflection on these “stories”
led me to understand that you have to listen to the story, the story is often complex, but, you
have to listen anyway, because it’s the only way parents will perceive you as truly “knowing
their children.” This lesson was reinforced when parents of students in my school brought
pictures of their children to CSE meetings, wanting those on the committees to “see” their
children as something more than just “the next case.”
The dilemma is, how does one keep the professional distance required to provide a valid
evaluation of the child’s educational needs without projecting an uncaring, unsympathetic
affect? Asking for regular feedback is one way of demonstrating sincere interest while
maintaining professional distance. Active listening, where the listener is actively seeking to
understand the speaker’s intent and emotional state, appears to be a significant and symbolic
activity that facilitates positive relationships with parents. Active listening does not require the
listener to agree with the speaker, only to seek to understand him/her and to use that
knowledge to present his/her perspective. Each of the parents interviewed referred to the need
to have those “in charge” understand their children. Because their children were not in a
position to tell their own stories, parents did so for them. Salend and Duhaney (2002)
underscore the importance of “paying attention” to what families (parents and caregivers) have
to say about their child’s experiences with special education programs/schools. In seeking
feedback they suggest that the following will facilitate the process:
Being attentive
Establishing a comfortable and supportive atmosphere that fosters the comfort
level and participation of family members
Asking open-ended, meaningful and non-intrusive questions
Seeking clarification, details, and examples to support statements.
Lesson Two: Developing Trust
I meant what I said and I said what I meant (Horton the Elephant, by Dr. Seuss)
Federal mandates like No Child Left Behind (NCLB) can require parent involvement in
the educational process, however they cannot mandate the effectiveness of involvement.
12

Collaborative relationships between parents and educators are dependent on developing trust
(Shelden, Angell, Stoner, & Roseland, 2010). Given the opportunity for, and nature of
interactions, teachers and support personnel have a likelihood of establishing trusting
relationships with parents. However, the principal’s relationship may be more complex. The
principal, in a position of power and control, must be willing to work with parents as equals.
Understanding role relationships and the innate interrelated dependencies between
parties assists the principal to create an environment of trust. The principal, faculty and parents
depend on each other. These dependencies create a sense of mutual vulnerability (Bryk &
Schneider, 2003). Shelden, et al. (2010) report that within this vulnerability exists the
“potential for betrayal or harm from another person,” necessitating trusting others. Therefore,
the principal must establish and maintain trusting relationships through his or her vision for the
school, demonstrating trustfulness in interactions with others, and mediating conflict in honest
ways (p.160). Parents of children with disabilities have increased interactions with school
principals. As a result, school principals must also examine how the trust factor relates to the
special education process, parents and their children.
For the parents I interviewed, trust meant doing what you said you would. The difficulty
was making sure that what they thought the administrator said and what the administrator
thought s/he said, were sometimes very different. Thus, misunderstandings, lack of clarification
and inaccurate assumptions can lead to what are perceived as broken promises. Because we
are the “professionals/experts,” we assume that we have it “right.” It is easy to say of a parent,
“S/he only hears what s/he wants to hear.” My question is: “Do we know what it is that parents
want to hear?”
Knowing what one expects from the IEP and being able to articulate these expectations
seems to facilitate trust and enables both parents and educators to develop an effective plan
for the student’s success. The parent of a student with Down Syndrome, who attended my
school, approached me about the inclusion program for her child. Her child’s teacher, a former
special education teacher, was expressing doubts about the child’s ability to “keep up” with the
rest of the class. The parent felt that the teacher was rejecting her child, expanding her concern
to the entire school, stating that we were not living up to our promise to include her child. The
teacher believed that the parent was holding on to unreasonable expectations for her child’s
participation in the curriculum.
We set up a meeting with the child’s teacher, aide, parents and me. During the
conversation, the teacher clarified her concerns that the child would never be able to
participate fully in the curriculum demanded at that grade level. The parent was able to clearly
articulate that her goals were not that her child demonstrate mastery of the curriculum, but
that he would be able to learn how to write his name, take turns, follow school routines, and
learn how to ask and respond to simple questions like, “How are you?” and “Do you need
help?” She went on to say that she knew that this was a year-by-year thing. If it worked this
year it might not the next and that we would all have to look at whether or not it was still
making a positive difference for her child. In turn, the teacher was able to establish reasonable
and effective learning goals. At a follow up meeting at the end of the year, the parents were
13

thrilled that all of these goals were accomplished. This couple did not need to hear “your child
is not keeping up.” They knew he would not. They needed to hear “we understand your
concerns and we will do our best to address them.” The end result was a trusting relationship
that lasted many years and became a model for including parents in the practical matters of
their child’s inclusion program.
Olivos (2009) asserts due to inherent inequalities, it is not enough to present the
concept of parity and expect parents to feel like a valued partner. Increasing fair levels of
parent involvement requires structuring schools in ways that minimize inequality. Including
parents of students with disabilities on the Shared Decision Making Team, PTA and SEPTA
leadership, and creating informal arenas for conversations are just few ways to increase the
likelihood that parents will feel that their input is valued.
Lesson Three: Changing Culture
Give me a lever long enough and I can move the world. (Archimedes)
Barth (2001) asserts, “Probably the most important, and most difficult job of the schoolbased
reformer is to change the prevailing culture of a school”(p.7). However, without this
commitment to re-culture, we run the risk of allowing what Fine and Weis (2003) refer to as a
“reproduction” of the attitudes and practices currently in place. As one of the parents in my
study put it, “When I went into this, I realized I couldn’t change my daughter. So I had to change
everyone else. It’s daunting at times, but that’s been my challenge.”
Principal leadership is the most significant factor in influencing the overall climate of the
school. Beyond words and actions, the culture of the school must reflect relational trust,
established through the principal’s vision for the school, his or her faculty and students.
Sometimes faculty may need to be “reshaped” by supporting teacher/ parent collaboration,
increasing face-to-face social interactions, building into the school culture the ability to sustain
positive parent engagement (Bryk & Schneider, 2003). Re-culturing is not an easy task, neither
is establishing an inclusion program; but one may help the other. By developing processes and
procedures that enable students with disabilities to participate with the general education
population, everyone benefits: students, teachers and parents. Developing common language
and understandings leads to less confusion and better decision making for parents, more
effective planning and goal setting for teachers, a richer curriculum embedded with more
instructional strategies, and a more responsive school environment for students.
In developing a culture that is inclusive, we create a micro-community that reflects the
elements we would like to see in our own, larger communities. This idea was driven home by a
story from one of the parents in my study, a mother of a high school student with disabilities.
At a school dance, it became clear that, although her daughter was enjoying herself immensely,
she was not “doing it the right way.” As a chaperone, her mother watched as a group of
students approached her daughter and her partner. They were clearly trying to show her how
typical teenagers dance. When it became apparent that she could not, but was glad to be a part
of the group, they backed off. The parent described it as a “clashing of cultures” but once the
others saw that “she wasn’t likely to conform, and that it didn’t impact them, they backed away
14

and it was fine and they were accepted.” The parent offered the following advice to
administrators: “You need our children with special needs more than we need you, because
your general education students need to know how to live with each other, how to interact
without that uncomfortable feeling.”
Conclusion
It’s Always Somethin’! (Roseanne Rosanadana, SNL)
For most administrators, the issue is not that there are problems; problems are a part of
the job. Problems can be solved, solutions may not be readily apparent, but given a reasonable
amount of time and talent, solutions are discovered and implemented. Typically, when parents
of students in special education say there is a problem, they are referring to a dilemma. A
dilemma is challenging because dilemmas cannot be easily solved, time and talent may reveal
unappealing choices, and administrators must often resort to managing dilemmas, trying to
build consensus while making repeated attempts to resolve them, and learning from the results
of those efforts.
Learning is a dynamic process, always changing those who pursue it. As I have been
changed by the learning gained from this endeavor, I will affect change in the buildings I serve.
As the teachers, parents and I continue to discuss special education issues, we will inevitably
see the need to change certain practices, policies and procedures. We will manage the
dilemmas. There will be “ripple effects” to be sure. As Elmore (1995) has pointed out, changes
are often connected and it is typical for one change to lead to other changes in school structure
as implementation occurs.
In his eloquently titled article, I think, therefore I am resistant to change, Duffy (2002)
points out what we know-or think we know- is our biggest roadblock to learning. His strategies
for change focus on “raising doubts” about what is believed to be true. His suggestions include:
discussing dissatisfaction, saying it’s only an experiment, turn surprises into questions,
recognizing that all dissents and warnings have some validity, believe that collaborators who
disagree are both right, remember that all problems have multidirectional causes and effects,
and understand that what you know is not optimal. Not unlike the well regarded and often
used K-W-L chart, our interactions with special education students and their parents will lead
us through cycles of ever evolving understandings and opportunities for application that
ultimately will lead to more questions and searches for answers. Fortunately for those of us
who work in schools, listening to parents’ stories and learning from them is part of what we do
every day. We can learn a great deal from Aesop.
Information about the authors: Mrs. Mary E. Haggerty is Principal of William Kaegebein
Elementary School in Grand Island, New York. Susan Schultz, Ed.D. is Assistant Professor and
Director of Special Education Graduate Services in the School of Education at St. John Fisher
College.
15

References
Barth, R. (2001). Learning By Heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bryk, A. S. & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform.
Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-44.
Duffy, F. (2002). I think, therefore I am resistant to change. The Journal of Staff Development,
24, 30-36.
Elmore, R. F. (1995, August). Teaching, Learning, and School Organization: Principles of
Practice and Regularities of Schooling. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(3) 355-
374.
Fish, W. W. (2008). The IEP meeting: Perceptions of parents of students who receive
special education services. Prevention School Failure, 53(1), 8-14. Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=11&hid=4&sid=0a0751fb-6289-
4e63ab76694fd653009a@sessionmgr10&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1
zaXRl#db=ehh&AN=34772224
Olivos, E. M. (2009). Collaboration with Latino families. A critical perspective of home-
school interactions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45(2), 109-115.
doi:10.1177/1053451209340220
Salend, S. & Duhaney, L. (2002). What do families have to say about inclusion? How to pay
attention and get results. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35, 62-66.
Shelden, D. L., Angell, M. E., Stoner, J. B., & Roseland, B. D. (2010). School principals’
influence on trust: Perspectives of mothers of children with disabilities. The
Journal of Educational Research, 103, 159-170. doi:10.1080/00220670903382921
16

A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Extended Learning Opportunities
1) In the introduction to the article, it is suggested that prioritizing parent participation in the
education process is not often at the top of schools’ lists. Have you found this to be true from
your perspective as pre-service teacher, teacher, or administrator? If so, why might this be
true? Is there something we can/should do about this?
2) In this essay, the authors speak about keeping a professional distance. What do you think is
meant by this and how do you make sense of this in your own practice?
3) In one interview with parents, the authors concluded that “trust meant doing what you said
you would”; however, what was said was often interpreted differently. Are there
recommendations for principals’ and/or teachers for communicating with parents in ways that
establish a mutual understanding of discussion points and anticipated follow up?
Additional resources for working with parents that you may wish to explore include:
1) NICHCY is very pleased to offer you a wealth of information on disabilities! NICHCY stands for
the National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities.
http://www.nichcy.org/Pages/Home.aspx
2) Exceptional parent magazine: http://www.eparent.com/
3) Brookes publishing: http://www.brookespublishing.com/
17

Reading 2: “I’m So Excited About This!” A Shared Administrative Vision for Inclusive Practice
Introduction by: John J. O’Kane, Assistant Professor, Teacher Education, Roberts Wesleyan
College
Those of us who have long sought to promote meaningful program innovations and structural
changes to advance the more normalized teaching model, often referred to as “inclusion,” fully
understand the critical need for administrative support of the process. “I’m So Excited About
This” clearly and succinctly describes the significant contributions of Hilton Central School
District’s leadership at both district and building levels in advancing an inclusive continuum of
services as the approach to integrating special and general education. This strategy is based on
three key and fundamental beliefs: Hilton’s students belong in Hilton’s schools; general
education settings afford the best opportunity for success; and special education is a service, not
a place. This narrative history powerfully articulates and affirms the importance of a shared
vision, mutual collaboration, and a common core of beliefs that promote learning for all
students.
18

“I’m So Excited About This!”
A Shared Administrative Vision for Inclusive Practice
Katrina Arndt and Laura Whitcomb
The title for this essay is a quote from the Village Elementary School principal in Hilton
who was very pleased to be engaged in the work of changing a 15:1:1 self-contained special
education program for grades five and six to an integrated-co-teaching program. This work is
the focus of our essay, which explores the success that can evolve with shared administrative
support for inclusive practices. In Hilton supporting inclusive practice at all grade levels is
ongoing. Our focus on the fifth and sixth grade classrooms reflects our commitment to exploring
the experiences of one group of teachers and administrators.
Hilton Central School District in Western New York is a midsized school district adjacent
to the Rochester area. Hilton has three elementary schools, one middle school, and one high
school; the high school serves around 1500 students, the middle school has about 700 students
in grades 7-8, and the three elementary schools serve around 2200 students between them
(About Hilton Schools, n.d.). Hilton has a long history of low turnover for teachers and
administrators; the result is a faculty strongly committed to the district. The security of long
relationships has created a strong foundation for innovation and risk-taking in many areas,
including exploring how to best serve students with disabilities. In this essay, we review the
history of inclusive practice in Hilton, discuss how the district has developed inclusive practices,
and provide recommendations for practice.
Inclusive Practice in Hilton
In the last thirty years – from 1980 to 2010 - Hilton’s inclusive practice has shifted from
a reliance on special education services provided by private schools and Board of Cooperative
Educational Services (BOCES) programs to retaining most students with disabilities in district.
Before the late 1980s, Hilton –like many surrounding districts - utilized BOCES and approved
private schools for services for students with disabilities who needed levels of specialized
instruction or support not available through the district. This involved relying on these agencies
to recruit, hire, and supervise special education teachers, who were then assigned to teach
classes of students with disabilities who came from Hilton and other local districts.
Just as special education law and practices evolved from its beginnings in the 1970s,
Hilton’s special education service delivery model evolved as well. Students with significant
learning disabilities, emotional disabilities and developmental delays were gradually brought
back to the district beginning in the late 1970’s. Students who had been attending approved
private schools and BOCES classrooms began attending district-based special classes as
programs were developed in Hilton to meet their needs. Programs included self-contained
classrooms with ratios of students, teachers, and teacher assistants of 15:1:1, 12:1:1, 8:1:1,
and 6:1:1. Some of those classrooms continue, while other classrooms have been dissolved as
more co-teaching and inclusive practices have been instituted. A new model of service delivery
19

in many states is co-taught classrooms with a general education teacher and a special
education teacher together for the full day. Over time, the Hilton school community has
become accustomed to integrating students with disabilities in local school buildings and
programs. As the district’s capacity to deliver specialized instruction grows, fewer students are
referred to out of district placements and more students received their special education
services in the general education classroom.
The New York State Department of Education is clear that there are important reasons
for students with disabilities to be part of State assessment and accountability systems. The
New York State Department of Education notes that:
Including students with disabilities in accountability systems has resulted in parents,
teachers, and administrators paying more attention to grade-level standards and
ensuring that students with disabilities have access to the general curriculum and an
opportunity to learn grade-level content. Together, the IDEA and NCLB work to provide
the specialized and individualized instruction and school accountability that is critical to
improving achievement for students with disabilities. (Modified Academic Achievement
Standards, 2007)
As Hilton examined ways to help students with disabilities meet higher expectations, it
became evident that self-contained classroom options did not ensure students access to the
content and skills that define the general education curriculum. So, new settings and models of
inclusive practice were developed, including less reliance on the in-district special classes and
more provision of consultant teacher services designed to push into general education
classrooms and resource room services to support skill and content.
Hilton Central School District’s ongoing assessment of special education programs led to
phasing out the district-based 15:1:1 special class option at both the middle school and high
school level several years ago. These special classes had been designed for students with
significant learning and or language disabilities. With the strong support of the middle and high
school principals, students were successfully integrated in general education classrooms and
are achieving at higher rates than when they were in self-contained programs. This successful
integration at the secondary level has been supported by a strong consultant teacher and
resource room model. Students formerly in self-contained programs receive support,
accommodations and case management by special education teachers working collaboratively
with general education teachers.
The natural next step for Hilton is to continue phasing out the 15:1:1 special class selfcontained
model at the intermediate level of elementary school. So, in 2009-10, with
enthusiastic support from the elementary building principal and assistant principal, a yearlong
staff development plan was implemented in order to enhance inclusive practices for all
teachers working in a consultant teacher-general education teacher partnership and to prepare
specific teachers for an integrated co-teaching model. In 2010-11 the district will not operate
the 15:1:1 special class at grades 5-6 and will instead provide integrated co-taught classrooms
at both grade levels. Students formerly in the self-contained classroom will now be educated
20

with their nondisabled peers in an instructional setting that provides a general education
teacher and a special education teacher and a teacher assistant for the full day.
Inclusive Practice in Action
In our discussions about this essay, we realized that underlying all the practical realities
of inclusive education in the Hilton Central School District are three strong beliefs, shared by
building and district administrators. First, a sense that children from Hilton should be educated
in Hilton is explicit; second, the “earn your way in” mentality that can be a barrier to inclusive
classrooms is challenged; and third, the idea that special education is specialized instruction –
not a particular classroom setting or particular teacher’s services - is clearly articulated and
repeated. Professional development for building teachers and staff is aligned with these
foundational ideas about what inclusion can and should be.
We Want Our Kids
The history of BOCES in the late 1970s is one of service provision for smaller districts
with few resources for students with disabilities. BOCES served an important role in helping
districts educate previously excluded students. As more districts recognized the possibility of
including children with disabilities, BOCES has evolved into new roles in consulting services,
professional development, and continuing to serve students with the most severe disabilities.
Hilton has gradually brought more and more students with disabilities back into the district,
supporting the belief that children from the community should be served with their non
disabled peers, in their home district.
This philosophy grounds inclusive practices in the elementary, middle, and high school,
and focuses discussion about students with disabilities on practical solutions at the building
level. The shared commitment to “all means all” leads to productive discussion about shifting
classroom composition, educating teachers, and continually adjusting how instruction is
provided for all learners. While this is not always easy, the shared commitment to inclusive
practices between the superintendent, special education director, other instructional directors,
and the principals focuses discussions on solving problems and moving forward.
This experience confirms what Tomlinson, Brimijoin, and Narvaez (2008) note about the
nature of leadership – that at the building level, “the pivotal leader for change is the principal”
(p. 23). In Hilton, there is a shared mission and vision among all stakeholders with respect to
meeting the needs of each individual learner. This shared mission and vision, coupled with
strong district-office administrative supports and enthusiastic building leadership has led to
ongoing change and improvements in inclusive practices across the district.
Grades Do Not Always Reflect Learning
Affirming that students with disabilities need access to the general education curriculum
is key to supporting inclusive practice. In Hilton, an understanding that the general education
classroom is the best place to access the richness of the full curriculum is evident. The Director
of Special Education believes that we may not always know what a student is capable of
21

learning; unfortunately, in the absence of traditional measures of success, students with
disabilities have often been segregated in self-contained classrooms.
Instead of this traditional and limiting practice, the Director of Special Education helps
teachers focus on individual achievement – and notes that grades are just one measure of
success. Her philosophy is based on current recommendations about effective differentiation.
Tomlinson & McTighe (2006) noted that shifting grading practices toward effective assessment
includes thinking of assessment as “a photo album – a collection of evidence - rather than a
single snapshot” (p. 135).
Special Education = Specialized Instruction
Special education is not a place; it is a service. The misconception that “those kids”
belong somewhere other than the general education setting is a long standing one, and one
that we continue to challenge. Teachers need to be prepared to provide high quality
differentiated instruction for all students – and with appropriate supports and services, we
believe this is possible. A concern for many teachers is that they are not prepared or
knowledgeable about how to provide instruction to meet the needs of students with
disabilities. Integrated classrooms help address this concern and there are far reaching benefits
to everyone in the classroom when two highly qualified teachers are available to help a
heterogeneous group of students.
Recommendations for Practice
Other districts considering how to move inclusive practices forward may consider this
recommendation from Hilton: know and accept what your district’s capacities are. That is, be
willing to examine what your district is doing well, what could change, and how to begin to
implement change in deliberate and thoughtful ways. Hilton’s Director of Special Education
notes that there is still a small group of Hilton students who have complex and severe needs.
The complexity of these needs is more than Hilton is able to support in district based programs
at this point.
While she is not pleased that some Hilton students are placed out of the district, the students
are well supported and are getting what they need in their specialized programs. Trying to
effect change in too many places at one time is often not useful; instead, Hilton is focused on
manageable, measurable goals related to inclusion. In 2009-2010, the focus is on supporting
the development of integrated co-taught classrooms in 5 th and 6 th grade.
Information about the authors: Katrina Arndt, Ph.D. is an Assistant Professor in the Inclusive
Education Program at St. John Fisher College. Laura Whitcomb is Director of Special Education
for Hilton Central Schools in Hilton, NY.
22

References
About Hilton Schools. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.hilton.k12.ny.us/Hilton-schools.htm
Modified Academic Achievement Standards. (2007). No Child Left Behind Non-regulatory
Guidance. Retrieved from:
http://find.ed.gov/search?client=default_frontend&output=xml_no_dtd&proxystylesheet
=default_frontend&q=NCLB+and+IDEA
Tomlinson, C., Brimijoin, K., & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making
revolutionary changes in teaching and learning. Alexandria,VA: ASCD.
Tomlinson, C., & McTighe, J. (2006). Integrating differentiated instruction and understanding
by design: Connecting content and kids. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
“I’m So Excited About This!”
A Shared Administrative Vision for Inclusive Practice
Extended Learning Opportunities
1) What are the apparent strengths of the dissolution of the 15:1:1 classrooms and their
replacement by an integrated consultant teacher-general education teacher partnership?
2) What do the authors suggest about the need to rethink our traditional view of assessment
when they claim that “Grades do not always reflect learning?”
3) Why do you believe that it has taken nearly thirty years for many schools in this region to
accept more direct responsibility for educating all students in the home district?
4) How might you personally help to promote what the authors describe as “a shared vision
among all stakeholders?”
5) Can you envision a time when even students with “complex and severe needs” would be
educated in their neighborhood schools? If so, how do we get there?
23

Reading 3: Are We There Yet? Making Inclusive Schooling Part of Our Daily Journey
Introduction by: Jackie Czamanske, Regional Field Facilitator, NYSED S 3 TAIR Project
As a School Improvement Specialist, I’ve facilitated numerous discussions over the years on how
a school district may address the various challenges it faces. During these conversations, teams
often voice their fears on how including students with disabilities may negatively affect a
school's overall performance. The Rochester City School District’s World of Inquiry School
provides a solid illustration on how high expectations and inclusion can lock arms in a large
urban environment to achieve a performance-enhanced setting for all students. “Are We There
Yet?” gives building administrators and leaders an intimate illustration of one school's journey
to create an inclusive environment. Concrete guidance on structures, culture, collaboration and
a developmental implementation model provide navigational tools on how to “Get the world for
EVERY student!”
24

Are We There Yet?
Making Inclusive Schooling Part of Our Daily Journey
Marie Cianca and Beth Mascitti-Miller
“School 58, please get the world for us!” This refrain is on every page of a picture book
describing World of Inquiry School (WOIS) 58 in the Rochester City School District. To those
who enter its doors, World of Inquiry School immediately reveals itself as an exciting learning
community – one that embraces people, places and adventures in its journey to explore the
larger world for each and every learner. How does a principal develop a school culture that
accommodates all learners? How can a principal navigate inclusion and stay on course? This
article provides three areas of emphasis to help new or experienced elementary principals
create and stay on an inclusive journey.
The current WOIS community exists, in large part, because administrators, teachers and
support staff at World of Inquiry School 58 deliberately created the intention to “get the world”
for every student enrolled. World of Inquiry School 58 is located in a large urban district and
has approximately 370 students enrolled in Kindergarten through Grade 7. It was not always
one of the highest performing schools in Rochester or in the region. In fact, in 2001, school
staff members voiced concerns that caused the principal and teachers to review academic
progress and other integral facets of their school community. As they did this, they were
distressed to find a steady decline in student achievement, few connections across teachers
and grade levels, and significant family stressors based on increasing levels of poverty in the city
of Rochester. After researching, talking, and planning collaboratively, the school adopted a
comprehensive reform model in 2002 to address some of the major concerns. The new
instructional design formed a basis for establishing effective ways to engage students and
families using an inquiry based approach. Design principles for inquiry-based learning also
helped World of Inquiry School define and create school structures that engaged the entire
school community in the success of the school.
As in many large urban school districts, a high percentage of students in Rochester
receive special education services. At WOIS, 17% of students receive special education support.
In adopting a new instructional design, the principal and teachers had to purposefully plan for
delivery models that benefitted all learners. If World of Inquiry School was to “get the world”
for all of its students, administrators and teachers needed to seriously consider how to foster
the strengths and address the needs of students with special needs.
In re-examining school mission and outcomes beginning in 2002, WOIS discovered that
co-teaching was the most effective classroom delivery model for all students. In configuring
25

classes, the principal was able to staff one co-teaching section at every grade level. Co-teaching
teams consisted of a special educator and general educator with a class size guideline of 23
students per section. This allowed all students to be included in general education with support
and teamed general educators with special educators who were previously assigned to
resource or special classes. As an example, during the 2009-2010 school year, fifty students
with special needs were all fully included in general education using the co-teaching model.
With a new instructional design and a more effective model for delivering instruction,
WOIS was well on its way to addressing its challenges. However, the change process is
complex. There was much to be done to implement and embed the new ideas that were
underway. Further, under typical circumstances, it is a daunting task to lead school change, but
it is even more challenging to ensure an inclusive school culture. For WOIS and for other
schools implementing inclusive change, three areas make the journey a successful one for all
stakeholders.
Clear Structures
First, there must be clear support structures in place for teachers. This was not in place
back in 2001 at WOIS. There was little to no common planning time and no consistent
approach to rituals and routines in the classroom or school. During the past several years, the
master schedule was developed to include two 90 minute periods of common planning time
during the week for each grade level. This was possible by block scheduling special subject
areas. In addition, daily morning meetings were held in the classrooms and weekly school-wide
community meetings occurred to reinforce and solidify school rituals. At the weekly schoolwide
meetings, students at each grade level rotate responsibility for delivering several
consistent themes performed each week. Grade levels share a reading and weekly greeting
based on learning themes, conduct an activity for the whole school, perform a skit on the
number of the week and share a fact of the day. At the meeting’s end, there is a “torchpassing”
ceremony to anoint the grade level in charge of the next meeting. Intermediate
students take leadership by owning and facilitating the meetings. Parents and visitors are
always welcomed at the weekly school-wide meetings.
These structures were developed and revised over time and make a critical contribution
to an inclusive school setting. This takes perseverance and, if overlooked, the lack of support
structures can take a school off course very quickly and diminish the opportunities for students.
The impetus to persevere emanates directly from the principal and is key to moving forward.
When building structures of support, the principal should carefully examine several areas.
Get to know the student body and be aware of the types of learners in the school.
26

Know the number of students receiving special education services and their grade
levels.
Consider the classroom environments that would best respond to student needs and
talents.
Examine the programs of students individually and build the school schedule with these
considerations in mind. Think about the related services that each student may need.
Work with related service personnel when building the master schedule so that each
student receives the instructional opportunities that are required and anticipated.
Keep the goal of inclusivity in mind when purchasing furniture, technology, classroom
supplies, library books, and arranging for field experiences or guest speakers.
While becoming familiar with the programmatic elements for each student, developing
teams of teachers is also important. Considering student numbers and logistics, it helps to
purposefully build in planning time for classroom teachers who are working together and
supporting similar students. In the case of World of Inquiry School, special education and
general education teachers in co-taught classrooms have daily planning time together.
Teachers use their planning time to develop standards based instruction with activities
centered on inquiry and student engagement. Planning time is also used for cross-grade level
team planning and “specialized crew” meetings where special education teachers and related
service providers problem solve situational needs of students that arise.
Inclusive Culture Building
When the principal and teachers of WOIS looked at the state of their school in 2001,
they found that many students were unaware of or did not have access to the school. Staffing
and classroom space was arranged in a way that discouraged placements of students with
special needs or students with other learning needs. Establishing an inclusive culture and
philosophy became an important part of the school improvement plan and the second area of
emphasis in this article. Building an inclusive school culture takes a concerted effort and does
not happen automatically. Leading by example sets the tone. The principal shows by example
that inclusivity is a school priority and helps establish a common language among teachers to
internalize the concept and take it further. Communicating an inclusive vision to parents and
families is also key. Often, when building a school culture, parents are not aware of the steps
and supports that are foundational to a school’s intended direction. The principal and teachers
can use a school-wide newsletter, displays and school website to communicate with parents
and families about the school’s values and, specifically about the ideals of inclusive schooling.
This allows parents to understand the intended purpose, context and benefits of the vision.
Developing and communicating information to parents on an inclusive school culture
also serves to solidify the direction for teachers and support staff. In the process of developing
a common language, teachers and support staff form a common understanding of the vision of
27

inclusive education. Each school’s vision is uniquely tailored but school staff can readily
incorporate research and models of success from information in current professional journals
and organization websites. When principals, teachers and students know and understand the
benefits of inclusive schooling for all students, they are much more likely to understand and
support the common journey.
When one enters World of Inquiry School 58 and walks its hallways, it is immediately
evident that individuals matter and each person is a valued contributor. Large photographs of
each student are framed and hung along school hallways. Family customs and cultures are
displayed. “I am” poems are posted for all to see. A personalized environment and relationship
building is symbolized throughout the school and is reinforced every morning through morning
meetings. This builds upon the concepts and ideals practiced in the weekly school-wide
meeting by incorporating the values and instructional expectations of the school. These
everyday relationships between and among students and staff at World of Inquiry reinforce a
caring, compassionate school culture and help all involved to continue on their journey to “get
the world for all.” It is critical for the school principal to build these opportunities, model
inclusive values and extend behaviors that demonstrate inclusive practices.
At World of Inquiry School 58, the vision and context for “getting the world” was
developed and modeled over several years. Teachers, families and students identified with the
culture at WOIS because the journey continues to be collaborative and transparent. In fact,
each day, students recite the school’s Model Citizen Pledge where belief in an inclusive culture
is stated aloud:
Model Citizen Crew Pledge
We, the crew of World of Inquiry School, make this pledge for all Model Citizens.
We should all give service and have compassion for others.
We will celebrate our discoveries and wonderful ideas.
Through reflections, we will learn from our successes and failures.
While collaborating, we will show caring for diverse people and the natural world.
We are all responsible for our own learning.
Our education is our future.
28

Multi-faceted Collaboration
The third area of emphasis is multi-faceted collaboration and does not occur in isolation
but through cross-team collaboration, interdisciplinary planning and systematic feedback from
teachers, support staff, families and community. When planning for a more responsive school
community, WOIS staff members discovered that parents and community were entitled to
more of a voice and more opportunities to be part of the school community in ways that were
resourceful and mutually beneficial. One example in this area was an ongoing professional
development project that involved parents and community in a major way. With principal and
teacher support, several families prepared and implemented a professional development
experience for all staff. The collaborative project allowed teachers to work in teams with
families from the school to explore different parts of the Rochester community, become
familiar with public transportation routes, visit community stores, churches and organizations.
This was all facilitated by parents who shared expertise and knowledge about neighborhoods
and community resources with staff.
Additional practices that have helped sustain an inclusive environment where success is
achieved for all kinds of learners include:
Summer planning to fine-tune the curriculum and meet the needs of children for
the following year;
One on one reading and math support for students to address their particular
needs and also access their strengths;
A data wall in each classroom that allows students to follow their progress in skill
development and concept acquisition;
Considerations for student groupings that are an ongoing part of lesson planning
and are flexed based on current student data and student talents;
Teaching teams that meet weekly with support staff and administrators to
discuss and focus on individual student progress;
Special education teachers and related service providers that meet together
twice monthly to exchange strategies and share expertise in adapting lessons
and diversifying lesson delivery;
Multiple methods for student assessment that are used on a daily and weekly
basis to allow students to effectively demonstrate what they know; and
Students observations that take place during practice tests to help match testing
conditions to each child’s needs.
Daily and weekly collaboration at World of Inquiry establishes an atmosphere of open
communication and ongoing creativity that fosters student-centered, positive approaches as
the foundation of its pedagogy. In addition, parents and community take part in school-wide
learning exhibitions twice each year, where grade level inquiry projects in science and social
29

studies are expertly designed, developed and demonstrated for hundreds who come to see the
evidence of student growth.
3-S Model
As a principal leads his or her school with clear structures, inclusive culture building and
multi-faceted collaboration, a principal also must consider depth of understanding and
implementation within each of these intentional building blocks. One way to deepen the level
of implementation is to follow a 3-S model. The term “3-S” describes an implementation
method that is at first simple, next substantive, and finally sustainable. So, when implementing
any of the suggestions in this article, a principal can benefit by following these three steps. He
or she might first introduce it to staff or community in the simplest of ways. Following the
introduction of a practice, the principal and other school staff members develop the substance
of the practice on a school-wide basis. Lastly, the principal and other school leaders
incorporate policies and systems that enable the practice to be sustained. The example below
highlights the progression of an idea using the 3-S model.
Idea Simple Substantive Sustainable
Common
Planning Time
for Co-teaching
Teams
Principal develops the
master schedule with
priority consideration
to co-teaching teams.
Ensures that there is
daily planning time for
co-teachers and with
other teachers at that
grade level.
A standards-based tool is
developed or adapted
for use by co-teachers
and grade level teams to
assist with collaborative
lesson planning.
Embedded professional
development occurs to
gain a common
understanding of
collaborative planning
strategies.
Principal and specialists
attend common planning
meetings on a regularly
scheduled basis to
provide support and
resources.
Common planning
time becomes part
of the school plan.
Teachers exchange
collaborative units
and share best
practices.
Teachers effectively
use various coteaching
models.
Teachers are both
skilled and metacognitively
aware of
their skills.
School leaders
support
collaboratively
planning on many
levels.
The use of the 3-S model helps a school to go beyond a surface level of implementation,
and paves the way to a deepened understanding with a scaffolded, step-by-step approach.
30

Roles and Responsibilities
When embarking on this journey to find the world, it helps staff members at World of
Inquiry School #58 to stop frequently and ask, “Are we there yet?” This is an important
question to ask several times during the year because, by doing so, inclusive schooling is
characterized as a dynamic, ongoing process. All school stakeholders receive an opportunity to
continuously reflect on progress towards the journey’s destination.
The asking of this central question also encourages the examination of individual roles.
To the principal, what has specifically been put in place recently to support teachers and
students? To the teacher, what is the feedback from my students and my colleagues? To all,
how have new roles and areas of expertise been incorporated into the daily repertoire? What
resources are being used more effectively and why? The journey of inclusive schooling is a
challenging but fully satisfying one and the principal makes a substantive difference in
facilitating its success.
To new or experienced principals whose school community is poised for inclusion, ask
yourself, “When am I getting started on this journey?” and continue to ask “Am I there yet?”
Children are waiting for you to show them the world!
Note: World of Inquiry School 58 adopted an Expeditionary Learning (EL) model in 2000 and
continues to use this instructional design to this day. Currently, students at WOIS 58 achieve the
highest average math and reading scores of any elementary school in Rochester and 100% of its
students are proficient in science and social studies. In 2007, World of Inquiry School received
the Panasonic National School Change Award. To receive this award, World of Inquiry School
provided evidence of:
A significant change in attitudes, beliefs and values;
Dramatic changes in instructional practices;
The existence of systems to promote and embed success;
A multi-year sharp increase in achievement;
Changed perceptions inside and outside the school;
Engaged teachers and students who enjoy school and contribute to its success in
significant ways; and
A school culture that promotes inquiry, research and professional development.
In addition to the change award, WOIS also received the 2008 National Excellence in Urban
Education Award, and was recently selected as a National Blue Ribbon School by the Secretary
of Education.
31

Information about the authors: Marie Cianca, Ed.D. is Assistant Professor at St. John Fisher
College in the Executive Leadership Program. Beth Mascitti-Miller, is the former principal of
World of Inquiry School 58 and was recently named Deputy Superintendent of Teaching and
Learning in the Rochester City School District.
References
Conderman, G., Bresnahan, V. & Pedersen, T. (2009). Purposeful co-teaching. Thousand Oaks:
Corwin Press.
Friend, M. (2000). Myths and misunderstandings about professional collaboration. Remedial
and Special Education. 21(3); 130.
Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Mastropieri, M. & Scruggs, T. (2010) The inclusive classroom. Upper Saddle River: New Jersey.
McNary, S., Glasgow, N. & Hicks, C. (2005). What successful teachers do in inclusive classrooms.
Thousand Oaks: Corwin Press.
Reeves, D. (2006). The learning leader: how to focus school improvement for better results.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Walther-Thomas, C., Korinek, L., & McLaughlin, V. (1999). Collaboration to support students'
success. Focus on Exceptional Children. 32 (3) 1-18.
32

Are We There Yet?
Making Inclusive Schooling Part of Our Daily Journey
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. In what ways do the characteristics of this school work to support all learners?
2. Discuss the role of collaboration in an inclusive environment. What can be gained
from a collaborative infrastructure? What might be some cautions?
3. Create a diagram illustrating the primary issues a building administrator needs to
address when growing an inclusive environment.
4. Considering the 3-S model, create a personal action plan on how inclusive practices
would be implemented in your educational setting.
For further resources on Inclusive environments, visit the following:
www.S3TAIRproject.org
http://www.vesid.nysed.gov/specialed/techassist/specedQI.htm
33

Reading 4: A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey Toward Inclusion
Introduction by: Ellen Contopidis, PhD
Associate Professor, Nazareth College
As a teacher educator preparing future inclusive educators, I often find myself responding to my
students’ experiences with inclusion as “bad examples of a good idea.” The common element of
these bad examples is that they are often the description of a place, a classroom, a service, a
teacher or a child. Never do these bad examples reflect a philosophy or a culture within a
system. Dr. Harold Leve’s leadership of transforming his school to an inclusive instructional
environment is founded in a strong vision of social justice. The tools of collaboration, coteaching,
consultant models, common planning and quality professional development were all
used along the journey. Yet, tools they were and would have been ineffective if not grounded in
a vision that allowed a transformation to a “mindset of a more inclusive philosophy.”
Hildenbrand and Leve are very pragmatic in their description of the journey. They provide
specific details that can be replicated or morphed to be used in other school systems. They also
clearly demonstrate that leadership is key to transforming a school’s culture. Active leadership is
an important catalyst for system change.
34

A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey towards Inclusion
Susan Hildenbrand and Harold Leve
Introduction
“This is an inclusion model; we acknowledge the challenges, and we
figure out – together – how to make it work. We don’t abandon people
who are having trouble. We don’t celebrate “I won” unaware or
indifferent to those who are struggling” (Sapon-Shevin, 2007, p.7).
With the passage of the No Child Left Behind legislation in 2001, the educational system
assesses the majority of students with disabilities using the same statewide standards-based
assessments as their general education peers. Similarly, this legislation requires schools to look
at different service-delivery options for special education (Weiss & Lloyd, 2002). As a result,
districts are placing more students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms with their general
education classmates (Bouck, 2007). In fact, almost half of all students with disabilities are
served in general education classrooms with their non-disabled peers for more than 79% of the
school day (U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
However, it is not a simple or easy task to make this move to placing students in
inclusive classrooms instead of a traditional segregated or pullout system of delivery. East
Rochester Elementary School, under the leadership of Dr. Harold Leve, and working
collaboratively with Donald Shuryn, the districts’ special education coordinator, did just that
and began the amazing journey towards an inclusive elementary school where all learners are
welcomed as a part of their learning community.
It Will Never Happen! Where Do We Start?
Even though East Rochester Elementary School had primarily self-contained classrooms
for many years as the service option for special education services, there was little academic
and social growth for the students in these classrooms within this traditional service delivery
model. At the time of the beginning of the transformation, there was also a first cohort of
students placed in an integrated kindergarten classroom. As this group of students began their
educational experiences, we, as a school, began the transition from self-contained to inclusion.
In addition, the New York State Education Department audited the school district’s special
education department in the early 2000s. The 2003-04 NYSED School Report Card Information
about Students with Disabilities reported the percentage of students at East Rochester
Elementary identified with disabilities was 15.3% at the time, which was above the statewide
average of 11.9%. The 2003-04 report card also showed that 14.2% of the district’s special
education students were in segregated settings, compared to the statewide average of 6.6%.
Therefore, Dr. Leve was even more convinced that collapsing the self-contained
classrooms and replacing them with co-taught, inclusive classrooms would be a positive step to
35

eaking the social barriers between the students with disabilities and typical students while at
the same time possibly improving scores on state- wide exams. Dr. Leve and his support team
thoroughly researched the benefits of inclusion for students with and without disabilities and
acted on the school’s vision of social justice for all learners in his building by setting up inclusive
classrooms (Hunt, Hirose-Hatae, Doering, Karasoff, & Goetz 2000; Peck, Staub, Gallucci, and
Schwartz 2004).
This unyielding, transparent, and continuous administrative support directly affects the
viability of the decision to commit to this philosophical shift in the placement of students with
disabilities within a school hierarchy. Among teachers who co-teach, administrative support is
frequently stated as the number one need that is instrumental in the in the success of the
teachers’ collaboration (Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie, 2007). If the commitment to
inclusion is not fully supported by the principal it is difficult to make this paradigm shift in how a
school delivers special education services. As Friend and Cook (2004) discuss, administrators
must possess a “general understanding of the importance of collaboration, the role of the
administrator in fostering a school climate supportive of collaboration, and enough knowledge
about collaborative activities to make them a reality” (p. 282).
Dr. Leve speaks the language of inclusion, creates, and supports opportunities for his
teachers to be able to successfully collaborate in this new model of delivery, including
professional development opportunities surrounding co-teaching. More importantly, Dr. Leve
is present at all trainings centered on inclusion and co-teaching and continues to provide
opportunities for further educational opportunities in differentiation and collaboration. This
professional development agenda resulted in collaboration between Dr. Leve and professors
from St. John Fisher College, who provided training for this inclusive model.
However, this inclusive pedagogy was not widely accepted at the beginning, and many
in the school thought it was a concept that would never happen, would certainly not last and
would not produce the growth in assessments that was predicted. Dr. Leve pushed on,
eliminated one self-contained classroom at a time, and watched the positive results begin to
appear.
Let the Journey Begin: Baby Steps
The transformation of the elementary school began with the elimination of the first of
the established self-contained classrooms, the K-1-2 classroom. During the planning year
before this classroom was dissolved, Dr. Leve, with administrative input, sought out the general
education teacher that would be open to an inclusive classroom and would be willing to
collaborate with the temporarily displaced special educator teacher to plan and deliver
differentiated instruction for all learners. When these two teachers agreed to be a part of this
inaugural inclusive classroom, Dr. Leve formally reassigned the special education teacher to coteach
in this general education classroom at the first grade level, and the teacher assistant was
utilized across several classrooms. According to Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie (2007), in
order for co-teaching to be a successful pairing, there needs to be a level of choice and
36

volunteerism on the part of the co-teachers. Although Dr. Leve purposely approached certain
teachers and encouraged them to think about becoming partners in an inclusive classroom, he
did not mandate this situation, but allowed for a comfortable level of teacher choice.
Dr. Leve also worked very closely with the district coordinator for the Committee on
Special Education, Donald Shuryn, and through a collaborative effort, they made the
commitment to draft Individual Education Plans (IEPs) that offered an integrated classroom as a
placement option. This co-taught classroom was not presented as an option on the continuum
of services prior to this transformation to inclusive education. The students with disabilities
were then returned to the general education classrooms, including the co-taught classroom,
and the remaining students were supported by other special education teachers in a consultant
model. The inclusion experiment began…
The Journey Continues: Next Steps
Each year after the initial inclusive, co-taught classroom was launched, the remaining
two self contained classrooms at the 3-4 and 5-6 level were also closed, and the students with
disabilities assigned to these classrooms were placed back into general education classrooms.
As with any new referendum for change, there were growing pains from the faculty and staff,
and a small number of students left the school to return to other more restrictive placements in
other settings. The early resistance to integrating special education students into general
education classrooms can best be expressed as a long-standing, traditional mindset that
general education students are the responsibility of the general education teachers and special
education students are the responsibility of the special education teachers. Even though
several teachers volunteered to teach in integrated classrooms, they still needed to change
their mindsets. For example, at the start of integrated classes, the expectation was that all
instruction would take place in the general education classroom. What was found was that
some of the special education teachers were still taking “their” special education students to
other classrooms for their instruction.
To transform this mindset to a more inclusive philosophy, the participating teachers
were provided professional development about inclusive practices and how to deliver all
instruction within the four classroom walls. Next, the “extra” special education classrooms
were gently absorbed and utilized by other service providers, thereby providing the physical
constraints to support the inclusive mindset. Finally, the teachers were encouraged to think
and talk about all students being the responsibility of all teachers, regardless of classification.
For example, the administration leads by example by always saying both teachers’ names when
referring to integrated classrooms. The integrated teachers are proud that their students often
don’t know who the special education teacher is and who the general education teacher is in
the classroom. Equally, students have difficulty identifying special education students from
their general education peers.
37

For this restructuring to occur, Dr. Leve had to re-conceptualize the whole idea of
special education programming in his building, and he spread and supported the belief that
special education is defined as the delivery of services, but not a particular place or classroom.
By reconfiguring the delivery of services, Dr. Leve was able to operate his entire building
in the spirit of the logic model for the delivery of specialized supports and services which
“focuses on what students need rather than what they are in terms of a categorical service
system” (Sailor, 2006, p. 127). No longer were the students with disabilities isolated according
to their disability, but were now given the freedom to experience a general education
experience while still receiving the support they needed to be successful regardless of their
disability. In addition, with this new integration model of service delivery, the supports and
modifications took place within the general education classroom, which is a way to benefit the
maximum number of students, and the delivery of services was shifted from the classroom to
the school, using all of the available resources to enrich the educational experience of all the
students in the school (Sailor & Roger, 2005).
Reaping the Rewards and Facing the Challenges: Final Thoughts
There are data supported rewards from this commitment to inclusion at all grade levels,
but barriers to a completely inclusive building also exist. The first cohort of students to
experience inclusion was in fifth grade in 2008-09. On the New York State English Language
Arts assessment, 90% of East Rochester students with disabilities achieved levels 3-4 compared
to 46% of students with disabilities in similar schools. 86% of East Rochester students with
disabilities scored levels 3-4 on the NYS mathematics assessment compared to 46% of students
with disabilities from similar schools. On the fifth grade social studies assessment, 95% of East
Rochester students with disabilities scored at levels 3-4. (No similar school data available on
the NYS social studies assessment.) In addition, the NYSED 2008-09 School Report Card for the
East Rochester School District also reported that 4.2% of students were in segregated settings,
compared to 14.2% in 2003-04, which is a powerful statistic that illustrates this broken
paradigm of a separate education for students with disabilities.
There are also more subtle rewards observed, such as a decrease in social isolation for
students with disabilities who have now become full members of the general education
classroom. In addition, the teachers have begun to embrace the collaborative culture of
inclusion, which acknowledges the expertise of each member of the staff. This philosophy of
inclusion was a gradual mindset that took hold slowly as the all of the stakeholders began to
see the positive effects of inclusion for all of the children in the elementary building.
Although a future vision is a completely inclusive system of delivery of special education
services, there remain three district-based self-contained classrooms in the elementary school
building. However, these classrooms allow for a continuum of services for those students who
are unable to be supported in the inclusive classrooms at this time but are able to remain in
their home school. Non-traditional delivery models are used within these classrooms as well,
such as reverse mainstreaming where students without disabilities are brought into the self-
38

contained classrooms to receive additional support not provided in the general education
classroom and to provide role modeling for the students in the segregated settings.
Embracing change, whether or not it is the right thing to do, can be an insurmountable
task for a traditional system that is used to doing things the way they have always been done.
When change is approached and supported from the top down, this shift, no matter how large,
is attainable if done one-step at a time and allows for true buy in from all involved parties. East
Rochester Elementary School took hold of the vision of inclusion and is making it a reality one
classroom at a time. The transition process is just that…a process. It takes time for people’s
perceptions and perspectives to shift. Some people’s perceptions change faster and easier than
others. We have made co-teaching one of our building initiatives and have provided the
professional development to teachers to ensure their success and that of their students.
Although the ultimate results remain to be seen, this paradigm shift has already produced
measurable academic gains and a decrease in the number of students in segregated settings,
but the most significant gain is in the feeling of community that permeates from every aspect of
the school.
Information about the authors: Dr. Susan Hildenbrand is Assistant Professor at St. John Fisher
College in the Inclusive Education Department. Dr. Harold Leve is principal of East Rochester
Elementary School.
References
Bouck, E.C. (2007). Co-teaching…Not just a textbook term: Implications for practice.
Preventing School Failure, 51(2), 46-51.
Friend, M. & Cook, L. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School Professionals.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hunt, P., Hirose-Hatae, A., Doering, K., Karasoff, P., and Goetz, L. (2000). Community
is what I think everyone is talking about. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5),
305-317.
Peck, C.A., Staub, D., Gallucci, C., & Schwartz, B. (2004). Parent perception of the
impacts of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Research & Practice for Persons
With Severe Disabilities, 29(2), 135-143.
Sailor, W. (2006). The quest for ordinary lives: A legacy and a challenge to the status
quo. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, (31)2, 127-129.
Sailor, W. & Roger, B. (2005) Rethinking inclusion: Schoolwide applications. Phi Delta
Kappan, March 2005.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (2007). Widening the Circle: The Power of Inclusive Classrooms.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
39

Scruggs, R.E., Mastropieri, M.A., & McDuffie, K.A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive
classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children,
73(4), 392-416.
A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey towards Inclusion
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. What are five things that Principal Leve did to support the transformation of the
elementary school to an inclusive environment?
2. What are two collaborative relationships that Principal Leve engaged in and what
were the goals of these relationships?
3. What was the re-conceptualization that Principal Leve and his faculty experienced?
4. Sapon-Shevin writes of “inclusion: a matter of social justice.” The authors of this
article speak of the school’s “vision of social justice.” Speak to your understanding
of the connection between inclusion and social justice.
5. What would have to happen in your school to move toward a more inclusive
environment? Which of the activities initiated by Principal Leve would be a starting
place or next steps, in a movement toward a more inclusive environment in your
school?
Additional References:
Habib, D. (Producer). (2009). Including Samuel [DVD]. Available from
http://www.includingsamuel.com/store.aspx
Sapon-Shevin, M. (2003). Inclusion: A matter of social justice. Educational
Leadership, 61, 25-28.
Valle, J.W & Conner, D.J. (2011). Rethinking Disability: A disabilities studies
approach to inclusive practices. NY: The McGraw Hills Companies, Inc.
40

Reading 5: Looking Backward, Looking Forward: One School’s Story of Co-Teaching
Introduction by: Jennifer Ashton, Ph.D., University of Rochester
With its reliance upon collaboration between general and special educators, co-teaching has
emerged as one of the most effective and viable methods of providing an appropriate education
to students with and without disabilities in the same classroom. As a former co-teacher and a
current co-teaching researcher, I have found that there are multiple ways to experience success
in co-teaching and the successful method employed by one team does not necessarily transfer
guaranteed success to others. However, Dr. Linn and Mr. O’Kane present a set of general
principles that guided one school’s transition from a somewhat restrictive structure of
traditional special education placements to a more broadly inclusive co-teaching arrangement.
These seven principles do not provide a recipe for success, but rather a sequential series of
stages that could help guide other schools through similar inclusive transitions.
41

Looking Backward, Looking Forward: One School’s Story of Co-Teaching
Jeffrey Linn and John O’Kane
Introduction
It is well-established that the building principal is the most important variable in the
process of school change (Tomlinson, Brimijoin & Narvaez, 2008). Without visionary leadership,
successful team work, and clear communication of goals, change is doomed to failure. This is
especially true when considering how to design, implement, and evaluate changes intended to
promote increased inclusive education through co-teaching. The following is a description of
the change process at a large primary (K-2) school in Western New York.
Looking Backward
Inclusion is a not a new idea! Many view the movement of public schools toward more
inclusive programming, where students previously described as “handicapped” or “disabled”,
students with special education needs, are afforded the same educational opportunities and
experiences as their peers in regular/general education classes, as a late Twentieth Century
phenomenon. It is not. Elizabeth Farrell, founder of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC)
and Supervisor of ungraded Classes for the New York City Public School System, proposed
similar ideology more than a century ago. She was an advocate for educational programs that
addressed the needs and challenges of children described as “atypical, subnormal, and dull of
spirit, slow of speech, the inert” (Kode, 2002, p. 96). Her vision, dedication and tireless efforts
on behalf of large numbers of impoverished, illiterate and excluded children of recently arrived
immigrants established a foundation for many current practices. She argued for nondiscriminatory
evaluations based on more than just intellectual criteria. She challenged
Goddard, an imminent psychologist of his time (and also a proponent of Eugenics), on the
validity and reliability of Intelligence Quotient (IQ) tests. She developed standards of
professional accountability for teachers and established numerous professional development
opportunities for faculty and staff. She is generally acknowledged as a pioneer in creating
collegial teaching teams or cohorts to advance the skills and knowledge of novices and veterans
alike. As Kode (2002) notes, her work “served as the framework for later mainstreaming efforts
in this country’ (p. 98). The authors believe that she would be proud of what is going on in
Canandaigua.
42

One School and One Principal’s Story
The legal and social pressures to promote more inclusive and collaborative models for
addressing the needs of all students, including those with special education needs, have
intensified since the initial passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1974
(Yell & Katsiyannis , 2004; Yell, Rodgers, & Lodge-Rodgers, 1998). Many schools and school
districts, including the Canandaigua City School District and the Canandaigua Primary School,
are committed to a more inclusive general education- special education relationship. In the
2009-2010 school years The Primary School had approximately 835 students in grades K-2 and
additional 80 students in a Universal Pre-Kindergarten Program. There were 13 or 14
classrooms at each grade level. At the start of the school year, the population of students with
special needs at the Primary level consisted of about 85 students. That number has increased to
more than 90 during this school year.
Prior to the 2009-2010 school year, in 2008-2009, the model for providing supports and
services to students with disabilities was traditional and somewhat restrictive:
12-1-1 Kindergarten class
8-1-1 for Kindergarten-aged children with severe behavior or emotional problems
12-1-1 First grade class
Resource rooms and similar pull out services for second graders
8-1-1 class for first and second graders and one third grader with severe emotional or
behavior problems as identified on their IEP’s
A variety of configurations for teachers and related service providers pushing into
classrooms in a limited yet integrated co-teaching model to meet the requirements of
IEP mandated services.
The Director of Special Programs and building principal determined that this model was neither
meeting the needs of the children nor the faculty. Yes, there were still children whose needs
could not be adequately addressed in a general setting and would therefore continue to need
special classes, but there were also children being pulled out of classrooms who could benefit
from a more inclusive setting. Similarly, it was believed that a number of both classroom
teachers and special education teachers would benefit from closer and more collegial,
collaborative professional relationships. Hence the principal’s role consisted of a number of
steps that can be best characterized by, at the insistence of his co-author who has an unusual
fondness for alliteration, a series of “S words: Selling, Scheduling, Selecting, Staff developing,
Supervising, and Supporting with Sensitivity.
43

Selling
The Director of Special Programs and Principal met on several occasions midway through the
2008-2009 school years with the purpose of proposing a more inclusive model. Discussions
were quite spirited. Teachers expressed numerous and passionate questions and concerns
about “giving up” their classrooms and not serving “their kids”. Some had previously worked in
a co-teaching setting while others had not. After we presented the model and our ideas we
invited faculty and stake-holders to generate a list of questions and concerns which we
addressed over the course of more meetings, usually held from 8-8:30 in the morning. Later, at
the insistence of teachers, these meetings were held after school to provide opportunity for
more in-depth discussions. A few extended 30 minutes or so beyond the contractual day; but
most teachers were interested and stayed because they wanted to help. To facilitate
understanding, the Director of Special Programs generated a number of color coded models
with sample schedules. While not everyone’s attitudes and reservations were changed, we
ended the school year without animosity.
Our working model looked like this.
Kindergarten – All students with the exception of one 8-1-1 class would be integrated into the
regular education setting with a home room class. Using what we have defined as a “walk to”
model, students move to a new setting for math and reading with the special education
teacher, while spending the remainder of the day in the classroom for science, writing and
social studies. These students also participated with their non-disabled peers in music, physical
education and art. Still other classes implemented a less restrictive co-teaching (CT) or
integrated co-teaching (ICT) “push in” model for reading and math.
First grade – All first grade students would be in a home room class and use the identical “walk
to” model as kindergarten to a co-taught (CT) or integrated co—teaching (ICT) class.
Second grade – This model was identical to that of the first grade. Additionally, there was
another 8-1-1 class for first and second graders whose severe emotional and behavioral needs
required a special class setting.
Scheduling
All students were scheduled by a committee of administrators, teachers and counselors.
The deciding factor for most students was their reading level based on the Degrees of Reading
Assessment (DRAII). The school planning team has already made some changes to the
placement throughout the year, usually by adding students to the mix as some were newly
classified or entered the district. Due to this anticipated need, the Principal purposely kept the
44

CT and ICT class enrollments two students lower than the general population classes to start
the school year.
Selecting
An important responsibility of the principal in any change process is selecting the
change agents who will help him or her drive the change. This was a top down process. A vital
role of the principal is to assess the capability of the classroom teachers who would be
expected to work collegially in a co-teaching setting. Ideally the most exceptional teachers
would come forward to accept this challenge, but that is not always the case. Hence the
selection process typically overlaps with the selling process. The administrator’s role is to create
the best matches of persons and personalities. For example, the Primary School principal
recruited and convinced three veteran second grade teachers who were friends to create the
three classrooms that would feed into a “walk to” model where students could relocate and
regroup for differentiated instructional opportunities. Similarly, the new plan incorporated
classrooms that were close together and in a separate wing for the kindergarten model.
Staff Developing
All the teams of teachers were offered the opportunity to take a two day paid workshop
at the end of the summer in co-teaching and co-planning. Based on the work of Marilyn Friend
(1996), the workshop was structured to initially generate conversations between co-teachers
about their belief systems, prerequisites of a co-taught classroom, and affective domain issues
having to do with teacher attitudes about change. After these guided conversations, teachers
were presented with six distinctive models of co-teaching and nine instructional adaptations
that they could use in a co-taught classroom. Finally the teachers were led through a series of
activities that focused on assessment in a co-taught classroom and presented with a number of
lesson planning models prior to being given the second half of day two to plan.
Two co-teaching teams enrolled in the summer course and others took the class when it
was offered for two days in the fall. Still others availed themselves of our staff development
plan which allows teachers to submit individual plan for selected superintendent’s conference
days. And other teams took their one allotted professional day to work together and meet with
the building principal for a more condensed version of the workshop and planning.
Supervising
In addition to observations the K-5 director of Special Education, K-6 Director of math
and Reading and Principal set of a series of meetings with the Special Education teachers and
other providers every other month to review data on all children with special needs. The
principal also observed all classrooms as part of his normal observation process which means
45

that untenured teachers were observed three times and others were observed twice, one for
the general teacher and one for the special education provider. The principal and Director of
Special Programs also did walk through and provided feedback throughout the year.
Supporting with Sensitivity
The principal must be able to work with teachers, Director of Special Programs, parents,
and paraprofessionals to find the correct mix of adults and be sensitive to their needs. For
example, there have been challenges and concerns with paraprofessionals working with coteaching
teams. Often, these caring adults know the special needs of children and have much
information but they are not the professionals in the classroom. If communication is ongoing
and roles are well defined, paraprofessionals can be effectively brought into some
conversations with teachers or parents for another perspective.
Yet despite our efforts, sometimes the relationships just do not work. The principal has
made adjustments to at least one team while continuing to support those teams that
effectively and successively fostered more inclusive education through co-teaching and
collaboration.
The final work belongs to the teachers who work in the model. They have learned much
and grown both professionally and personally after nearly one full school year. When asked to
identify the pros and cons of their experiences, these are some of their thoughts:
Pros
Cons
Help with frequent assessments
Another expert in the classroom
Two of us can differentiate and “make it happen”
Ability to frequently regroup kids
So good to listen to someone else
She “settles me when I get frantic”
Allows to sometimes step back and see the whole picture
We value each other
Planning time is still an issue
People should be allowed to pick their own partners
I don’t have my own classroom. “It hurts to not have my kids.”
Tough on kids with other needs outside the cognitive domain like anxiety
46

It is essential that the building administrator listen to, reflect upon, and plan to
implement appropriate recommendations and suggested adaptations in next year’s model. Yet
it is important to always remember that schools exist for the benefit and well-being of our
students, not for the comfort and convenience of those who serve. Pugach and Johnson (2008)
defined teaching as “working well together with students and interacting well with adults”
(p.5). They emphasized that schools must be communities of learning – for children and adults
– engaged in complex and challenging work necessary “to be a source of vibrant, intellectual
stimulation for every student who attends” (p.5). The efforts of the Canandaigua School District
in general and the Canandaigua Primary School in particular to implement co-teaching practices
are meaningful and enriching steps to strengthening our community of learning.
Final Thoughts
At the first annual meeting of the Council for Exceptional Children in 1922 Elizabeth
Farrell charged all teachers and school leaders – not just special educators, to create schools
and classrooms that would be:
…less machine-made and more individual; that the schools of this country will use the
ability of each pupil group to its maximum; that the school will fit its burden to the back
which bears it; that it will bring the opportunity of successful achievement to every
child. (as cited in Kode, 2002, p. 90).
This vision of learning environments where each student’s potential was fully
acknowledged and nurtured was echoed decades later by another President of the CEC, Dr.
Lloyd Dunn. Dunn (1968) asserted that the segregation and removal of students with disabilities
from regular classrooms fostered a social and learning environment of isolation, inferiority, and
non-acceptance by both peers and teachers. He forecast four changes that he saw as shaping
“An American Revolution in education” that would “help special education … begin moving to
fit into a changing general education program and to assist in achieving the program’s goals” (p.
10). These four “powerful forces” as he called them were: changes in school organization;
curricular changes; changes in professional public school personnel; and hardware (or
technology) changes. Extending Farrell’s initial visions, he prophesied much of what the
Canandaigua Primary has implemented in the 2009-2010 school year – team teaching, flexible
grouping, curricular innovations that are respectful of the varying needs of learners, increased
professionalization and staff development, and a climate that is cautious yet receptive to
change and considers the needs of both children and adults.
One must always view educational change within the broader context of societal
evolution. The advocacy and pursuit of inclusive education encompasses attitudes, beliefs, and
practices beyond the classroom door. Barton (1999) asserted that inclusion represents “the
47

transformation of a society and its formal arrangements such as education. This means changes
in the values, priorities, and policies that support and perpetuate practices of exclusion and
discrimination” (as cited in Winzer, 2009, p. 206). Through the cooperative efforts and
collaborative vision of school leaders and teachers, significant restructuring of an established
yet inefficient service delivery model has helped move a district and a building closer to Farrell
and Dunn’s long-ago dreams of justifiable, innovative, and rewarding classrooms where
professional partnerships assure a better education for all.
Information about the authors: Jeffrey Linn, Ph.D. is the principal of Canandaigua Primary
School and John O’Kane is Assistant Professor at Roberts Wesleyan College.
REFERENCES
Dunn, L. (1968). Special education for the mildly retarded – Is much of it
justifiable? Exceptional Children, 35, 5-22.
Friend, M (1996). The Power of 2: Making a difference through co-teaching. Facilitators guide.
Indiana University-Purdue University Educational Services and Elephant Rock
Productions, Inc.
Kode, K. (2002). Elizabeth Farrell and the history of special education. Arlington, VA: Council for
Exceptional Children
Pugach, M. & Johnson, L. J. (2002). Collaborative practitioners, collaborative schools. Denver,
CO: Love Publishing.
Murawski, W. W. (2008). Five keys to co-teaching in inclusive classrooms. School Administrator,
65(8)http://www.aasa.org/publications/saissuedetail.cfm?ItemNumber=10658&snItem
Number=950 (Accessed April 3, 2010).
Tomlinson, C., Brimijoin, K & Narvaez, L. (2008). The differentiated school: Making revolutionary
changes in teaching and learning. ASCD
Winzer, M. A. (2009). From inclusion to integration: A history of special education in the 20 th
century. Washington, D.C.: Gallaudet University Press.
Yell, M. & Katsiyannis, A. (2004). Placing students with disabilities in inclusive settings: Legal
guidelines and preferred practices. Preventing School Failure, 49(1), 28-35.
Yell, M. L., Rogers, D & Lodge-Rogers, E. (1998). The legal history of special education: What a
long, strange trip it’s been! Remedial and Special Education, 19 (4), 219-228.
48

Looking Backward, Looking Forward: One School’s Story of Co-Teaching
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. What does the continued recognition and acceptance of the need for special classes for some
students indicate about the current structure of special education in terms of inclusive
education?
2. In a co-teaching situation, how can you begin to break down the barriers that designate
students with disabilities as being the primary responsibility of the special educator?
3. How might the selection process look differently if a “bottom up” process were used in which
the teachers took the primary role. What are the benefits and consequences of using both a
“top down” and a “bottom up” model for selecting co-teachers?
4. A two day workshop on co-teaching set the foundation for the teams of teachers. What
types of issues or concepts do you think should be addressed in follow-up sessions and how
important is sustained professional development in co-teaching?
5. What might the list of Pros and Cons of participation in co-taught classes look like for
students with disabilities?
6. How does the continuum of services and placements in special education hinder or facilitate
our progress towards inclusive education for ALL students?
Additional Resources:
Kohler-Evans, P. A. (2006). Co-teaching: How to make this marriage work in front of the kids. Education,
127(2), 260-264.
Mastropieri, M., Scruggs, T., Graetz, J., Norland, J., Gardizi, W., & McDuffie, K. (2005). Case studies in coteaching
in the content areas: Successes, failures, and challenges. Intervention in school and clinic,
40(5), 260-270.
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms: A metasynthesis
of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392-416.
Taylor, S. J. (1988). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive
environment. The Journal of the Association of the Severely Handicapped, 13(1), 41-53.
49

Reading 6: Listening First: Designing and Implementing Middle School Inclusion
Introduction by: Cathy E. Freytag, Ed.D.
Associate Dean for Education and Physical Education, Houghton College
(… and former middle school inclusive educator)
In an era of high-stakes testing, standardization, and increased accountability, how can schools
effectively include students of all ability levels and provide them with appropriate access to
grade-level content? This question, of significant concern to many administrators and
educators, is one which the faculty, staff and administration of the Garden City, NY Middle
School have addressed and answered with considerable success. While co-teaching has been a
popular inclusive delivery model for many years, educators at Garden City Middle School have
found ways to harness the power of effective co-teaching so that the needs of students with and
without identified disabilities are met. In this article, you will see how purposefully-implemented
co-teaching can enable all learners to realize their full potential and meet with academic
success.
50

Listening First: Designing and Implementing Middle School Inclusion
Peter L. Kozik, Peter Osroff, Susan Lee and William Marr
Introduction
Inclusion at the middle school level can become problematic since secondary curricula
presents increasing challenges to students. Planning time, concerns about caseload,
inadequate preparation, and meager professional development opportunities loom as barriers
to full inclusion (Coleman, 2000). The complexity of schooling at the secondary level involving
the level of the content, the pace of instruction, the need for study skills, and standardized tests
(Mastopieri & Scruggs, 2001) is another impediment to full inclusion. What happens, however,
when the need for social justice for students with disabilities meets with the expectations of
best practices at the middle school level? The likelihood of inclusion is strengthened (Kozik,
Cooney, Vinciguerra, Gradel, & Black, 2009). When you add to this, the determination of a
team of school administrators who listened carefully to staff and set in place a vision and a
means to fulfilling the promise of inclusion, you have the story of success at Garden City Middle
School.
This essay documents the efforts of Garden City, NY Middle School to include students
with disabilities using an integrated co-teaching model in the four academic content areas. By
listening to the staff and the community, by creatively using data, by developing innovative
uses of the middle school schedule for collaboration and for planning, and by holding all
students accountable to high standards of achievement, administrators at Garden City
successfully included their students with disabilities (Goertz, 2000). Among these students’
successes was the first cohort’s passing of the Math B examination in high school. As a result of
its efforts, Garden City has been recognized as both a blue Ribbon School by the Federal
Government and a Validated Practice School by the Office of Vocational and Educational
Services for Individuals with Disabilities (VESID) in the New York State Education Department.
Communication and the Decision to Change
Prior to restructuring the school in 2004, Garden City placed its students into gifted,
honors, Regents and self-contained English, Social Studies and world language (gifted, honors
and Regents only) fixed academic tracks. As a result of the periodic Middle States Accreditation
process, the school developed plans for where it wanted to be in five years with goals
established in academic and affective domains. This planning process uncovered a need for
improved communication between teachers and administration. As a result, school
administrators implemented several initiatives to improve staff/faculty morale and
empowerment, enhance communication and build a sense of a shared progressive and inclusive
mission. Among the changes, faculty meetings were shifted away from administration-directed
51

agendas to faculty members presenting professional development topics to each other with
faculty members usually setting the agenda (Bugeja, 2005; Hinkle & Kinney, 2008; Rourke &
Hartzman, 2008). In addition, the principal instituted Bagel Breakfast Meetings with academic
teams and non-teamed departments to establish direct, professional conversations with all
teachers. Building administrators established an open door policy where teachers were
encouraged to speak with administrators to share concerns and ask questions.
Opening up the decision making process provided the administrative team access to a
greater range of ideas with regard to educating all students. Data analysis showed that
students in self-contained programs were not meeting minimum expectations on the New York
State Assessments in every subject and in every grade. Garden City also witnessed an increasing
number of students being moved into self-contained programs. After data were shared with
teachers, they created action plans to address the problems.
Best practice research showed that students with disabilities in regular classrooms
exposed to the regular curriculum with typical peers were more likely to succeed and gain a
high school diploma. In addition, middle school administrators noted that students in selfcontained
Grade 8 classes were never moved back into general education classes at the high
school level. Special education and general education teachers and the district Math
Coordinator were asked to identify patterns and provide the administrators with potential
solutions. They found that students with the same scores on the NYS Assessments in Grades 3
through 5 dramatically separated in performance in future years when they were separated
into self-contained classes in the middle school years. They also found a tendency for students
to be moved into self-contained classes when they had academic difficulty.
Teams of teachers were developed to address shortcomings in student academic
performance. The School Improvement Team was formed to provide a mechanism for faculty
involvement with school decision-making. Teachers from each academic team were trained to
become members of the Instructional Support Team, providing uniform representation across
each grade level. Faculty members were empowered to determine the best action to help each
student reach success. A Student Review Team comprised of building administrators, guidance
counselors, psychologists, and the social worker met weekly to discuss interventions for at risk
students. Also, the teachers’ union and building administrators met regularly to work
collaboratively to provide the best outcomes for students. The administrative team discovered
individual teachers and departments willing to engage in co-teaching arrangements for all
students and, after piloting co-taught classes in mathematics, the concept expanded to include
all academic areas in the school.
52

Restructuring For Inclusion
The vision for including students in academic content areas required a reconfiguring of
staff responsibilities at Garden City Middle School. Teachers in all grades are assigned to
academic teams. Each team of core area teachers is assigned the same heterogeneous group
of students. If a team is assigned students that require co-teaching, the special education coteacher
is also assigned to that team (Bray, 2005; Scruggs, Mastropieri, & McDuffie, 2007). As a
result, the special education teachers travel with their students throughout the school day.
Importantly, the core area subject teacher and special education teacher are both listed as the
teacher of record in co-taught classes, so the responsibility for all children’s academic success
extends to both teachers. At the end of the school day, each special education teacher is
assigned a team support class (.2 FTE) where he or she provides additional support for students
with and without disabilities. This teaching assignment works well since the special educator
helps instruct each co-taught class the student attended earlier in the day. Critical to the
success of inclusion at Garden City, team teachers are assigned a daily meeting period when
they meet to collaboratively plan lessons for all children (Keefe, Moore, & Duff, 2004;
Thousand, Villa, & Nevin, 2006).
The design of inclusion meets student needs in a number of ways. Students attend a
daily, 22 minute advisory program known as Home Base with members of their team. This
program is designed to meet the affective needs of students by providing opportunities to build
community and to interact with peers. A staff member makes the curriculum for the Home
Base advisors and trains students to act as peer leaders in quality circles. Each team teacher
has a Home Base. Special education teachers assigned a Home Base are assigned a
heterogeneous group of children (Villa, 2003). Students in need of assistance, classified and
non-classified, are able to attend academic support classes in English, math, science, social
studies and Spanish. These classes provide students with an additional period of instruction on
an alternating day basis. Academic support classes are scheduled to avoid a conflict with the
team support classes. This process allows at risk students to attend team support as well as
core area subject support on the same day so they are exposed twice a day for support in the
content area in which they are struggling.
Additional supports are available for students outside content areas and classes.
Students are assigned a guidance counselor who follows them for all three grades. The
guidance counselors are also unique to each grade level limiting the number of teachers he or
she must interact with on a daily basis; this provides the counselor a greater ability to provide
support services for students. Reading and Speech teachers push into academic classrooms as
consultant teachers whenever possible. They work collaboratively with the classroom teachers
and administrators to serve the needs of students with special needs within general education
53

settings. Students with disabilities are provided with a full continuum of services, providing
each student with a setting in his or her own least restrictive environment. Educational settings
include co-taught classrooms, resource room support and special classes with specialized
curriculum. These offerings are available for the student and his/her family to choose. All
students receive developmentally appropriate amounts of homework in each grade.
What Inclusion Looks Like at Garden City
As is often the case in inclusive schools, it is impossible to discern which students are
the ones with disabilities in a typical twenty-five person classroom (Pedroza, Mullen, & Whiley,
1998). Students interact with one another and with their teachers comfortably and often.
Everyone appears ready to work from the start of a sixth grade class, homework out, attentive
to the teacher’s corrections and her direct instruction. Homework is reviewed; almost
everyone volunteers an answer in this ten minute warm-up. This is followed by groups of
students rotating through learning centers at which teachers and teaching assistants are
stationed to provide understanding about multiplying fraction using manipulatives and other
resources. Both teachers of record share the timekeeping. Both teachers share the
management of all the students. They each assess the entire class of learners not just the
students for whom they would have been responsible in a typically structured special education
system or in a failed co-taught situation.
Just as remarkable is the fact that the general education content teacher and the special
education teaching strategist are equal contributors and impossible to distinguish from one
another. Visitors to Garden City’s classrooms invariably misidentify which teacher is the
general educator and which the special educator. Special educators regularly undertake the
task of delivering content instruction in math, ELA, social studies, and science while the general
educator circulates through the classroom, answering questions and keeping students on task
(Mastropieri, Scruggs, Graetz, Norland, Gardizi, & McDuffie, 2005; Villa, Thousand, Nevin, &
Liston, 2005). Students regard both teachers interchangeably; the special educator is another
teacher in the classroom. Teachers remark to visitors how co-teaching has invigorated them
professionally. Fluidity is typical of the experience of teaching and learning in Garden City.
Labels are all but non-existent; students move in and out of learning situations purely on the
strength of their work and their ability to continue to take responsibility.
Working Toward Success
Restructuring from the middle in Garden City has prompted changes throughout the
district. The elementary schools in Garden City still maintain segregated classes. The High
School on the other hand has had to adapt to the waves of well-prepared, high achieving
students with disabilities. High school credit courses in math and science have been
54

eformatted from honors classes to accelerated classes. Students are now able to self select for
these accelerated classes with assistance and recommendations from parents and teachers
(Diffily, 2004). Prior to this change, students were pre-placed into fixed academic tracks with
little opportunity for change in placement.
Although the drive for greater inclusion has resulted in increased opportunities for
students with disabilities, two classes housing less than .02 % of a population of 1,053 students
remain in special classes. Students from self-contained elementary settings in the district are
invited to visit co-taught fully integrated middle school classrooms before entering sixth grade.
Thus, the focus on greater inclusion has created the opportunity to accommodate all learners
more successfully. Students who choose not to participate in the integrated content area
classes in Garden City may opt to attend a Life Skills Program. The program functions within
large, centrally located classrooms which were converted to resemble apartments with kitchen
appliances, living/dining furniture, and sublet breakout mini classrooms that enable small
groups of students to receive individualized instruction. In spite of the option, inclusion at the
middle school has led to a dramatic decrease in students placed in these self-contained classes
since very few children with special needs are unable to remain in a regular classroom when
appropriate supports and accommodations are provided (P. Osroff, personal communication,
March 1, 2010). Since an inclusive setting remains a choice for students, all middle school aged
children with disabilities in the Garden City District attend its middle school.
The sustainability of the inclusion model at Garden City Middle School was cultivated by
the administrative team’s continuing efforts to listen and respond to its staff. The success of
the model eventually brought other teacher volunteers into the mix as the program expanded.
Teachers mentored each other through this paradigm shift. Additionally, district consultants
were used to fine tune the approaches at the Middle School (Wilson, 2006). Teachers asked for
and received the assistance they felt they needed. Teachers attended workshops and
conferences on co-teaching. Inter-visitation across classrooms and across schools was
encouraged. In the end, the teachers working together and the success of their students led to
their embracing the new model.
Information about the authors: Peter L. Kozik, Ph.D., is Project Coordinator for the New York
Higher Education Support Center and Chairperson of the Task Force on Quality Inclusive
Schooling at Syracuse University; Peter Osroff, Ed.D., is principal of Garden City Middle School;
Susan Lee, M.S., P.D., and William Marr, M.S., both serve as assistant principals at Garden City
Middle School.
55

References
Bray, W. S. (2005). Supporting diverse learners: Teacher collaboration in an inclusive classroom.
Teaching Children Mathematics, 11(6 ), 324-329
Bugeja, M. (2005). Sharing governance at teacher meetings. The Education Digest, 70(5), 38–
43.
Coleman, M.R. (2000). Bright futures for exceptional learners: Conditions for special education
teaching technical report. Chapel Hill, NC: Frank Porter Graham Center; Arlington, VA:
Council on Exceptional Children. (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED457632)
Dieker, L. (2001). What are the characteristics of 'effective' middle and high school co-taught
teams for students with disabilities? Preventing School Failure, 46(1), 14.
Diffily, D. ( 2004). Teachers and families working together. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Goertz, J. (2000). Creativity: An essential component for leadership in today’s schools. The
Reoper Review, 22(3), 158.
Hinkle, T. & Kinney, P. (2008). Collective wisdom. Principal Leadership (Middle Level ed.), 9(2),
30–34.
Keefe, E. B., Moore, V., & Duff, F. (2004). The four “knows” of collaborative teaching. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 36(5), 36-42.
Kozik, P. L., Cooney, B., Vinciguerra, S.V., Gradel, K., & Black, J. (2009). Promoting inclusion in
secondary schools through Appreciative Inquiry. American Secondary Education, 38, 1,
77-91.
Magiera, K., & Zigmond, N. (2005). Co-teaching in middle school classrooms under routine
conditions: Does the instructional experience differ for students with disabilities in cotaught
and solo-taught classes? Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(2), 79-85.
Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2001). Promoting inclusion in secondary classrooms.
Learning Disability Quarterly, 24(4), 265-274.
Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E., Graetz, J., Norland, J., Gardizi, W., & McDuffie, K. (2005). Case
studies in co-teaching in the content areas: Successes, failures, challenges. Intervention
in School and Clinic, 40(5), 260-270.
Murawski, W. & Dieker, L. A. (2004). Tips and strategies for co-teaching at the secondary level.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5), 52-58.
Murawski, W., & Swanson, H. (2001). A meta-analysis of co-teaching research. Remedial &
Special Education, 22(5), 258.
Osroff, P. (2010). Electronic Communication
56

Pedroza, A., Mullen, G., & Whiley, J. (1998). Restructuring special education services in middle
school: Success for all. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association. (San Diego, CA, April 14, 1998).
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & McDuffie, K. A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive classrooms:
A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73(4), 392-416.
Thousand, J. S., Villa, R. A., & Nevin, A. I. (2006). The Many Faces of Collaborative Planning and
Teaching. Theory into Practice, (45)3, 239-48.
Villa, C. (2003). Community building to serve all students. Education, 123(4), 777.
Villa, R.A., Thousand, J.S., Nevin, A., & Liston, A. (2005). Successful inclusive practices in middle
and secondary schools. American Secondary Education, 33(3), 33-50.
Rourke, J. & Hartzman, M. (2008). A change of direction. Principal Leadership (Middle Level
ed.), 8( 10), 8-12.
Walther-Thomas, C. (1997). Co-teaching experiences: The benefits and problems that teachers
and principals report over time. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30(4), 395.
Walther-Thomas, C., & Bryant, M. (1996). Planning for effective co-teaching. Remedial & Special
Education, 17(4), 255.
Wilson, G. L. (2006). Introduction: Co-teaching and literacy. Reading and Writing Quarterly.
22(3), 199-204.
57

Listening First: Designing and Implementing Middle School Inclusion
Extended Learning Opportunities
1) What aspects of the co-teaching model at Garden City Middle School were most
notable to you? How did these elements contribute to the success of co-teaching in
this district?
2) How did administrators at Garden City Middle School facilitate an inclusive climate
that led to the success of the co-teaching model in this district? What steps might
elementary schools administrators and teachers take to help secondary students
transition?
3) How can a well-implemented co-teaching model advance meaningful and effective
inclusion?
4) What aspects of the inclusion model at Garden City Middle School might inform the
development of a successful co-teaching program in your district? What potential
barriers should also be considered, and how might they be addressed?
5) How might a well-implemented co-teaching program align with your district’s
Response to Intervention model?
Additional resources on this topic:
Burello, L. (Producer), Burello,. J. (Producer), & Friend, M. (Producer). (2005). The
power of 2: Making a difference through co-teaching (2 nd ed.) [Video disc recording].
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University, Elephant Rock Productions.
Friend, M. (2008). Co-teach! A handbook for creating and sustaining effective classroom
partnerships in inclusive schools. Greensboro, NC: Marilyn Friend, Inc.
McLeskey, J., & Waldron, N. (2000). Inclusive schools in action: Making differences
ordinary. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
58

Reading 7: An Administrator’s View of Inclusion as a Parent of a Child with Special Needs
Introduced by: Barb Klein, parent and Director of the Parent Centers at The Advocacy Center in
Rochester, NY.
Charlie's story is an inspiring one and ultimately one of success because of several individuals
who went above and beyond what was expected of them in their professional roles as
educators. It is also a story of success because his parents were integrally involved as
collaborators in finding, creating, and advocating for a program that would support Charlie's
strengths, challenge him appropriately, and accommodate his needs so that he could learn and
achieve all that he was capable of. Had these individuals not come together on his behalf, it is
quite likely that Charlie would not be a young adult who is currently living independently and
positively participating in and contributing to his community. Barriers were encountered in the
very system designed to support students with disabilities, but with perseverance, these barriers
were overcome. Dr. Manaseri identifies several challenges that still exist within New York
schools and encourages us to work together to improve upon these issues. I concur with the
authors in suggesting that "we would all do well to become… co-conspirators for the benefit of
the many children with special needs who require professionals, including administrators, (to
make) a special sense of commitment to meeting those needs wherever and whenever
possible."
59

An Administrator’s View of Inclusion as a Parent of a Child with Special Needs
Christopher Manaseri, Eun-Joo Kim and Jie Zhang
Introduction
The Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), which has widely used
standards for school leader candidates, comprehensively addresses the importance of
promoting all students’ successful learning (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2008).
Administrative roles for successful inclusion are crucial (Voltz & Collins, 2010). Lack of
administrators’ support is one of biggest barriers to implement inclusion (Valeo, 2008; Worrell,
2008). However, administrators have also expressed their own challenges to support inclusion
such as overwhelming paper work (CEC, 2001; Garrison-Wade, Sobel, & Fulmer, 2007), lack of
understanding CEC (Council for Exceptional Children) standards (Fiedler & Haren, 2009), lack of
finding well-trained personnel and needs for more concrete adapted curricular materials
(Carter & Hughes, 2006).
Administrators also view their main role to support inclusion as making sure all paper
work is correctly done (Valeo, 2008), while teachers view the important aspects of
administrators’ supports as more comprehensive such as encouraging equal leadership among
teachers (Hines, 2008), handling subtle organizational barriers (Darrow, 2009), or advocacy
from principals (Garrison-Wade, Sobel, & Fulmer, 2007). Meanwhile, not many studies have
identified administrators’ perspectives about working with parents for successful inclusion. This
essay presents a unique story of a school administrator who is a parent of a child with special
needs. This story will describe how inclusion is much more successful when administrators
practice a deeper understanding of parents’ needs.
Charlie
Charlie is a college-educated young adult living independently with minimal parental
support in the greater Rochester community. But that was not the outcome many who knew
him would have predicted twenty years ago when he entered public schooling, despite the fact
that his father was a new school administrator with more than a dozen years of classroom and
school counseling experience. Along the sometimes joyous, sometimes arduous journey Charlie
took through local public schools from kindergarten to two and four year publically supported
higher education institutions, there were both barriers and barrier-breaking heroes who made
the path what it was. Charlie’s journey provides some sense of what works and what does not
in a recent real-life experience in school systems that continue to struggle to provide quality
inclusive education for thousands of children in central and western New York.
60

We might have seen the trouble coming. Charlie, a paraplegic kindergartener with spina
bifida, was incontinent of bowel and bladder and would need assistance with personal care
during the school day. His first school nurse found the need challenging to meet because she
seemed afraid that she would hurt the child in the routines required for his daily care.
Thankfully, we had the support of a principal with a background in school psychology and
experience as an administrator in a non-traditional school setting for children with emotional
disturbance. He provided professional development and patient problem-solving so that the
basic needs of the child were met. Charlie could attend class with age-appropriate peers, and
become indoctrinated to the routine of a typical public school experience. Charlie’s principal
was one of the heroes whose own experience with children with differences helped pave the
way for Charlie with veteran school staff members who were not used to dealing with the
differences Charlie presented. That the same basic issue of continence would represent the first
and almost insurmountable barrier to Charlie’s college experience thirteen years down the line
is a sad commentary on the ability of the P-16 system to function as a system for students with
disabilities, ironically those who may need optimal systemic support the most.
Charlie’s kindergarten teacher was a developmental educator ahead of her time. She
understood the need to allow children to grow and to learn the skills they would need to
interact successfully with peers, with teachers, and with text in order to establish a foundation
for success in school. The system where Charlie started had toyed for years with a supported
kindergarten and a supported first grade. The system allowed its youngest children to spend as
many as four years in early childhood environments equivalent to what would amount to
kindergarten and first grade for children travelling through school at a traditional pace. His
teacher knew that Charlie needed more time to be ready for the curriculum and the social
interaction that would lie ahead, and she was bold enough to suggest that he spend a second
year in kindergarten rather than move on with his peers or be subjected to an early tracking
system in support classes that might have doomed him to a more restrictive special education
setting. Her wisdom and bravery in suggesting a second year spent with her in a looped
environment where she knew his strengths and needs, may well have paved the way for his
future success in that school and beyond. The kindergarten teacher’s insight into early
childhood education, and her willingness to personally own Charlie’s success made a significant
difference in what worked for him in the long run.
Many educators recognize fourth grade as a pivotal juncture in a child’s readiness to
succeed in school. Charlie’s fourth grade experience was marked by interactions with three
individuals in particular, whose sometimes conflicting viewpoints about the challenges he
presented proved to be pivotal in his future success. His classroom teacher was a local resident
active in the community and a teacher with a reputation for high expectations of her students.
That she would hold those same high expectations for Charlie was critical and much
61

appreciated. At the same time, Charlie was beginning to chafe at the level of support the CSE
had recommended for his first few years of schooling, specifically a 1:1 aide in support of his
physical needs. At this critical juncture, the relationship of the aide to the student became
problematic to the point that we, as parents, felt we needed to advocate for Charlie to be
allowed to do more on his own, to be free of the ever-watchful and sometimes domineering
eye of the aide, and to assert his emerging independence as a learner and as a child beginning
to be ready for early adolescence. Learning to let go was something the system needed to do to
provide Charlie with the environment in which he might be recognized by his peers as someone
capable of interaction without constant adult intervention.
Also at this critical juncture, his relationship with his “self-contained” special education
teacher became a challenge. Charlie was “mainstreamed” for most classes, but needed more
rigorous support in math, and the model in place removed him from his peers for a portion of
the day, to spend time in a smaller, more specialized math class with other children with special
needs (who were not his self-perceived social peers). The result proved problematic. Charlie
struggled in his relationship with the teacher who had been assigned the primary responsibility
for his IEP, ironically the very person who was assigned to be his hero, his mentor, his chief
advocate, to the point that the greatest frustration he experienced in school at this time was
not with the general education personnel, but the special education personnel in both his
teacher and his aide. Fortunately, calm heads and a sense of perspective prevailed that kept
him from contentious relationships that threatened failure. We might all learn to keep such a
sense of perspective when dealing with our neediest children – that special educators are most
responsible to support and appropriately challenge the students in their charge, not to become
the very barriers to their success. The fact that Charlie could not yet tie his own shoes or master
the multiplication tables was perceived to be a barrier to his advancement beyond the critical
fourth grade juncture, not by his general education teacher, but by the special education staff!
At the same time that Charlie was asserting his emerging independence from the
confines of his special educators and the system he had once needed but perhaps now needed
less, one of the true heroes of his elementary experience crossed his path in adaptive physical
education. Charlie’s teacher was a Cortland football player and physical educator whose
commitment to working with children with special needs manifested itself in the founding of a
weekend wheelchair sports camp at Ithaca College in which Charlie was an eager and engaged
participant. Being hungry for male role models in his elementary experience, and an avid sports
fan, Charlie responded marvelously to the interventions in gym class and outside. His teacher
found unique ways to include Charlie and others in physical education and activity that
encouraged a positive self image about Charlie’s abilities, rather than focus on his limitations.
His enthusiasm, his commitment above and beyond the school day, and his sense of helping
children with special needs discover all they could do as opposed to what everyone assumed
62

they could not and became lessons that this talented special educator gave not only his
students, but to their parents (this author included) and his professional peers as well.
Less encouraging in special areas was Charlie’s initial experience with instrumental
music. Charlie and other students with disabilities were screened out of participation through
auditions and assessments that systematically discouraged their participation in an area that
could be highly individualized but that, perhaps because of the public nature of the
performance of such ensembles, discourages difference and an appreciation for varying talent
development. Fortunately, his parents prevailed in advocating for and allowing his
participation, and by the time Charlie was in high school in a different district, he was playing
trumpet in a marching band, being pushed down the street in his chair by another student with
cerebral palsy! It might not have helped that band win any competitions or pageants, but it
surely made a difference in the quality of school life and experience for the two young men in
question. And at the end of the day, isn’t that what school is supposed to be about?
By the time Charlie had moved to middle school, both he and his father were in a
different district, one challenged financially, but one with a strong sense of teamwork and
commitment to individual student success nonetheless. A newly established middle school
model that involved an extraordinarily high level of teaming among general and special
educators saw each student’s needs attended to regularly by interdisciplinary teams devoted to
the success of each of the 45 or so students in a grade level. Testament to the commitment to
the effective integration of students with disabilities into inclusive settings was an effort by his
science teacher to include Charlie in a winter field trip to Cummings Nature Center. He involved
his own family (not ours) in constructing a safety sled that would allow Charlie the opportunity
to attend the same outdoor winter experience as his classmates. Charlie’s science teacher and
other members of the middle school team not only allowed and encouraged students with
disabilities to participate in the general education program, they expected and demanded them
to meet the same high standards of participation and success as all other students. Despite the
fact that these teams functioned in the smallest K-12 district in the Finger Lakes, they did and
continue to produce excellent student results in state-wide assessments and the school
continues to enjoy strong parental and community support.
By the time Charlie entered high school, both he and his father had once again changed
districts. In high school, Charlie continued to receive excellent support for his special needs
from a variety of individuals, general and special area teachers, but perhaps most significantly
from the special educator with whom most students with learning disabilities interacted in that
school. This special educator created a “Learning Center” model for the provision of multiple
support services to all students in the high school who were in need of special education in
inclusive settings. The model included a double classroom of welcoming design, staffed by both
63

general and special education teachers throughout the school day as well as before and after it.
Students with IEPs received Resource Room support through the Learning Center, throughout
the school day from special education teachers, tutors, aides, and/or general education
teachers assigned to the Learning Center. The teacher’s belief in creating the most desirable
learning environment in the school specifically for those students who needed extra support
transformed the image of special education there and created an environment where every
student’s individual needs were recognized and supported without stigma. His long-term
commitment to that school, that Learning Center, and to those students sends an enduring
message of commitment and caring that is too seldom recognized in schools where every day,
every year, other teachers make that same commitment.
Also part of Charlie’s high school experience was an experimental year at the local
BOCES Career and Technical Education Center. There, Charlie became exposed to a career path
that would allow him opportunities to consider a college education in the communications
field, as well as the opportunity to be exposed to a different clientele of students and a
different expectation about demonstrating hands-on learning. His experience allowed him to
interact with students from a broader geographical area, students with similar career goals,
students with greater socio-economic and racial diversity, and with adults who were able to see
beyond the limitations of his disabilities to varying degrees. Somewhat ironically, however, the
nature of the classroom instruction he received there and the physical design of the learning
labs were not always conducive to the challenges posed by a student with physical disability.
The lack of effective resource room support for students at BOCES-housed programs
themselves, and the difficulty bridging the gap between home-school support and the needs of
special education students taking career and technical education are barriers we would do well
to continue to attempt to eradicate. Charlie only completed one year of a possible two-year
program at BOCES, but that one year was sufficient to allow him to complete a sequence
leading to a diploma.
After earning a high school Regents diploma, Charlie enrolled in and enjoyed a
successful experience at a local community college attending classes for a full day on alternate
days of the week, allowing him the opportunity to minimize transportation issues and the
concomitant difficulty in arranging for services related to his continence issues. As the locus of
control for such health-related issues shifts dramatically from the K-12 system to communitybased
support in higher education, it was difficult to arrange a transition which was minimally
supported by even good special needs coordinators on college campuses. Charlie was required
to see the Dean of Student Services regarding the provision of space on campus for use by a
visiting nurse so that he could successfully attend classes for more than half a day at a time.
Such issues as adequate private space, parking for visiting health aides, and the coordination of
services with college personnel almost as inadequately prepared to deal with students with
64

special needs as was Charlie’s first school nurse a decade and half previously, almost precluded
his return to a second day of classes. On his first day, he was referred to the Dean’s Office by
the campus health center for what medical staff members were willing to consider a student
conduct issue in terms of cleanliness and adequate personal hygiene!
After successfully completing an Associate’s degree within two years, Charlie
transferred to a four-year state school in the area, and again faced significant challenges in
transition. Fortunately by this time, his parents had learned enough themselves to seek the
support of an advocacy agency and the provision of case management services. Charlie’s case
manager from CP Rochester helped coordinate home health care services on campus that
allowed Charlie the opportunity to live in a handicap accessible dormitory room (tellingly,
though, only one of four such rooms available). Despite success in establishing routine daily
living care, health issues, including behavioral health issues that many typical students face in
dormitory living, caused Charlie to contract pneumonia by the end of this first year on campus.
It was a serious enough situation that we moved him home, reduced his course load and had
him finish his Bachelor’s degree as a commuter student. Even then, difficulties around the
physical accessibility of classrooms, and the inflexibility of certain professors to make
modifications to curriculum for required subjects posed challenges for a student in a
wheelchair. This is not what we would have anticipated from in a college with both a school of
professions, including education and human development and educational administration
majors, as well as a school with health science and physical education as major areas of study.
We all still have much to learn.
So, with two decades worth of experience as both the parent of a student with multiple
significant disabilities and as an administrator working both inside and outside of the school
settings where my son attended, what have I learned about the requisite skills and aptitudes
necessary for the full promotion of inclusive education? First and foremost, effective inclusive
education requires an understanding and caring classroom professional who sees the possibility
in every child. It requires the support of administrators who can look beyond placating staff
members who may be asked to do more than usual or to do things in ways that differ from the
norm. However, since few states require a special education course before obtaining credential
and license, lack of special education content may limit principals’ ability to fully understand the
field and to provide sufficient support (McHatton, Boyer, Shaunessy, & Terry, 2010). Thus,
appropriate preparation, including foundational knowledge of the academic, social/emotional,
and functional needs for students with disabilities is necessary to ensure the effective
leadership, which leads to schools’ response to inclusion (Villa, Thousand, Meyers, & Nevin,
1996).
65

In addition, inclusion requires the cultivation of relationships that extend beyond
contractual obligations and compliance with the law to relationships that promote caring for
the long-term well-being of students who do not necessarily fit the mold of what one was
trained to deal with or what one encounters in one’s own personal life. Effective inclusive
education also requires parents to be willing to engage as partners when they can and when
they must, to challenge the status quo as adversaries to a system that too easily dismisses
difference and insists on conformity to artificial and too often absurd and arbitrary standards.
When one or both of the parents of the child with a disability are also school administrators,
there is an additional edge to the relationships with teachers, special educators, support staff
and even fellow administrators. During one job interview, I was accused of using my
handicapped son as both a sword and shield. That comment has stuck with me for more than
twenty years. Charlie and I used his disability and our intimate awareness of his needs as well
as his rights as a student with a disability in publically funded institutions to lead the way for
others, sometimes attacking the status quo as inadequate (using the sword), and in defending
his rights and ours as parents (using the shield) in promoting necessary change that would
benefit not only him but all other students with disabilities who followed him in these
institutions.
As an administrator with a child with a disability, I had both an additional responsibility
and challenge in negotiating relationships. I saw to it that my son’s needs were met in
challenging the capacity of the system, while also supporting those within the system who were
providers of services that I might recognize more than others needed improvement or
reinforcement. By and large, I look back on my time as a school administrator in New York with
pride in having moved some school organizations to look at the needs of students with
disabilities from a more personalized perspective (when the boss’s son is the student in need,
people often pay attention, begrudgingly or not- that doesn’t matter). I also look back with
with some chagrin at how difficult it was for even a school superintendent, even a BOCES
superintendent, to negotiate the labyrinthine system of (non)support we have created between
VESID and K-12, much less P-16, in a network under a single structure within the State
Education Department. In the end, I rest comfortably knowing that if we do, in fact, make the
path by walking it (as Paulo Freire says), having helped my son “walk” his path through the
system as both his parent and his administrator, we have helped make a path that might also
work for others.
Since federal legislation mandates parental involvement throughout the process of
assessment and service delivery (IDEA, 2004; NCLB, 2001), collaborative relationships have to
be established and maintained between parents and school professionals to benefit the
student (Shelden, Angell, Stoner, & Roseland, 2010). Without talking with parents and families,
listening to their stories, happiness, dreams, and needs, it’s impossible to build trust and better
66

understanding. Perhaps one can sum it up best as contributing to a conspiracy for success of all
children despite what other professionals with fewer tolerances may commit or omit in
responding to typical students. That being said, we would all do well to become such coconspirators
for the benefit of the many children with special needs who require professionals,
including administrators, to have with a special sense of commitment to meeting those needs
wherever and whenever possible.
Information about the authors: Christopher B. Manaseri, Ph.D. is Dean of Student Services at
Leeward Community College in Pearl City, Hi. Eun-Joo Kim, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor at The
College at Brockport State University of New York. Jie Zhang, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor at The
College at Brockport State University of New York.
References
Carter, E. W., & Hughes, C. (2006). Including high school students with severe disabilities in
general education classes: Perspectives of general and special educators,
paraprofessionals, and administrators. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe
Disabilities, 31, 174-185.
Council for Exceptional Children (2001). Bright futures for exceptional learners: An agenda to
achieve quality conditions for teaching and learning. Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional
Children.
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2008). Educational leadership policy standards: ISLLC
2008. Retrieved on June 30, 2010 from http://www.npbea.org/projects.php.
Darrow, A. (2009). Barriers to effective inclusion and strategies to overcome them. General
Music Today, 22, 29-31.
Fiedler, C. R., & Haren, B. V. (2009). A comparison of special education administrators’ and
teachers’ knowledge and application of ethics and professional standards. Journal of
Special Education, 43, 160-173.
Garrison-Wade, D., Sobel, D. & Fulmer, C. L. (2007). Inclusive leadership: Preparing principals
for the role that awaits them. Educational Leadership and Administration, 19, 117-132.
Hines, J. T. (2008). Making collaboration work in inclusive high school classrooms:
Recommendations for principals. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43, 277-282.
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. No. 108-446, 118 Stat.
2647 (2004).
67

McHatton, P. A., Boyer, N. R., Shaunessy, E., & Terry, P. M. (2010). Principals’ perceptions of
preparation and practice in gifted and special education content: Are we doing enough?
Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 5, 1-22.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107-110, 20 U. S. C. 70 (2002).
Shelden, D. L., Angell, M. E., Stoner, J. B., & Roseland, B. D. (2010). School principals’ influence
on trust: Perspectives of mothers of children with disabilities. Journal of Educational
Research, 103, 159-170.
Valeo, A. (2008). Inclusive education support systems: Teacher and administrator views.
International Journal of Special Education, 23, 8-16.
Villa, R. A., Thousand, J. S., Meyers, H., & Nevin, A. (1996). Teacher and administrator
perceptions of heterogeneous education. Exceptional Children, 63, 29-45.
Voltz, D. L., & Collins, L. (2010). Preparing special education administrators for inclusion in
diverse, standards-based contexts: Beyond the Council for Exceptional Children and the
Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium. Teacher Education and Special
Education, 33, 70-82.
Worrell, J. L. (2008). How secondary schools can avoid the seven deadly school “sins” of
inclusion. American Secondary Education, 36, 43-56.
68

An Administrator’s View of Inclusion as a Parent of a Child with Special Needs
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. Were there common themes which you can identify in the people/things that
contributed to Charlie's success?
2. What barriers were identified that you as a professional see ways to overcome? To
what extent were you surprised by any of these barriers and did you find irony in any
of the barriers that were identified?
3. What role did the "heroes" play in Charlie's success?
4. Describe what you believe was the most essential concept or content described in
this article. Explain its relevance and importance to teachers and administrators.
5. How will what you've learned by reading this story influence you in your role and
what changes, if any, will you make? Alternatively, what current practices does it
validate that you will continue to use?
Additional Resources
For more information about working collaboratively with parents, contact your local Special
Education Parent Center:
NYS Parent Centers: http://www.emsc.nysed.gov/specialed/techassist/parentcenters.htm
69

Reading 8: Billy’s Story: The Power of Collaboration
Introduced by: Marie Cianca, Ed.D., Assistant Professor in the Ralph C. Wilson, Jr. School of
Education at St. John Fisher College.
Although this story happens to be about a young man in a district-based BOCES class, Billy’s
story presents possibilities for any student with special needs in any elementary school. From
my perspective as a school practitioner and teacher educator, the power in Billy’s story is the
incredible bond between parent, teacher, child and school. In Billy’s school, a collaborative and
welcoming environment blossomed from the school’s genuine care and concern for Billy and his
family. In return, Billy’s family became connected to his school in ways that we hope would be
universally anticipated and achieved. Will it be much longer before Billy’s story is typical and
Julie’s advice is merely a pleasant reminder of what is? Whether you are a school principal,
aspiring leader, parent advocate or teacher candidate, the wise words in the following article
describe how to build positive and meaningful relationships between schools and families. As
Julie says, “Having a school and a team that believes wholeheartedly in meaningful inclusion
goes a long way in supporting a child who has a sense of pride in his abilities and presence.”
70

Billy’s Story: The Power of Collaboration
Julie Buick and Stephanie Scism
Looking back over the last 6 years brings tears to my eyes. Billy started Kindergarten not even
being able to attend lunch in the cafeteria due to the overstimulation and unexpected situation of the
environment. Community and inclusion were only ideas and dreams that we envisioned for Billy but
seemed impossible to achieve. Had it not been for strong communication with our team about our vision
as a family for Billy’s future and their willingness to engage in the efforts to make it happen, I’m not sure
where we would be today.
One thing is certain over the last six years. We all have worked hard and consistently with one
another to make huge strides in Billy’s education, independence, maturity, inclusion and community
outcomes. Billy was embraced by an entire community of students, teachers, and administrators. He
was included in specials, assemblies, after school activities, and within the 5 th grade as a whole. Was it
even an option not to be? Having a school and team that believes wholeheartedly in meaningful
inclusion goes a long way in supporting a child who has a sense of pride in his abilities and presence.
Billy’s excitement for life is contagious and everyone who gets to know him can’t help but want to be
around him, to hear his humor and laugh. I’ve often heard teachers say that it has been an honor to have
Billy in class. They talk about how he puts his all into everything he does. He lives life out loud.
As a parent of two children with developmental disabilities my goal is to create a community
where everyone feels they belong. At Dewitt Road Elementary that is exactly what happened. We are sad
to be leaving our District-based BOCES program at Dewitt Road Elementary School in Webster, NY.
However, we know that we have the tools for meaningful inclusion wherever we go.
-Julie Buick
Julie is the mother of three children, two of whom have developmental disabilities
including Fragile X and Autism. Julie is also an Educational Advocate and Trainer in the
Rochester area. She has been helping to prepare future elementary and special education
teachers through sharing her story and best practices for community inclusion through The
Advocacy Center’s Speakers Bureau in collaboration with St. John Fisher College. Her
experience at DeWitt Road Elementary School in Webster, NY reaped many mutual benefits.
Her experiences are helpful and authentic tips for principals and teachers working towards
inclusive practices. The following advice explains what Julie’s experiences have shown.
What Parents See As Successful Inclusion
All parents want their children, regardless of their abilities and disabilities, to be
successful academically, feel a sense of pride in their accomplishments, have meaningful
community inclusion and outcomes. Making this happen begins with strong communication
among classroom teachers, paraprofessionals and administrators.
71

Vision is key. When a vision is developed by each family for their child, it asks: What
does a family wish to accomplish with their child’s school career towards future outcomes?
Vision aligns a family’s goals for the future taking into account the IEP: Present levels of
Educational Performance, current level of abilities, strengths, needs, and what needs to be
added to make gains towards future outcomes. Like vision and goal setting, the IEP is a work in
progress that needs to be reshaped to meet the child where he or she is and build upon skills
and strengths in advancing toward the long term goals.
Creating meaningful inclusion and community starts from the top down. Bridge builders
are everywhere. They are the people who ask, “How can we work together to make this
happen?” They know the value of out-of-box thinking and how it leads to positive outcomes for
all. In order for inclusion to happen, administrators need to believe in the philosophy, live by it
and endorse it in schools. Administrators need to able to take the fear of the unknown out of
special education and replace it with acceptance and understanding. Looking to families to help
facilitate this can be a win/win situation. Parents are allies and often are willing to dedicate
their time to help educate professionals, parents and students about their child’s individual
needs, abilities, and learning style. More and more parents in our communities are taking on
the role of providing disability awareness and training. Implementing the vision for their child
prompts them into this active role to better prepare communities to accept and include their
children.
Strategically setting up classroom environments is another way to successfully create
meaningful inclusion that works for everyone. Administrators will want to help students and
teachers understand a student’s way of learning or why they need a specific accommodation.
Matching teacher styles with students is important in creating responsive classroom
environments. It is also helpful to bring others on board by sharing articles and workshops that
help teachers diversify their styles and methods. Planning and preparing helps students
understand that inclusion is not special treatment but rather providing what a student needs
for him or her to be successful in a particular learning environment. Open dialogue is key to
this. Let students know it is okay to ask questions and learn so that all can feel confident and
included.
Classroom observations and graduated transitions prior to beginning a new classroom
environment can put a student’s and parents’ fears at ease. Transitions into new environments
are often one of the most difficult things a student and parent has to do. Understanding and
guiding families through this process strengthens the teacher-family relationship and builds
trust for one another. The opportunity to see classrooms in advance minimizes fears and
allows families to imagine their children in a certain setting. All this helps prepare the student
and parents to become a part of their new community by meeting, asking questions, sharing
72

information, and helping to set up the environment. This is the foundation for successful
inclusion.
Home communication is an essential to any program that supports students with
disabilities. Sharing information on key aspects of a student’s day helps create a sense of
community with the family. For a student in a more restrictive environment who also
participates in many school learning opportunities, communication is helpful for families. It
allows families to receive ongoing information on friendships that are being built or activities
that are successful which can be built upon at home. For families, being in the loop in their
child’s day is priceless and often leads to better communication with their child and more
meaningful on target conversations with educators.
No other tool bridges home and school more strongly than team meetings. During an
effective team meeting, outcomes are valued and set collaboratively. Actions to meet these
valued outcomes are prioritized. Teachers and parents share new information, ask questions of
each other and contribute answers. Team meetings also create time to discuss inclusive
opportunities in school and out. This is a time for key players on the team to discuss next steps
or any concerns while attempting new activities and raising the bar for all.
The student’s voice must also be heard. Often students are overlooked when decisions
are being made about their curriculum or future. Students have a lot to add to conversations
regarding meaningful inclusion. Not all students want the same outcomes. Some may have
strengths in the area of the arts while others value science. Making informed decisions based
on student’s strengths can be key to their success. Students, if appropriate, should attend their
IEP and team meetings so that they can begin to steer their own interests, vision and outcomes.
After all, investment in inclusive education begins with the student. As much as we need to
prepare the environment and support the student, we must also prepare the student for the
environment. The techniques and tools required to effectively achieve this will depend on the
individual student. Preparation might include social stories, observations, transition with visits,
assessing individual interests/strengths, and listening to what the student wants.
Parents are the expert on their child and the one consistent force in the child's life.
Valuing parents input can lead to strong meaningful inclusion and positive outcomes. When
parents and educators work together on behalf of a child and a vision, the opportunities and
successes multiply!
Teacher and Administrator Support
Successful inclusion in the school community does not happen accidentally. A large part
of Billy's success is the responsiveness and purposeful actions of his teacher. Another part of
Billy's success is due to support from his school's administrators. When teachers and
73

administrators think sensitively and strategically about inclusion, so many powerful practices
can be developed and applied.
When Billy's teacher began teaching at DeWitt Road Elementary School, she only knew a
couple of people at the school and she was not aware of school procedures or philosophy.
Instinctively, Billy's teacher felt that she had to meet with the principal. She wanted to find out
what the principal's philosophy was and how inclusive practices played out in this school.
I have been the teacher in the Dewitt Road District Based classroom for four years. Several steps
are taken prior to my students walking into a general education classroom. At the start of my first year
at Dewitt Road, the principal and I met to formulate the steps for successful inclusion opportunities. An
inclusive opportunity is successful when the student with autism, the general education teacher and the
general education students all benefit from the experience.
-Stephanie Scism
Billy's teacher's instinct to meet and plan with the principal is an effective strategy in
any school implementing inclusive practices and programs. Before school starts, whenever
possible, special education teachers should initiate a meeting with the building principal to
discuss their assigned students, highlighting student strengths and identifying opportunities for
inclusion. At the meeting, special education teachers should be prepared with the academic
levels, strengths/interests and characteristics of students being included in the general
education setting. Prior to the meeting thought should be given to grade levels and settings
(i.e. core subjects, art, music) for students. Also, teacher should be prepared to discuss the
students' goals in the inclusion settings as well as specific support that paraprofessionals or
teacher assistants will provide to support students in these settings.
The initiative of the principal is important, too. Most general education teachers are
open to working with any student when they are given information in advance and included in
the process. Early collaboration with general education teachers helps with plans for inclusive
practices in the classroom and provides a forum for "what ifs" or potential concerns that can be
problem-solved upfront. Discussion should include class size enrollment, potential for
heterogeneous grouping, classroom resources and materials and instructional strategies that
encourage success for all students.
Once potential settings have been decided, special education teachers and general
education teachers should meet to discuss students with special needs and agreed upon goals.
This is the time where Billy's teacher sets up a means of correspondence to regularly
communicate with the general education teacher about student progress and any concerns. A
simple form or progress journal can be used or, if any common planning is available, a regular
74

meeting time can be established so that any anxiety on the part of the general education
teacher can be diminished.
When inclusion of a student begins, the special educator can help the general education
teacher by together reviewing the child's IEP and explaining what kinds of program support are
included in the child's individualized plan. Understanding on the part of the general education
teacher is one step towards successful inclusion and understanding on the part of general
education students is crucial, as well.
The special education teacher should plan a 15-20 minute awareness lesson to be held
for the general education students in any inclusive classroom. At that time, the special
education teacher and the general education teacher should present together to the class. The
presentation can include a brief profile of any student that will be joining their classroom.
Books or stories that best describe the student’s disability can be shared (i.e. autism, down
syndrome). The teachers should provide a question/answer period for the students and
encourage questions to be asked. When possible, have the student with special needs join the
class after the Q/A period. If there is a paraprofessional working with the student, introduce the
paraprofessional to the class and have the paraprofessional join the class with the student.
From Stephanie Scism:
If my student is joining a 4 th grade art class, I go to that art session to do the awareness lesson. I
always start the lesson by asking, “Does anyone know someone who has autism?” I have yet to be in a
classroom where no one raised a hand. At least 3-4 hands go up. What is nice to see is there isn’t any
resistance to sharing or an embarrassment to say they have a family member with autism. The hands go
right up! The students talk about their sisters, neighbor or another student at Dewitt Road who was in
their class at one time.
For my first 2-3 awareness lessons, I used a book I purchased that talked about special education
students in a general school setting. After my readings, I always asked the students for questions. Their
questions made me realize the contents of the book I read to them did not prepare them to understand
the characteristics that might be displayed by a student with autism. I decided to write my own story
that is more specific to defining autism characteristics.
After the story, the general education teacher and I have a question/answer period. Then the
student who will be joining the class comes to the room for a brief visit with the paraprofessional who
will be supporting the student during inclusion. If a communication device is used we give a
demonstration of the use of the device for all to see.
Before students join a general education setting, it is helpful to arrange a brief visit so
the student has an idea of his/her classroom and gets an opportunity to explore the setting in
advance. In some cases, where students are reluctant, he or she might start by staying brief
periods and work up to longer periods of time in the new setting. Here is where the ongoing
75

communication with the general education teacher works well. With prearranged meetings or
established written communication, the general educator and special educator can problem
solve any issues that arise and develop strategies together that effectively support the student.
Some students in district-based BOCES classes do not participate for a full day in general
education for a variety of reasons. For students with autism, they may be in need of related
services or other specialized activities that are delivered in the special class setting. In these
cases, it is often feasible to begin partnerships between general education students and
students with special needs. Peer mentoring or buddy programs can be established so that
general education students can take part in a variety of activities with students receiving special
education support. Again, this starts with an awareness lesson for general education students.
Oftentimes, there is so much interest that students take turns coming to the special class
setting or buddying up with students in the cafeteria or for school-wide activities and clubs!
Buddy opportunities usually start with a structured activity and once the students get to
know each other, the structure can be altered or relaxed as the teacher sees fit. Students can
play board games together, complete art projects or be reading buddies. In the cafeteria,
students can pair up to ensure that students with special needs are not isolated and have
plenty of opportunities to be social with their peers.
As a teacher, Stephanie is working diligently to support inclusive practices in this
partnership between a public elementary school and the local BOCES. The BOCES and school
administrators are working hard to support the growth of an inclusive school culture, too. This
manifests itself in several ways.
From Julie’s point of view, when she walks in to DeWitt Road Elementary School, she
knows she is welcomed. Staff in the front office greet her pleasantly and know she is Billy’s
mother. They smile and are happy to see her. Julie is also welcomed by all the teachers in the
school who work with Billy. They were initially excited to meet Billy’s parents and, during the
growth of his inclusive opportunities, made sure to welcome the family to school and
community events. The physical education teacher made a point to invite Billy’s family to
special activities and included Billy in countywide events. Even the teacher that supervises the
‘’lunch buddies” made sure she met Billy’s parents and shared positive anecdotes about Billy.
This type of support makes such a positive difference.
For program consistency, administrators have demonstrated flexibility in assigning
paraprofessionals to Billy and other students receiving such services. Stephanie, with
administrative support, was able to adjust paraprofessional assignments to best meet the
needs of each student. In fact, Julie says that ongoing contact from Billy’s paraprofessional
76

through his daily Home/School Communications binder has regularly added to her knowledge
about school successes and accomplishments.
Program reviews are collaborative sessions with none of the pitfalls of an adversarial or
detached relationship between parent and school. In team meetings, the BOCES administrator
makes sure she is present when needed. She facilitates problem solving, question and answer
sessions and gathers input between teachers and family. When an opportunity is posed, the
team makes a commitment to figure out how to make it happen smoothly and positively.
Julie’s message to families and educators:
I view life as a journey with many learning experiences along the way. Billy may be leaving his
current BOCES District Based Program at Dewitt Road Elementary but the journey continues with many
new learning experiences ahead of us. I will be forever grateful to Dewitt Road School and our BOCES
team for providing Billy and his classmates with an unconditional sense of community and belonging.
Having experienced it first hand in the school, I know what acceptance feels like inside and out.
Billy began his journey at Dewitt Road unsure of his own strengths and abilities and unable to
cope with what seems like a simple task to others: eating lunch in the cafeteria. Inclusion wasn't
something I said out loud back in those days. I just wanted Billy to be able to make academic strides
while being with others who had similar needs. I wanted him to be safe and comfortable. As we became
more educated on who Billy was, and as we began to see him outside his label of Autism, we began to
see his strengths and abilities along with his needs. This is when our “Vision” for his future became clear.
It also became clear that my husband and I needed to move outside our comfort zone just as much as
Billy did. We began to use the word inclusion not only when discussing school but also when looking into
our community. The word inclusion changed our life and Billy's life all for the better and it all started with
the cafeteria with one step at a time.
Had we not invited inclusion into our lives and had our team at the school not been willing
participants, would Billy feel acceptance and belonging in the hallways at Dewitt Road? Would his peers
genuinely wave and say hi to him as he walked down the hallways like they do today? Would he have
been invited to eat lunch every day with his 5th grade peers this year? Would he have gotten a note from
a girl in 3rd grade which he kept in his pocket saying, "Billy, you’re the best"? Would he have mastered
the monkey bars with other recess buddies encouraging him on? Would he have been invited to be part
of extracurricular activities such as a school wide race supported by his adaptive PE teacher and General
Education PE Teacher? Would he have gone on that after school gymnastic opportunity? This, again, was
Billy's PE teacher inviting him, knowing that Billy loved everything about gymnastics and had been
working to master his handstand. One thing is for sure. Billy is consistent in mastering the handstand
with his peer buddies as spectators all witnessed! Would we have experienced Open House? Would we
have seen Billy waiting so proudly and patiently year after year to introduce his whole family to his Art,
PE, Science, and Music teacher? I'll leave that question up to you to decide.
Just when we thought things couldn't get any more exciting for Billy, a true testament of Dewitt
Roads dedication and acceptance of all their students was shown. This year, Billy was invited to
77

epresent his class in all school wide assemblies as flag bearer. Our Billy! The same Billy who couldn't eat
lunch in the cafeteria due to overstimulation and his anxiety around others! He was now front and
center before the entire student body and faculty holding our country's flag. What a proud moment for
us and for him. What a true sense of accomplishment for his dedicated team. Billy was part of “the elite”
so I say but it was really proof that he was part of his school community.
As Sally Field said so nicely "You like me, you really like me!” That is what life and our journey is
all about, being liked, being happy, being accepted for who you are and being able to contribute in a
meaningful way to the whole! Our vision for Billy is becoming a reality one year at a time. We know we
still have a long way to go. As we leave Dewitt Road and enter into our next journey with Billy, we know
that Billy is a well rounded 6th grader with many strength, abilities, needs and lots of humor and
friendship to give. We are okay with moving on in our new journey and looking forward to all the life
experiences that come our way. We are confident that we have the tools to establish true, meaningful
inclusion where ever we go. I hope those around us are up for it because I know Billy and our family
members are!
Information about the authors: Julie Buick is Vice President for Advocacy at UNYFEAT and an
Educational Advocate and Trainer at The Advocacy Center in Rochester, NY. Stephanie Scism is
a special education teacher for Monroe BOCES No. 1.
78

Billy’s Story: The Power of Collaboration
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. Julie had several recommendations for schools. Compare the importance of these
recommendations and discuss how they might look in your school or your classroom.
2. Think about Stephanie’s efforts and the efforts of teachers you have known who
collaborated to support all learners. What stands out to you? How do these efforts
reinforce an inclusive school culture?
3. Billy was placed in a district-based BOCES class because his home district had no similar
program. What should the future direction of BOCES be? What can principals do to
ensure that parents have inclusive options in their home school district?
Resources:
Davis, C., & Yang, A. (2005). Parents & teachers working together. Strategies for teachers series.
Turners Falls, MA: Northeast Foundation for Children.
Halvorsen, A. T., & Neary, T. (2009). Building inclusive schools: Tools and strategies for success.
Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson
McNary, S. J., Glasgow, N. A., & Hicks, C. D. (2005). What successful teachers do in inclusive
classrooms: 60 research-based teaching strategies that help special learners succeed.
Thousand Oaks, Calif: Corwin Press
Rief, S. F., & Heimburge, J. A. (1996). How to reach & teach all students in the inclusive
classroom: Ready-to-use strategies, lessons, and activities for teaching students with
diverse learning needs. West Nyack, N.Y: Center for Applied Research in Education.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (2007). Widening the circle: The power of inclusive classrooms. Boston:
Beacon Press.
79

Reading 9: Creating and Sustaining Partnerships with an Inclusive Childhood Graduate
Program: Learning from our Journey
Introduction by: Dr. Susan M. Schultz, Graduate Program Director, Ralph C. Wilson, Jr. School of
Education at St. John Fisher College
Regardless of how long it has been since you stepped into your first classroom, you can probably still
remember feeling a mix of emotions. You knew the theories, but would you be able to effectively put
them into practice in the classroom setting? In “Creating and Sustaining Partnerships with an Inclusive
Childhood Graduate Program,” the importance of collaborating hand in hand with building
administrators and classroom professionals is highlighted. This essay outlines one college’s paradigm
shift from observing in the classroom to active engagement and purposeful collaboration with classroom
professionals, emphasizing the theory to practice connection.
80

Creating and Sustaining Partnerships with an Inclusive Childhood Graduate Program
Learning from our Journey
Kerry Dunn and Debbie Godsen DePalma
This essay focuses on the formation and sustainment of relationships between a public elementary
school and the Graduate Inclusive Childhood Program at Nazareth College. The purpose of this
collaboration is to integrate a graduate course on literacy assessment with an elementary school that
shares similar ideals and values regarding the role of literacy and assessment in inclusive environments.
The power of this partnership is in the strong and constant commitment from the leadership at the
elementary school, the classroom teachers, and the course instructors. This multiple leveled partnership
allows for continued professional conversation and application of theory to practice through the lenses
of all stakeholders. The practical and consistent applications and benefits of this project include
graduate students working one on one with elementary students in the areas of literacy, classroom
teachers serving as consultants and collaborators with the graduate students, building administrators
and course instructors consulting regularly regarding process and product, and elementary students
gaining one on one assistance in areas of literacy. The classrooms engaged in this project represent
diverse learners in grades k-3. The essay represents the many voices involved in the ongoing
collaborative relationship.
The Need for Collaborative Partnerships
The work of teacher education often focuses on the theory to practice spectrum. This is
vital to one of the most practical areas of study. In order for us, as teacher education faculty, to
best support our graduate students, we must provide learning opportunities that promote the
active engagement and discovery of graduate learners in elementary classrooms. Just as we
espouse the tenets of constructivist thinking and inquiry learning in elementary classrooms, we
need to engage graduate students in these processes so that they can develop their own
thinking and decision making abilities.
This is no easy task, and the opportunities must be carefully crafted to allow for the
power of this type of learning. In this essay we will discuss how we as college instructors have
connected with local schools to develop a reciprocal relationship where graduate students,
college faculty, teachers and administrators work together to create models for inclusive
education in the area of literacy. We will look at the administrators’ role in our placement, and
provide some reflective questions for administrators who wish to become more involved in the
field placements occurring in their classrooms. It is our goal that, through this essay, building
level administrators will see how this collaborative partnership enhances the inclusive setting of
the school and supports teachers through a multi-leveled collaboration.
Our Students
Our graduate students attend Nazareth College, a small liberal arts school in western New
York. Most of our students work full or part time and have typical life commitments of
graduate students. None of our students live on campus. Our students’ experiences in
81

education range from being a few who are current classroom teachers, to most who are
embarking on their initial certification. As with other graduate programs, we are challenged
continually to provide integrative learning opportunities and field work experiences that will
enhance, and sometimes drive the graduate education. There is strong commitment to the
theory to practice connection. This is needed especially when experiencing teaching and
learning in elementary classrooms while also studying the philosophies, theories and processes
of the education profession. Students enrolled in methods courses in this program have
fieldwork hours that are attached to each course. These hours allow students to learn about
methods in the graduate course, and then both observe and apply these in the elementary
classrooms.
The Course
Students enrolled in the graduate course: “Literacy Assessment, Program Planning and
Assistive Technology for Diverse Learners” fulfill a requirement for their program in Inclusive
Childhood or Inclusive Early Childhood Education. Students in this course learn how to
administer many reading assessments, as well as data analysis and instructional planning based
on the assessments. A ‘case study’ child is identified by the classroom teacher- this is a child
who experiences moderate struggles with reading. This course incorporates an action research
project that requires the graduate student to collaborate with the classroom teacher. Together
they identify the strengths and needs of a struggling reader through the administration and
analysis of the assessments learned; development of a research question, analysis of relevant
literature and creation an instructional plan. Together they then analyze the impact of the
instruction on k-3 student learning.
Our Model
This model of field placements requires a paradigm shift from the beginning stages of
observing in classrooms to active involvement and purposeful collaboration with the classroom
teacher. The shift in practice helps ensure the application and evaluation of researched based
methodologies that impact k-6 learners. The intricate involvement with elementary classrooms
allows for effective and profound engagement in assessment-driven instruction and action
research. Often, the placement process in college and universities is “outsourced” to a central
administrative placement office rather than being based in departments. It often focuses on
cooperating teacher availability and administrative considerations rather than what is best for
the learning of the novice teachers. This, then, determines where prospective teachers are
placed for their school experiences (Zeichner, as cited in Zeichner,. Melnick, &.Gomez, 1996).
It is our goal as instructors to work hand in hand with school administrators, building
level coaches and teachers to ensure collaboration with meaningful field work directly tied to
course content in an effort to maximize graduate student learning. Research has clearly shown
that field experiences are important occasions for teacher learning rather than merely times for
teacher candidates to demonstrate or apply things previously learned (Zeichner et al, 1996).
Through years of refining this collaboration, we have been able develop a reciprocal
relationship where the classroom teachers and college students share knowledge in a focused
82

effort to support children who struggle with reading. College faculty and school administrators
collaborate to ensure that the particular needs of the faculty, graduate students and students
within the elementary school are being supported by our process.
The Partnership of the Graduate Student and the Classroom Teacher
Constructing Knowledge Together
It is critical that the administrators we work with understand the role of the classroom
teacher in this process. This aids in teacher identification, as well as being the critical support
person for both the teachers and graduate students. The intent of the relationship between
teacher and graduate student is for graduate students to view their field experience as a
‘learning laboratory’ to practice and implement the knowledge, skills and strategies gained
from their course work. The field experience is a true partnership in which classroom teacher
and graduate student meet regularly throughout the semester to analyze assessments and
discuss student learning. They analyze together various assessments, including running reading
records, CBM, phonics surveys, the Observation Survey, and other meaningful assessments
used in the classroom or discovered through research. Through this process students develop
an Academic Intervention Plan for a specific child.
Additionally, classroom teachers work jointly with the Nazareth student in reviewing
and critiquing the action research project. The Nazareth student is expected to determine an
instructional need for specific students. Based on this need they use the latest research to help
guide instruction. Together, the classroom teacher and Nazareth student decide how to best
use research strategies to guide student instruction and improve student performance. We
have found through conversations with administrators, that this spirit of collaboration has
spread, and teachers often take what they learn from the graduate student and share this with
other teachers. For example, at one elementary building, teachers have incorporated some of
the assessments and inclusive strategies that are taught in the graduate class. This started
when one graduate student shared her learning and new resources with the classroom teacher
in hopes of addressing the needs of a struggling reader. The teacher found these resources to
be valuable not only in her own classroom, with a particular student, but viewed this new
information as valuable for grade level teams as they look to better address the needs of their
diverse learners. The sharing of resources has become a sustained practice. Much of these
resources are housed in a database built by the college faculty; the principal and staff now have
access to all of this work.
We are fortunate to work with classroom teachers who open their doors to our
students, and approach this as a true collaboration. One of the classroom teachers in the
Rochester City School District who has participated in this model for 5 years still enthusiastically
welcomes each graduate student. “Each new student brings a new perspective, and enhances
my own knowledge about my students” she states. “I feel it is critical for pre-service teachers
to collaborate with practicing teachers in this way. The students I work with truly internalize
how assessment works in a classroom to target instruction. As well, they bring new research
which I have been able to use with my students. Through this collaboration I have learned new
83

ways to assess students and specific fluency and decoding strategies that have greatly improved
the skills and strategies of several of my struggling readers.”
Graduate students discuss the impact of this kind of experience in classrooms as the
difference between being active in the classroom versus being purposefully engaged. Graduate
students collaborate continually with their classroom teachers and apply the tenets of
Response to Intervention, a topic they need to understand. These students experience
immersion in an active and integrative learning process through the Literacy Assessment course
and participate in both scaffolded and independent experiences that are integral to preparing
future educators as lifelong learners. As graduate students apply the course content they have
multiple avenues for perspective which include collaboration with course Instructor,
collaborating teacher and other professionals, as well as reading research articles and the use
of technological resources. A recent graduate of Nazareth College shares what she sees as
benefits to this model- “Through first assessing the student to see his strengths, weaknesses,
and needs, I was able to develop a plan of action for the student. This was more beneficial than
just sitting in class and creating a plan for a “future student.” I was also able to see growth in
the student as well. That is something that you do not have to opportunity to see during the
course time. Also working with the student I was able to see what part of the lesson he did not
understand. This was valuable because as a teacher you will constantly be changing your
lessons and adapting them to the needs of your students. I worked very closely with the
classroom teacher- together we analyzed assessment and student performance, I learned new
ideas from her experiences and was thrilled that she was able to use what I learned from class
with her students as well. I can see where collaborating with other professionals will be an
important resource throughout my teaching career.” The relationship between the classroom
teacher and the graduate student is reciprocal, in that ideas and resources are shared, resulting
in new learning for both parties.
How Does This Model Contribute to Fostering an Inclusive Environment?
A critical starting place is the role of the administrator is the identification of classroom
teachers. The teachers participating in this collaboration are purposefully chosen by their
ability to conduct literacy assessments and connect those assessments to targeted instruction.
Additionally, these teachers welcome the opportunity to mentor the graduate student and
work in partnership to best understand assessment and instruction. At times, administrators
saw potential connections with their staff and this project when reviewing teachers’ annual
goals. Administrators would offer this collaboration as a next step in the teacher’s professional
practice. Another identifier for success in this partnership is the long-term commitment. None
of us approach this relationship as a short term goal. Over time, we continue to refine our
process in an effort to meet the needs of all partners. The role administration plays is pivotal to
our success. Their understanding of this model supports not only the classroom teacher, but
the graduate student and course instructors as well. Their lens is critical in developing and
maintaining this model as a working relationship. Administrators are familiar with course
content, know the graduate students and assist on many levels as individual needs arise.
84

This long term commitment also assists in addressing some of the challenges that can
occur in this kind of partnership. At times we have had graduate students who do not meet the
expectations and commitments of this level of work. We also have had teachers whose
philosophies and approaches to collaboration do not meet the needs of our process. These are
hard conversations to have at any time, but they are made easier over time by the sustained
relationships we have and the mutual commitment to the process. As school principals,
classroom teachers and graduate faculty, we have a shared obligation to what Celia Oyler and
Lyn Goodwinn refer to as “gatekeeping our profession” (as cited in Cochran-Smith, Feiman-
Nemser, McIntyre & Demers, 2008).
School Leaders Supporting the Process
Principals and Vice Principals have encouraged the leaders among their faculty to help
to develop and sustain this partnership. The administration is a constant resource in these
conversations and the graduate faculty and school leaders meet before during and after each
semester to continue to analyze the effects of the process and make adjustments as needed.
The principal is a constant resource who serves multiple purposes:
1.) to foster a culture in the building that embraces this type of learning/mentoring
model;
2.) to collaborate with college faculty to develop a protocol for selecting teachers and
working collaboratively throughout the semester;
3.) to know the course content and serve as an additional resource to the graduate
students; and
4.) most importantly, to serve as the common thread that weaves all parties in this
collaboration together- to know what works in the building, and together craft the
shape of this model to fit building specific needs.
After graduate students identify areas for instruction and investigate research-based
practices for such areas, students approach the professionals to gain insight on their
perspective of the research. This allows each graduate student to have a comprehensive
understanding of the application of theory to practice. As a result, multi-agency collaboration
allows for sharing of resources, and classroom teachers are kept abreast of the latest research,
allowing graduate students and classroom teachers to apply the research consistently.
Principals must also support their teachers in this teaching and learning process.
Support is provided in different ways in different buildings but the commitment to the process
is universally strong. One principal at a participating school notes the important impact on
teachers: “This process continues to encourage my teachers to explain what they do and why
they do it. This allows all educators to continue to improve their educational practices.”
Our Role as Graduate Faculty
As graduate faculty, we find this partnership works best when we work hand in hand
with building level administration. We serve in a variety of active roles that include: meeting
85

egularly with classroom teachers, guiding classroom visits as needed and requested, providing
process time in the graduate class to consider the application of theory to practice,
communicating with all parties, and most importantly, adjusting for individual needs. This
support begins early. We conduct initial meetings with administrators to discuss how the
partnership will look at the building and how teachers will participate. We also talk about
expected outcomes.
Once the initial support is established, we meet with all involved teachers and building
level administration to thoroughly review expectations for graduate students and discuss our
system of support. Optimally, we are present in classrooms several times throughout the
semester, and are included in weekly email communications between graduate students and
teachers. Additionally, we provide scaffolding and continual feedback through coursework to
guide the student in his/her action research. As with all learning experiences, the focus on
differentiation for readiness, interest and learning style is a key aspect of our work. We
structure our course learning experiences in a progression – large group, small group, and one
on one - meeting to assist students with more specific assessments and questions. This progress
is natural and we provide scaffolding along the way. We connect regularly with the building
level administrators and participating teachers and continue to find ways to refine the process.
This process has evolved over time, and is flexible based on the individual buildings and staff.
Concluding Thoughts
Effective principals are those who promote change through practices that are
collaborative, intentional and supportive (Fullan, 1993, Lambert, 1998, as cited in Salisbury, C,
McGregor, G. 2002). Principals who use our model do just that. Our collaboration allows for
change in the learning for young students, change in processes in elementary classrooms and
ultimately in school culture. We all embrace the continual analysis of what teachers do to help
struggling learners and how the process of analysis and evaluation helps teachers make sound
decisions regarding the next steps in student learning.,
In order to make inclusive education work, attention must be given…to the instructional
strategies employed, the classroom management techniques used, and the educational
collaboration that occurs among faculty. (Voltz, 2001) We have found that when principals
support this model, the educational collaboration is at a premium. This has positively impacted
teacher collaboration, and has given graduate students first-hand experience in collegiality in
diverse settings.
When sharing our processes with colleagues in other districts and with other colleges,
we are often asked if we provide compensation to classroom teachers for their collaboration.
We do not – we cannot. Instead we look to form true partnerships where all stakeholders
benefit from the process. The administrators who invite us and our students into their schools
are clear about our mutual commitment to mentoring future teachers, collaborating with
higher education for the advancement of graduate students, classroom teachers and
elementary students. When we continue to reflect on our profession- why we do what we do
86

and how we are grounded in research based practices- we can continue to develop as a
profession.
In closing, we would like to offer the following points for administrators to consider as they
work with local colleges:
1. What is your role in working with local colleges to place students in your school?
2. How are teachers selected? Is there an internal process in place?
3. What are your teachers’ thoughts on taking field experience students?
4. What types of conversations do you have with the college level students working in your
building?
Information about the authors: Kerry Dunn, Ed.D, is Director of Graduate Inclusive Childhood
Programs at Nazareth College in Rochester, NY and Debbie Godsen DePalma, M.S. is the
Literacy Instructional Specialist and Adjunct Professor at the NYS Reading Resource Center at
Nazareth College.
References
Cochran-Smith, L., Zieman-Nemser, K., McIntyre, J. & Demers, K. (2008) Handbook of research
on teacher Education: Enduring questions in changing contexts (3 rd ed). New York:
Routledge
Salisbury, C., & McGregor, G. (2002). The administrative climate and context of inclusive
elementary schools. Exceptional Children, 68(2), 259-274
Zeichner, S. Melnick, & M. L.Gomez (Eds.) 1996. Currents of reform in preservice teacher
education (pp. 215-234). New York: Teachers College Press.
D. Voltz, N. Brazil, & A. Ford (2001) What matters most in inclusive education: A practical guide
for moving forward. Intervention in Schools and Clinic, 37(1), 23-31
87

Creating and Sustaining Partnerships with an Inclusive Childhood Graduate Program
Learning from our Journey
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. The authors state that we have an obligation to act as "gate keepers" for our
profession. What is your interpretation of this statement? How do you determine
the line between mentor and gate keeper? What are your roles and responsibilities
relating to mentor and gate keeper?
2. Why is it important for schools and colleges to collaborate? What are the benefits to
both parties?
3. How can a college/ school partnership support inclusive practices and work to
increase opportunities for students with special needs?
Additional reading:
Ferrier-Kerr, J. L. (2009). Establishing professional relationships in practicum settings.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6),790-7.
Buitink, J. (2009). What and how do student teachers learn during school-based teacher
education. Teaching and Teacher Education 25(1),118-27.
88

Reading 10: Exploring Disability in Young Adult Literature
Introduced by: Jennifer Ashton, Ph.D., University of Rochester
As an alternative to the dominant deficit-oriented representations of disability in our society,
Disability Studies in Education (DSE) recognizes the value of human diversity and foregrounds
the socially just tenets of inclusion in educational settings. Having recently completed my
dissertation on co-teaching using DSE as a theoretical framework, I see the need for this type of
re-conceptualization and often think about how we can broaden DSE’s reach and improve
inclusive education for all students. Dr. Ware and Ms. Wheeler’s work illustrates the potential
impact of infusing DSE principles into standard curriculum and transforming perceptions of
disability among students and teachers alike. This chapter presents a practical model of
conceptual transformation that highlights the spaces for administrative support for teachers
and students as they negotiate a re-conceptualization of disability, human diversity, and inclusive
education.
89

Exploring Disability in Young Adult Literature 1
Linda Ware and Natalie Wheeler
This essay considers the importance of administrative support in the maintenance of
inclusive schools at the level of classroom curriculum. We focus on an eight day instructional
unit that explored disability as human diversity presented through popular young adult
literature taught in Natalie’s 6 th grade general education classroom in the Honeoye Falls-Lima
Central School District (Spring, 2010). Both the principal and the Assistant Superintendent of
Curriculum/Instruction provided the administrative support to enable Natalie to partner with
her former professor (Linda) and seven undergraduate pre-service teachers 2 in the
development and delivery of this instruction in Spring, 2010.
Centering disability
Our instruction explored various cultural meanings of disability in three popular works
of young adult literature: Stuck in Neutral (Treuman, 2000), Freak the Mighty (Philbrick, 1993),
and The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time (Haddon, 2002) 3 . These award-winning
works of fiction are endorsed by the American Library Association (ALA) and readily featured on
numerous teacher lesson websites linked to both the National Council of Teachers of English
(NCTE) and to state literacy learning standards. For our purposes, the literature served as a
springboard to consider: 1) the lived experience of disability recounted in first person
narratives; 2) the fact that disability as human difference troubles normalcy); and 3) the
meaning of inclusion in schools and society. Each of the above was readily linked to the HF-L
mission statement that makes explicit the development of an appreciation for human diversity
(www.hflcsd.org). By locating our instruction in a general education setting we encourage
readers to recognize the need to locate conversation on disability and inclusion within the
general education curriculum.
Implications for Inclusion
Specific to inclusion, our project embraced Sapon-Shevin’s metaphor of “widening the
circle” (2007), where equity considerations are taken up in schools to include disability and with
particular emphasis on disability studies scholarship embedded within the K-12 curriculum
(Ware, 2001; 2003a; 2003b; 2006). Disability studies promotes understanding inclusion as a
1 The work reported here is a product of collaboration between the classroom teacher, Natalie Wheeler and Linda Ware who
share co-authorship of this article, and the SUNY Geneseo preservice teachers. We would like to acknowledge the participation
of Rob Sanford (Grade 6), who teamed with Natalie throughout the academic day, his contribution to our project was
invaluable. We also acknowledge the brilliant participation by Ms. Wheeler’s Wizards and Mr. Sanford’s Stars!
2 The SUNY Geneseo students who participated in this instructional unit include: Michael Cornell, Mindy Benamati, Sarah Burke,
Erin Zalewski, Rachel Pierce, Meaghan Werther, and Sami DeWitt. With the exception of Michael, all were junior level students
enrolled in a three-credit course taught by Linda. The course has disability and inclusion as its focus, and it culminates with a
community based project created by the student (s).
3 The HF-L students were assigned to groups by their teacher(s) to read only one book over the eight-day unit. The students had
the option to read all three books once the project concluded.
90

oader conversation about diversity in schools and society in much the same way that race,
class, and gender are considered beneath the umbrella of multiculturalism and human diversity
(Connor, 2009; Ware, 2006; 2010; Ware & Valle, 2010). In this way, when the emphasis shifts to
consider disability as a value added experience rather than a problematic experience,
understanding is no longer bound to remediation, rehabilitation and charity discourses.
Although it is rare to find disability taken up in K-12 curriculum as we discuss it here, classroombased
discussions of disability in K-12 classrooms appear in the literature as beneficial to
disabled and non-disabled students alike (Ware, 2001; 2003; 2006).
A Note to the Reader
Several aspects of this project cannot be fully detailed due to the limitations of space
and given the conditions that gave rise to its implementation. The collaboration between
Natalie and Linda began when Natalie was a student at SUNY Geneseo (2006-2007). Then,
Natalie was new to the disability studies scholarship, a topic of study that is paradigmatically
incongruent with content common to traditional special education programs 4 . Disability studies
offers a radical departure from special education coursework in that it does not locate the
“problem” of disability in the student, rather it implicates institutions, systems, and the built
environment. As well, disability studies asks educators to imagine a future beyond schooling for
disabled students so that their efforts move beyond the symbolic conformance to schooling
rituals. For Natalie, the patriarchal approach to “servicing students”—the common parlance in
her coursework—provoked her chagrin as she held fast to the goal of becoming a teacher who
would encourage her future students to develop as confident and “willful” self advocates
(advanced by the poet and disability activist, Eli Clare (2004) encountered in Linda’s
coursework). As a teacher (first in New York City, and later in HF-L), Natalie acted on those
beliefs by privileging independence and autonomy in all of her students, including those schools
identify as disabled 5 . Tensions between everyday schooling practices in both general and
special education that marginalize children with disabilities were a recurring concern for all who
participated in this project given our shared commitment to ensure equity in the classroom
(Hamre, Oyler & Bejoin, 2006; Sapon Shevin, 2007).
The Literacy Project Overview
Our literacy project spanned eight days of instruction in two sixth grade classrooms (n
=45). The SUNY Geneseo pre-service teachers (n=7) developed instruction and led small group
instruction with support from Natalie and Linda. We met as a team for over thirty hours of
preplanning discussion and independent revision of our instruction based on the selected texts.
In addition, we organized large group presentations that combined both classes for an
4 When special education teacher preparation programs are rooted to rehabilitative and medicalized strategies focused on
cure, care, and intervention, traditional coursework is not easily aligned with disability studies scholarship. The ideological and
paradigmatic disconnect often proves problematic and as such, outside the program knowledge base (see Ware, 2010).
Although some colleges have renamed their coursework beneath the banner of disability studies, in the absence of
conceptualizing it’s disjuncture at the level of ideology and of praxis, they accomplish little more than a meaningless “lexical”
change critiqued by Slee (1996) in the example of mainstreaming and inclusion.
5 Use of “person-first” language is purposefully inconsistent throughout this chapter to stress that the political status of
disability need not be minimized by a nod to language use that elides the reality of disability as an identity marker.
91

introduction to disability studies that featured representations of disability art and culture
presented by Linda. In addition, another SUNY Geneseo student participated as a guest
speaker, reading from an essay he wrote for Linda’s interdepartmental seminar, “Disability in
America” (also structured to address disability through cultural lens). Keith described his
experience growing up with a twin brother with developmental disability at a point in the unit
that invited the HF-L students to consider exclusion in schools and society. Keith recounted the
impact of his brother’s experience in segregated schooling and the injustice he felt powerless to
interrupt, and to extend one of the identified themes in the YA literature, that of disability as a
family experience.
The preservice teachers and Linda also led large group conversations with support from
Natalie who utilized dialogic discussion as a teaching strategy to promote literacy. Her facility
with this instructional strategy provided excellent mentoring for the preservice teachers as
none had prior exposure to its use. In addition, the HF-L students provided remarkable insight,
educating us about how young children come to associate disability with a devalued life
experience (Shapiro, 1999).
“Dialogic discussion” as Inclusive Pedagogy
Natalie’s instructional pedagogy merged the hybrid influences of “shared authority” in
the classroom (Oyler, 1996); making room for all students regardless of ability (Kluth, Straut &
Biklen, 2008; Sapon-Shevin, 2007); and a belief that inclusion was more than a set of practices
reserved for students with disabilities (Valle & Connor, 2010; Ware & Valle, 2009). Natalie was a
vigilant proponent of disability studies even though she recognized there was no “skills set” to
apply towards those ends. That is, the direct teaching of disability studies as she experienced
the content in her undergraduate preparation did not ensure a straightforward or “readymade”
application for her sixth grade students. As a teacher, she advanced understanding
disability as human difference in conversations with her peers and in her teaching whenever
possible, but actual disability-related content this year was haphazard. However, in 2009-2010
HF-L adopted Petey 6 (Mikaelsen, 1998) for instruction in all grade 6 classrooms. Natalie taught
Petey prior to our disability studies literacy project and coincident with her introduction of
dialogic discussion (Adler & Rougle, 2005). This strategy was framed as a tool for lifelong
learning (Adler & Rougle, 2005; Alexander, 2008), and was one of several instructional
approaches she utilized in an effort to create an inclusive classroom community. A handout,
pieced together from multiple sources was distributed to students with the following beliefs
outlined in a rationale for its use:
•Believe you have the right (and need) to understand things and to make things work;
•Believe that problems can be analyzed; that problems are solved through analysis; and
that you are capable of that analysis!
6 Petey begins in 1920 when he is born with cerebral palsy to a family who made every effort to care for him. He ultimately
became a ward of the state and spent his life in an institution. The novel recounts his life through 1990 when he is befriended
by a teen that defends him from neighborhood bullies. The book jacket reads: Petey is a touching story of friendship, discovery,
and the domination of the human spirit over physical obstacles.
92

Expectations for student learning were made explicit through the development of the skills that
would enable the students to: ask questions, develop logical reasoning, think about an issue
from multiple lenses, cope when things are unclear and ideas conflict, seek complexity rather
than simple answers, challenge another’s opinion or viewpoint, think flexibly, and listen for
unusual perspectives. Natalie also specified the norms for participation that would ensure that
students learned “listening” behaviors and rules for discussion. These included learning how to:
state your opinion; acknowledge an idea/give credit to another person; agree/disagree;
interrupt/offer suggestions; get a response; clarify positions; paraphrase; share the ideas of
others; summarize learning; and convey enthusiasm and respect for people’s comments. With
our focus on disability as a cultural experience “dialogic discussion” as a pedagogic tool proved
invaluable.
In the example of Petey, dialogic discussion provoked questions across a broad
spectrum of concerns including the origin of asylums and institutions at the turn of the century;
the impact of communication on understanding human difference; the acceptance of social
practices that enforced isolation of disabled people; the potential for friendships across
difference; the meaning of family responsibility; the meaning of inclusion; and the impulse to
bully people with disabilities. The breadth of the HF-L students’ questions, concerns, and the
perspectives they espoused prompted Natalie to recall a central tenet in early coursework with
Linda—that despite the presence of disability in schools and society—disability, remains an
under explored topic in the curriculum. In combination with Ben Mikaelsen’s author’s note at
the end of Petey that, “public misunderstanding continues to be one of the greatest obstacles
faced by any person with this condition” (Cerebral palsy), Natalie was more than willing to
collaborate on the development of this disability studies literacy project.
Instructional Aims
During our initial planning to identify instructional aims, Natalie reflected on her
experience teaching Petey, and as a consequence, she hoped that her students’ would be
encouraged to explore disability “beyond the labels and such.” She believed her students could
increase their awareness of disability as a general goal, however, the broader goal –to consider
the cultural intersections of disability, identity and society—held much pedagogic appeal.
According to Natalie:
I want my students to really examine disability as something that is made up. I
know it’s real, but at the same time it’s not. I think they can handle that
conversation.
After teaching Petey she realized that the students possessed compassion, however they also
expressed status quo, ableist misunderstandings of disability. She hoped to probe their views
through dialogic discussion, even though her own starting point was not fully outlined in
advance. Such a goal was consonant with Linda’s research supporting teachers in the
93

development of disability infusion in the curriculum 7 and as they came to realize the very real
consequences of marking difference as “problem” on the bodies of disabled children.
The pre-service teachers were less certain about what to expect as they too were new
to conceptualizing disability studies in the context of the classroom given that only one course
in their teacher preparation program addressed disability through a cultural lens. Linda
encouraged a lesson planning process that was more organic than the standard template
mandated in their preservice education courses. Instead, she urged open exchange that was
less didactic. That is, rather than “tell” the HF-L students what to think, they were encouraged
to “listen” to the students and to remain attentive to their sense making. Nonetheless, the
demand for a more prescriptive scripted teaching approach was difficult to dispel among the
SUNY students. One student explained:
In all honesty, I don’t really know how I might begin to teach from a disability
studies perspective. I don’t really know how soon we can challenge medical
views—or if the students even hold a medical view on disability. I’m still
wondering, Will my future students even ‘get it’?
Another pedagogic issue for the preservice students was how to teach books that were,
with the exception of the Haddon novel, fairly stereotypical and somewhat negative portrayals
of disability. One asked: “How do we teach the book along with the problem representation of
disability in the book?” Another observed, “I want to teach about disability the way we talk
about it in our class—as just one part, but not the only part—of a person’s identity, but will the
HF-L students grasp this content?”
Linda assured her students that the unit would take shape if they were poised to listen
to the students and to isolate signs of sense making. She advised them to set aside their prior
training and the expectation that they “over-prepare” instruction as it would compromise the
spontaneous exchange of ideas, beliefs, and perceptions—and their ability to listen to the
students as they engaged the texts.
Due to the limits of space, we consider only a fraction of the instruction prepared for
this unit so as to highlight excerpts of powerful classroom engagement that followed. We have
not provided specific steps in a lesson plan format because to do so in the absence of grappling
with a disability studies orientation would undermine our purposes for teaching this content in
the first place.
Instead we begin with a brief synopsis for each book taken from the website,
Bookrags.com. These excerpts are intended to serve as “non-examples” given their consistent
medicalization of disability and their unreflective reliance on ableist language. We believe that
the emphasis on disability “ailment” in these plot outlines operates in much the same way that
labeling operates in education to effectively “misread” people with disabilities as the product of
7 A disability-infusion approach was initially described by Linda in her work with K-12 educators who participated in a six week
National Endowment for the Humanities disability studies seminar co-directed by David T. Mitchell and Sharon L. Snyder at the
University of Illinois, Chicago, 2003 (see Ware, 2006).
94

misfortune and less worthy lives (for a more elaborate discussion of media influences see
Elman, 2010; Solis, 2004). We also provide text samples that point to the bold and rich narrative
possibilities contained in these works, which even as non-examples, reveal the potential to be
mined for deep meaning in the classroom. The instructional themes taken up in our instruction
are also included for each novel.
Stuck in Neutral (Treuman, 2000) is the heartbreaking tale of a young boy, Shawn who
has cerebral palsy and who is profoundly developmentally delayed. However inside his broken
body, Shawn believes himself to be a genius, due to his ability to remember everything he has
ever seen or heard” (www.bookrags.com).
Sample Text:
*I+n the eyes of the world, I’m a total retardate. A ‘retard’ Not “retard” like you might
use the word to tease a friend who just said or did something stupid…. everybody who
knows me, everybody who sees me, everybody, anybody who even gets near me would
tell you I’m dumb as a rock (p. 4).
I do sometimes wonder what life would be like if people, even one person, knew that I
was smart and that there’s an actual person hidden inside my useless body; I am in here,
I’m just sort of stuck in neutral (p. 11).
In my father’s eyes I’m a vegetable, a human vegetable, I’ll never be able to enjoy life or
be productive (p. 25)
When people first meet me, they usually do their Annie-Sullivan-meeting-Helen-Keller-in-
The Miracle Worker routine. ‘HI SHAWN, NICE TO MEET YOU…MY NAME IS ALLY
WILLIAMSON…HOW ARE YOU?’ For some reason people always speak real slowly and
loudly when they’re introduced to me (p. 55).
Instructional Themes: Perceptions of suffering, perceptions of competence; perceptions
of communication exclusive to speech; the impulse to pity people with disabilities, disability in
the schooling context, medical versus cultural meanings of disability, and claiming disability as a
source of strength and power.
In Freak the Mighty (Philbrick, 1993) the “primary characters are friends Maxwell Kane,
a large, very slow, but kind-hearted kid and his friend Kevin Dillon, nicknamed ‘Freak,’ who is
physically crippled but very intelligent (www.Bookrags.com).
Sample Text:
I never had a brain until Freak came along and let me borrow his for a while, and that’s
the truth, the whole truth (p. 1).
I got my first look at Freak *in+ that year of phony hugs. He didn’t look so different back
then, we were all of us pretty small…. (p. 2).
95

I feel real bad for Freak, because he hates it when people try to rub his head for luck. . .
(p. 72).
The only reason I got passed from seventh grade is because they figured this way the big
butthead can be—quote—someone else’s problem, thank God, we’ve had quite enough
of Maxwell Kane—unquote (73).
Instructional themes: Family relationships when disability is present; perceptions of self
vs. society’s perceptions; friendships across differences; accepting difference, disability in the
schooling context, bullying disabled people, and claiming disability as a source of strength and
power.
The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time (2002, Haddon) is a story about
a unique young man setting out to solve an unusual crime and to record his progress in a novel.
The young man is Christopher John Francis Boone, and he is unique because he is severely
autistic” (www.Bookrags.com).
Numerous lesson plans are available on-line for classroom use of this widely acclaimed
novel, many of which consider autism the focus. Ironically, Haddon made no specific mention of
autism in the novel; in fact, Haddon went to great lengths to explain why he did not label
Christopher as autistic (McInerney, 2003; Noonan, 2003;Ware, 2006). In keeping with Haddon,
Linda encouraged the preservice students to make every effort possible to avoid characterizing
Christopher as autistic. However, on the first day of instruction after reading through the first
few pages, the HF-L students demanded verification that Christopher was autistic. The impulse
to root out Christopher’s disability worked to our advantage as our instruction turned on the
ability of these sixth grade students to consider medical and cultural meanings of disability. The
demand to know Christopher as autistic rather than the richly layered character the narrative
offered was a brilliant starting point, and one that we could never have anticipated in advance
planning.
Sample Text:
All the other children at my school are stupid. Except I’m not meant to call them stupid,
even though this is what they are. I’m meant to say that they have learning difficulties
or that they have special needs. But this is stupid because everyone has learning
difficulties because learning to speak French or understanding relativity is difficult… (p.
43)
So I took deep breaths like Siobhan said I should do when I want to hit someone in
school and I counted 50 breaths and did cubes of the cardinal numbers as I counted like
this .. 1, 8, 27, 64, 125, 216, 343, 512, 729, 1000, 1331, 1728, 2197, 2744, 3375, 4096,
4913 … etc. (p. 213).
Instructional themes: The search for order and stability, perceptions of social behavior
as an indicator of intelligence/ability; social injustice; Christopher’s perception of ability; his
96

perception of disability, disability in the schooling context, and claiming disability as a source of
strength and power.
Discussion
The HF-L students responded to these texts and to our instruction with a mix of
reactions: some accepted stereotypes on face value, some saw past the stereotypes and
responded to the characters as more like themselves than they initially imagined; and others
made bold connections to disability and to the world around them. For example, in discussion
of Stuck in Neutral, Shawn’s interpretation of his eminent death at the hands of his father was
probed, questioning: “Is this a plausible plot?” By posing a question (consistent with dialogic
discussion) the students grappled with various responses including those related to Shawn’s
cognitive capacity given his inability to speak. Discussion touched on assistive technology, the
meaning of intelligence, and the misperception that due to the absence of traditional speech
one could not communicate wants, needs, and abilities. Another student laughed aloud as he
read Shawn’s depiction of his “condition” because the details were witty, sarcastic, and
intentionally self-mocking—attributes many of the HF-L middle school students shared with
Shawn. Students agreed these “personality traits” were clear signs of Shawn’s self-awareness
and his humanity, and in discussion, they redefined intelligence and questioned the meaning of
normalcy and their own neurotypical status.
The HF-L students readily identified the negative perceptions of Shawn held by others as
dehumanizing and infantilizing (vocabulary that emerged from our instruction). They debated
how others, especially Shawn’s father could view him as an object of pity and as less than
human. In one assignment they wrote poems about Shawn informed exclusively by his selfnarration
and without focusing on his impairment and his disability. In a prewriting session
students debated whether Shawn’s physical appearance was or was not an indicator of his
intelligence, and this led to an in-depth conversation about the social pressure to judge
appearance. In dialogic discussion, one student outlined the many ways that stereotypical
appearances are perpetuated by society. His list included: bullying in schools, fashion trends,
advertisements in the media, and racism that was previously abolished but still exists today.
Such exchanges in small and large group discussion revealed the complex thinking that Natalie
knew her students possessed, however, their ability to link disability discourse to larger social
issues was surprising to the preservice teachers. The parallel to their own coursework with
Linda became more apparent as this unique mix of disability related content proved to be yet
another long overdue conversation on disability, exclusion and social injustice.
In early discussion of Freak the Mighty, students focused on Maxwell’s placement in an
LD class, the meaning of LD, everyday usage of “retarded” and speculation about Kevin’s claims
to a robot identity rather than a “crippled” identity. Discussion of disability and ability
encouraged students to speak freely, to ask honest questions, and to not be judged. Discussion
on the historic context of language usage prompted one student to refer back to Petey. He
wondered if contemporary use of the word “demented” would be considered offensive, noting
that in the novel, it seemed acceptable. We probed the obvious link to contemporary use of the
“R” word, inviting further discussion that was again, much more sophisticated and nuanced
97

than students anticipated. One HF-L student wondered about contemporary use of LD, asking:
“If the LD class is for students who learn differently, why isn’t it called the ‘Learning Differences’
class?” Students rallied to justify this as a proposed change because, as one student observed,
“learning disability implies no ability, which isn’t true.” Another reasoned that he would
support a name change to learning differences because society is too quick to put the label of
disability on a person. Another commented that similar to wheelchair users 8 students with
learning disabilities did not choose to have them and they should not be seen as “learning
problems.” The students suggested that, at least in their school, they re-appropriate the
meaning of LD.
The exploration of disability-related content prompted by these novels, combined with
students’ life experience, and the regard for their ability to manage an open-ended
conversation on disability revealed how critical it is to approach disability as an experience that
can illuminate our shared humanity. In the Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time,
students responded to the question, “In what ways are you like Christopher?” Recall that
initially some of the HF-L students insisted on knowing whether Christopher was autistic. Days
into our instruction one student responded:
I am like Christopher because he does not like being touched. I like to have my own
space. I also think that Christopher is very independent. I would also prefer to be
independent.
Another noted: “I know what it’s like to be away from someone you love. My dad is in
Afghanistan and I miss him the way Christopher misses his mom.” For our purposes, it was not
necessary that the students consider disability in their response as much as it was to consider
similarities in lived experience.
Conclusion
This essay represents a fraction of our instruction in which we attempted to teach that
students with disabilities can be “valued members of our schools and classrooms—not because
we are charitable, but because students with disabilities, like all students, have a lot to offer”
(Ferri: 2008, p. 427). This curriculum exploration of disability in YA literature at HF-L would not
have been possible in the absence of an administrative vision that maintains the belief that “all
students have a lot to offer.” The importance of locating the goals of inclusive education
squarely in the curriculum for consumption by all students challenges disability as a taboo topic.
Until schools address the omission of disability history, art, and culture in the curriculum—
where the real work of inclusion begins—society will continue to reify disability as a devalued
experience. This project was one step toward the larger goal of recognizing that in order to
allay the stigma associated with disability, children and youth must be permitted to appreciate
disability as another aspect of human diversity made explicit in the curriculum of inclusive
schools.
8 Students learned the meaning of several new terms during this project including: Neurotypical, wheelchair-user, abelist,
ableism, infantalization, etc. The terms were readily applied in their exchanges with one another and with us.
98

REFERENCES
Adler, M. and Rougle, E. (2009). Building literacy through classroom discussion: Research-based
strategies for developing critical readers and thoughtful writers in middle school. New
York: Scholastic.
Alexander, R. Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th edition, 2008).
Clare, E. (1999). Exile and pride. Boston: South End.
Connor, D. J. (2009). Breaking containment—the power of narrative knowing: Countering
silences within traditional special education research. The International Journal of
Inclusive Education, 13 (5): 449-470.
Ferri, B. A. (2008). Doing a (dis)service: Reimagining special education from a disability studies
perspective, pp. 417-431. In W. W. Ayers, R. Quinn & D. Stovall, The Handbook of Social
Justice in Education. Mahway NJ: Erlbaum.
McInerney, J. (2003). “Remains of the dog.” A review of the Curious Incident of the Dog in the
Night-time. New York Times Book Review. June 9.
Noonan. P. (2003). “Allowed to be odd.” Newsweek, September 8, p. 39.
Passanante Elman, J. (2010). After school special education: Rehabilitative television, teen
citizenship and compulsory able-bodiedness. Television & New Media. published online
May 18. http://tvn.sagepub.com/content/11/4/260.
Shapiro, J. (1994). No pity: People with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. New
York: Times Books.
Solis, S. (2004). The disabilitymaking factory: Manufacturing differences through children’s
books. Disability Studies Quarterly. Winter, 2004.
Valle, J. W. & Connor, D. J. (2010). Rethinking disability: A disability studies approach to
inclusive practices. New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Ware, L. (2001). Writing, identity, and the other: Dare we do Disability Studies? Journal of
Teacher Education, 52(2), 107-123.
Ware, L. and Valle, J. (2010). Disability studies as the default paradigm? In Shirley R. Steinberg
(Ed.), 19 Urban questions: Teaching in the city (pp. 113-130). New York & London: Peter
Lang.
99

____.(2003a). Working past pity: What we make of disability in schools. In Julie Allan (Ed.),
Inclusion, Participation and Democracy: What is the Purpose? (pp. 117-137). The
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
_____. (2003b). Understanding disability and transforming schools. In T. Booth, K. Nes, and M.
Stromstad (Eds.), Developing inclusive teacher education (pp. 146-165). London:
Routledge.
_____. (2006a). A look at the way we look at disability. In S. Danforth and S.L. Gabel (Eds.), Vital
questions facing disability studies in education (pp. 271-288). New York: Peter Lang.
_____. (2006b). Urban educators, disability studies and education: Excavation in schools and
society. International Journal of Inclusive Education 10 (2-3), 149-168.
_____. (2010). Disability Studies in Education. In Steven Tozer, Annete Henry, Bernardo
Gallegos, Mary Bushnell Greiner and Paula Groves Price (Eds.), The Handbook of
Research in the Social Foundations of Education (pp. 244-259). New York & London:
Routledge Press.
100

Exploring Disability in Young Adult Literature
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. How can “dialogic discussion” be used as a learning frame for inclusive education across
curricula (i.e. in areas other than literature)?
2. How might the explicit introduction of norms for participation in classroom conversations
influence the development of an inclusive classroom community?
3. How does “dialogic discussion” support the notion that “all students have a lot to offer”?
4. As an administrator, how can you encourage your teachers to examine their own
conceptions of normalcy and embrace the value of human diversity?
5. What role would school administration need to play in order to make discussion of disability
as a "value added" experience a priority at the classroom and school levels?
6. Problematizing traditional conceptions of disability through the use of literature clearly
invoked the 6th grade students to challenge their own conceptions of normalcy. How might
continued use of “dialogic discussion” shape the ways in which these students approach
disability in other aspects of their lives?
Additional References:
Broderick, A.A., Reid, D.K., & Valle, J.W. (2006). Disability studies in education and the practical
concerns of teachers. In Danforth, S. and Gabel, S.L. (Eds.) Vital questions facing
disability studies in education. New York, NY: Peter Lang. (pp. 133-160).
Taylor, S.J. (2006). Before it had a name: Exploring the historical roots of disability studies in
education. In Danforth, S. and Gabel, S.L. (Eds.) Vital questions facing disability studies
in education. New York, NY: Peter Lang. (Foreword, pp. xiii-xxiii).
101

HIGHER EDUCATION SUPPORT CENTER FOR QUALITY INCLUSIVE SCHOOLING
MIDWEST REGION
Institutions of Higher Education
Alfred University
Houghton College
Keuka College
National Technical College for the Deaf/RIT
Nazareth College of Rochester
Roberts Wesleyan College
St. John Fisher College
The College at Brockport
SUNY Geneseo
University of Rochester
Network Partners
RSE-TASC
S 3 TAIR Project
TEACHER CENTERS
PARENT CENTERS
THE ADVOCACY CENTER
Special Thanks to Task Force Participants
2009-2010
Ann Monroe-Baillargeon, Regional Liaison, Ph.D., Alfred University
Katrina Arndt, Ph.D., St. John Fisher College
Jennifer Ashton, Ph.D., University of Rochester
Marianne Blanda, Roberts Weslyan College
102

Julie Buick, The Advocacy Center
Gina Carrano, Monroe BOCES #1
Marie Cianca, Ed.D., St. John Fisher College
Ellen Contopidis, Ph.D., Nazareth College
Jackie Czamanske, NYSED S3TAIR Project
Debbie Godsen DePalma, Nazareth College
Kerry Dunn, Ed.D., Nazareth College
Pat Geary, New York State Education Department
Matt Giugno, New York State Education Department
Gail Grigg, Nazareth College
Liz Hall, SUNY Geneseo
Susan Hildenbrand, Ed.D, St. John Fisher College
Jie Jhang, Ph.D., The College at Brockport
Daniel Kelly, St. John Fisher College
Eun-Joo Kim, Ph.D. The College at Brockport
Barb Klein, The Advocacy Center
Peter Kozik, Ph.D., Syracuse University
Gerald Mager, Ph.D. Syracuse University
Iris Maxon, Syracuse University
John O’Kane, Roberts Wesleyan College
Eileen Radigan, University of Rochester
Susan Salmon, SUNY Geneseo
Susan Schultz, Ed.D., St. John Fisher College
Linda Ware, Ph.D., SUNY Geneseo
Julia White, Ph.D., University of Rochester
Steve Wirt, Syracuse University
103

NY HESC for SystemsChange
Regional Sites
Much of the work of The Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling is done at the regional
level in each of the seven regions of New York State.
1. Western
2. Mid-West
3. Mid-State
4. East
5. Hudson Valley
6. New York City
7. Long Island
1
2
Higher Education Support Center for Quality Inclusive Schooling
Regional Liaison: Midwest Region
Ann Monroe-Baillargeon, Ph.D.
Alfred University
Chair, Division of Education
Alfred University One Saxon Drive, Alfred, NY 14802
Phone: 607-871-2221
Email: monroe@alfred.edu
3
5
4
6
7

Currier, Ed
Presentations
“Problem-Based Learning” Seminar. NYS Science Teachers Association Conference, Rochester,
NY. Fall 2010 and Spring 2011.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Dingus-Eason, Jeannine
Presentations
B. Rogers, J. Dingus, & T. Collins (April 2010). “In Search of Quality: The Contested Terrain of
Manuscripts
Teacher Recruitment in Post-World War II Urban America". American Educational
Research Association Conference, Denver.
Dingus-Eason, J. & Miller Smith, A. (under review). “What does a diversity-centered leader
need to know, do, and be?”: Teaching diversity for leadership. Monograph submission to
The Diversity Caucus of the Teacher Education Division of the Council for Exceptional
Children.

Erklenz-Watts, Michelle
Publications
Erklenz-Watts, M., Fasching-Varner, K. J., & Wood, J. 2009. Epistemology and diversity and
social justice education? A chapter from “How do we know they know? A conversation
about pre-service teachers learning about culture and social justice.”
Presentations
“Your Child is Supposed to Behave Like That: How Brain Development Indicates Behavior.”
Penfield United Methodist Church, Penfield, NY. March 26, 2011.

Your Child is Supposed to
Behave Like That: How Brain
Development Indicates
Behavior*
Michelle Erklenz-Watts, Ph.D.
School of Education
St. John Fisher College
March 26, 2011
*Copyright 2011

Which problem will you solve?
a. 3+2=
b. 49/7=3+?
c. You have a book of matches, a box of tacks
and a candle as your only resources. How can
you get the lit candle to be five feet in the air
without you holding it? You’ve tried melting
the bottom of the candle and sticking it to the
wall but it was ineffective.

Desperately seeking equlibrium
Efficiency
Consistency
Least resistance
Not always speed
Thinking is enhanced by challenge and
inhibited by threat.

Our brains develop pathways to
Needs Pyramid
get our needs met
These needs drive our behavior.
Every behavior has a purpose
“Mis” behavior is an opportunity for brain
development

QuickTime and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.

The Brain
Parts and functions of the brain
Pathways: Neurons, dendrite, axon,
synapses
Pruning and Myelination: maturation

QuickTime and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.

Light Bulb Moment
QuickTime and a
decompressor
are needed to see this picture.

Assimilation
Latitude of acceptance is high
Filing System
Schema
Accommodation
Latitude of rejection is high

Count the Passes
Activity

Patterns in development
Birth- 2 years (Sensorimotor)
Brain development: Cerebellum and Temporal
Lobe-- biological and physiological needs
reflexes, discovery of body from accident to
purposeful, beginning of thought (object
permanence)
Behavior: dropping things repeatedly, peeka boo,
crying when leaving

2-7 years (Preoperational)
Brain development: Connection to Parietal and
Occipital
symbolic representation with language
development, egocentric, appearance reality,
transformation…esteem needs
Behavior: difficult to take perspective from others,
spills while pouring, isn’t able to put everything
back exactly how it came, telling you “No!”

7-11 years (Concrete Operations)
Brain development: stronger connections to
frontal lobe
develops relational logic, rules for all, start to
understand will vs. obligation---safety, social
and esteem needs
Behaviors: tattling, arguing back to authority but
with concrete reasons

11-adulthood (Formal Operations)
Brain development: Working toward developing
full frontal lobe, temporal lobe in full swing
inductive and deductive reasoning begins,
idealism develops---Starting self-actualization
needs
Behaviors--want independence,questions
circumstances based on ideals rather than reality,
reactions based heavily on emotions

Questions for yourself
What need is s/he trying to meet?
What parts of the brain can I reasonably rely on
to tap into?
What schema does s/he have that relates to this
event?
How can I challenge her/his thinking without
threat?
Where is the gorilla I’m not seeing?

Final Thought
Your child’s brain is still
developing rapidly well
into early adulthood. It
needs the same support
at 4 and 14.

Epistemology and diversity and social justice education?
Michelle Erklenz-Watts, Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, James Wood
St. John Fisher College
Rochester, New York
Draft Submitted June 2008
Query Contact Information: Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner
kfasching-varner@sjfc.edu
585-309-6160
Pre-Reading Note: This chapter was written as a trio of thoughts, representing three
faculty members who vary in age, gender, sexuality, and ethnicity. Throughout the chapter
the voice of the piece is affected by the author who was primarily responsible for the
section. In the editing process time was spent milling each section back and forth between
authors to work toward a coherent narrative. For the later part of the piece, where each
author explores her or his own practice, we highlight the author who is writing. Given the
nature of our topic and our desire to really problematize what we “know” we decided not
to remove the track changes feature so that as the reader you can see some of the struggle
we were engaged in relative to how we framed our work. To that extent we have provided
you insight through the later third into our editing process, and included for your reading
our “comments” to each other. We want to be clear from the outset that we do not provide
definitive answers, and like our own process, we invite questions and wanted to model a bit
of our questioning process for you.
Educational practice, that is the theorizing of educational philosophies, pedagogical
understandings and acts, and the teaching of such philosophies, understandings and acts
inherently relies on a variety of paradigmatic orientations that guide the beliefs and actions of
any particular pedagogue. The teaching profession often finds that serious pedagogical
conversations seem to focus intently on methodologies rather than on the complete paradigmatic
approach where methodologies become informed. Given that paradigmatic constructions rely on
systems of knowing, also known as epistemologies, an understanding of the role of epistemology
should be understood before an educator attempts teaching social justice and diversity courses,
and for our purposes as authors here, proceeding with the chapter. Jones (1972) notes the variety
of understandings of what epistemology means relative to research and the praxis of education
including the terms cognitive maps, ethos, forms of life, ultimate cosmology, world hypothesis,

and climate of opinion, all as ways that researchers have conceptualized epistemology (p. 79).
Ladson-Billings (2003), cites that more than being a “…way of knowing an epistemology is a
system of knowing…,” highlighting that “…epistemology is linked intimately to worldview,”
ultimately shaped by “…the conditions under which people live and learn” (p. 399).
Given Ladson-Billing’s (2003) framing of epistemology, it becomes important to draw
attention to the distinctive aspects of epistemology; the highly personal and political nature of
epistemologies in terms of how they operate in educational praxis. Dixson (2005) asserts a
discomfort in how most graduate training encourages educators “…to express what we know as
benignly and sterilely as possible” despite that “…knowing and researching are indeed emotional
acts” (p. 107). With respect to the political nature of epistemologies, Flax (1987), posits that
“…any form of knowledge contains assumptions…constructed by and through human activity,”
which is in-and-of-itself a highly political act (p. 1007). Due to the “inter-relationship between
epistemology, ideology, and politics,” researchers who engage their research through an
epistemological entrance to their paradigm develop ontological (or truth) claims which “…are
simultaneously epistemological and political” (p. 1008).
A major concern in orientation for our chapter is understanding that any conversation
about knowing what our students know, come to know, or never will know with reference to
social justice and diversity is an inherently epistemological and paradigmatic issue as opposed to
a simple question addressed by a methodology. Thus our exploration may appear
overwhelmingly theoretical at times, yet the epistemology that guides our conversation is
important since one of our major claims hereinto is that we are inherently skeptical of claiming
that “we know” that our students “get it” or “don’t get it,” with an understanding of
epistemology as both personal and political, epistemologies can simultaneously be linked to

ontolologies, or the nature of truths, insofar as once one commits to the fact that all pedagogues
operate from multiple ideological and epistemological positions, and thus “none of us can claim
to know the truth or to have the exclusive franchise from nature on the way to find it out”
(Lincoln & Guba, 1990, p. 22). Our hope as authors is that educators can “…offer a thoughtful
and deliberate epistemological perspective and methodology and not merely an “alternative”
methodology because “racial or ethnic” epistemologies are the “in” thing to do at this moment in
qualitative inquiry” when teaching courses related to diversity, multiculturalism, and/or social
justice (Dixson, 2005, p. 110).
Given the aforementioned framework we will explore the nature of knowledge first in
theory, then relative to how educators frame their own knowledge, and then finally and more
specifically how educators frame student knowledge. An underlying assumption for each part of
the chapter is that educators can truly never know what others know; we may however begin to
approximate knowing what we think we know as educators, and thus we will conclude the
chapter with each chapter author exploring what “turns them on” in terms of knowledge and the
markers of knowledge we look for as instructors that align with what we think we know about
our own knowing.
Epistemology (…and privilege)
As authors of this chapter we want to make clear at the outset that we are three white
teacher educators, and whilst our commitments pedagogically are to social justice and diversity,
we wish to avoid staking any knowledge claims that position us as “knowers” for topics and
areas for which we can never truly know. Our task therefore is not to provide an in depth way or
method of how to come to understand what it is that our students or even us as educational
researchers know what our students learn, but rather our focus in this chapter is on sharing with

you the tough epistemological work inherent in trying to understand what it is we think we
know, and how we use what we think we know about ourselves and students to organize our
work as educators.
In line with a discussion of the way in which educators have had a historic focus on the
“othering” of poor, dark skinned, and indigenous “others,” the guiding epistemological
orientation in place for such work has operated in what Ladson-Billings (2003) calls the
“…Euro-American epistemological tradition” (p. 399). Equally, Gordon (1995), citing Foucault,
asserts that most “…educational literature in…the academy…is grounded in the Euro-American
“regime of truth.” (p. 184); ultimately it is the epistemological traditions of white euro-americans
that have created the privileging and “…the canonization of “Whiteness” in the dominant
narratives…” of educational practice (p. 184). Lather (1992), adding the complexity of gender to
epistemological orientation, avers that “…male domination results in partial and distorted
accounts of social life” (p. 93).
The epistemological domination of educational practices has, according to Mazama
(2001), placed students, academics, and peoples of color at “…the periphery, the margin of the
European experience…” as a “…footnote in the White man’s book (p. 387). The overarching
implication of these euro-american epistemologies has resulted in an “…epistemology of
oppression…” where “the racist ideology that drives hegemony moves the oppressed other into a
paradigm of survival so that these intersecting cycles of oppression and survival create a
particular epistemological view of the world” (Tyson, 1997, p. 22).
The development of race-based and indigenous epistemologies have, in part been an
attempt to bring to bear the epistemological view of the world that Tyson (1997) described to
challenge the privileging and dominant discourse. Researchers such as Hill Collins (1991),

Ladson-Billings (1995), Gordon (1990), Asante (1987), Taylor (1987), and Smith (1999) among
others, have developed raced-based epistemologies that stand in the face of dominant euro-
american epistemologies. Tyson (1997) asserts that “…the history of race and race relations
cannot be ignored in discussion about epistemology” (p. 22). Disheartening is the attempt by
some educational researchers, particularly Scheurich & Young (1997), that have consciously or
unconsciously, refocused the attention of race-based epistemological conversations back to the
purview of the dominant euro-american viewpoint by positioning that race-based epistemologies
are somehow new and ‘acceptable’ with white co-signers to acknowledge race-based
epistemologies as legitimate (Mills, 1995). For researchers of color, already cautious given the
hegemonic organization of research in the 21 st century, the question becomes does white interest
in race-based epistemologies create “…scholarly legitimization…” despite that “race-based
epistemologies have been a part of the research discourse” long before white acknowledgement,
interest, and acceptance (Tyson, 1997, p. 22).
White supremacist epistemology meets our paradigmatic orientation
To help guide you as you read on to what we mean by paradigmatically full, we wish to
highlight a set of three guiding principles that can serve as a metric to ensure that out scholarly
work addresses problems that we are epistemologically capable of addressing. The three guiding
principles are as follows:
1) A recognition that carefully orchestrated methods do not in and of
themselves obtain ontologically rich understandings or “…true
results…” (Lather, 1986, p. 259)
2) Epistemology, not ontology or methodology provides the best
entrance to the framing of the paradigm; given that choice of
method and path to ‘truths’ are highly dependant on the systems of
knowing in place

3) Our status as privileged whites necessitates a research agenda that
casts a critical ‘othering’ gaze on ourselves and our beliefs as well
as on other privileged whites, recognizing that our epistemologies
have the propensity for being white supremacist in nature, coming
from a history of white supremacy
The guiding principles above ‘work’ for us and our desire to engage in a chapter that is more
fully paradigmatic in nature. Geertz (1977) offered that “…man is an animal suspended in the
webs of significance he himself has spun…”” (p. 5). It is our belief that enacting upon the
paradigmatic guidelines presented above, allows us to begin the act of disentangling these
cobwebs. We are reminded by Fine (year) that educational research has involved “…acts of
cumulative privileging quietly loaded up on whites,” and consequently the disentanglement of
the privileged and significance we spin upon ourselves must be an open and transparent process
involving a commitment to change now and over time (p. 57).
Given the pervasiveness of whiteness in the educational arena 1 , educators are socialized
often in, with, and around white supremacist privilege; thus educators can no longer continue to
operate paradigmatically within the traditional milieu that has created spaces and places for the
conducting of hegemonic practice. Nor will it be enough to simply deconstruct the ‘center’ of
white privilege in educational practice, namely the euro-american epistemologies, without
attention to simultaneously deconstructing the entire paradigmatic whole. White educational
practictioners in particular are understood as having attempted to define and cast both what the
center and margins look like, thus creating an unsafe space for growth (Tyson, 1995; hooks,
1983).
1 85% of educators come form European ancestry (we need to check the statistic). Given that 85% of educators
are of european decent our claim is that even educators who come from other racial or ethnic groups are
socialized to the profession through whiteness. (This statistic needs to be changed so that it is in line with the real
numbers but we wanted to send you a draft and we can adjust this number at a later point)

Denzin (year) cautions against acting with "..an attitude of engagement with a world that
is ontologically absurd but always meaningful to those who live in it" (p. ). To push further
beyond Denzin’s thoughts, the limit of educational thought seems to be a disparity between
educators’ fetishes and overemphasized reliance on methods to make sense of truth and
understand others’ knowledge. The absurdity rests not within the nature each individual’s truth,
as single truths are not apprehendable, but rather the absence of epistemological alignment to the
subjective, partial, and situated truths we believe must exist. The ‘absurd’ and often profane use
of method, and not epistemology, to explain the nature of truth, ignores and disenfranchises the
very people that educators typically cast as ontologically absurd and ‘other.’ Denzin’s
recognition that in fact the life and the truth of the life is meaningful to those who live it, calls for
a greater paradigmatic responsibility in the construction of research agendas and our examination
of what it might mean to know what someone else knows.
Donmoyer (2001) noted that “the world was once a simpler place” (p. 174). This
statement is fairly misleading. In the Eurocentric paradigms that have guided principles of
educational practice, the world probably has been a simple place – there are plenty of ‘others’ to
teach and plenty of opportunity to advance personal interests at the cost of our students’ success,
simple indeed. Paradigmatic honesty necessitates that the world previously thought to be so
simple be understood in more complex and “messy” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 155) ways. Our
knowledge is situated, subjective (Peshkin, 1988) and partial. Our task as multicultural
educators thus is to fully attend to the paradigm, entering through our multiple systems of
knowing, engaging with methods connected to these systems of knowing, and searching for the
multiple truths that exist.
How Educators Frame Their Own Knowledge

In a Foucauldian fashion, we argue that conceptions of knowledge arise from a grid of
discourses that permeate the school culture as well as the wider state and national contexts, and
the individual and institutional practices that are supported or prohibited by those discourses
(Foucault, 1965, 1977). Without the deconstruction of knowledge, educators miss the fact that
we operate within particular historical practices that “are constructed and generate action”
(Popkewitz, 1999, p. 30). By focusing on discourses we can search for the amalgamations of
social technologies, such as discursive relationships among dominant discourses, institutional
organizations, and individual practices “that when taken together generate, sustain, and inscribe a
given rational system” (Fendler, 1999, p. 174). This focus allows us to see how educators come
to understand the complexity of knowledge, knowledge that often has contradictory outcomes to
the intended goal(s).
While a teacher’s goal of knowing if their students’ know can seem like a simple
function, its deconstruction reveals multiple layers of questions and uncertainties. Teachers
“rarely question the adequacy of their knowledge tradition. They tend to remain committed to
their practices and discourses because, lacking a residue of recalcitrant anomalies, they assume
that they are valid and objective, and thus they serve the best interests of their students and of
society” (Skrtic, 1995, p.40). If we are dedicated to knowing what students know then we must
be dedicated to the mission of seeking out recalcitrant anomalies. Such a commitment will not
provide definition but rather will position what we know as “historically contingent and therefore
changeable” (Fendler, 1999, p. 185). We propose that claims to “know what our students know”
through particular institutional and/or individual practices deny the politics of knowledge and
produce “regimes of truth” (Foucault, 1980). Regimes of truth normalize and habituate the
current conceptions and practices therefore, reinforcing the structures that support them. By

evealing this process, we can then set the groundwork toward seeing, feeling, acting, thinking,
and talking about knowledge in alternate ways.
How do we know we know?
Educators question should not be “what do people know?” but rather “what and how do
we know what we know? In the following section we explore two avenues for teachers’
assessment of their own knowledge—knowledge of the subject matter and practical wisdom—to
point out how they are socially constructed and are theoretically contested and complex.
Knowledge of subject matter
Appropriately, and not surprisingly, educators value knowing what it is they are teaching.
However, emphasis is placed upon implementation, training and developing of the subject matter
into the curriculum rather than on the underlying construction of the subject matter. To
problematize the knowing of subject matter we must first recognize that knowledge is socially
constructed and influenced by political, social, and historical forces. Such an acknowledgement
helps prevent the subject matter from becoming normalized and thus unquestioned. Second, the
increasing institutional practices of standardization and bureaucratization of the teacher
education curriculum (e.g., through SPA accreditation) must be deconstructed to illuminate the
efforts to normalize the knowledge of the subject matter. For example, the Association for
Childhood Education International (ACEI) evaluates teacher education programs on their
worthiness to prepare teacher candidates. ACEI has developed a standard that addresses the
need for teacher candidates to adapt to diverse students by stating,
Candidates understand and can identify differences in approaches to learning and
performance, including different learning styles, and ways students demonstrate

learning. They understand how elementary students' learning is influenced by
individual experiences, talents, disabilities, and prior learning, as well as
language, culture, family, and community values. Candidates know how to seek
assistance and guidance from specialists and other resources to address
elementary students' exceptional learning needs and understand the importance of
collaboration with specialists and families. They identify and design instruction
appropriate to K-6 students' levels of development, learning styles, strengths, and
needs, using teaching approaches that are sensitive to the multiple experiences of
students. Candidates plan instructional tasks and activities appropriate to the
needs of students who are culturally diverse and those with exceptional learning
needs in elementary schools. They are able to apply knowledge of the richness of
contributions from diverse cultures to each content area studied by elementary
students. (http://www.acei.org/acei.org/Sourcedocs3.htm)
There are many indicators of knowledge based on functionalism. The functionalist approach in
education is characterized by using scientific principles and an objective view of knowledge with
the aim of determining the proper roles of schools. Its historical context references back to the
early 1900’s. Such a theoretical view posits that a standardized formula for teaching can be
devised in order to achieve maximum efficiency and achievement. So once one knows the
“different learning styles,” “levels of development,” and “the needs of students who are
culturally diverse and those with exceptional learning needs” then appropriate instructional
opportunities can be provided. However, this standard does not question the knowledge of these
functional principles, providing for educators a rather large epistemological gap. For example,
we must wonder who are the “students who are culturally diverse.” There is an assumption of

knowledge because it has become normalized to define culturally diverse in a certain way. Who
does this represent? Who does it marginalize? How are learning opportunities then developed
based on the answers?
This standard also functionalizes knowledge by alluding that certain kinds of knowledge
are only for specialists. Skrtic (1995) claims that in education, “a division of labor in
professional bureaucracies is achieved through specialization, a situation in which clients are
distributed among the workers, each of whom specializes in the knowledge and skills presumed
to be necessary to serve clients with a particular constellation of needs” (p. 199). Theoretically,
such a bureaucracy promotes workers to know the theory and practice behind their work.
Practically, however, such a bureaucracy within the educational system of today decreases the
need to “know” what others know. The bureaucracy infers that knowledge can be
compartmentalized. The knowledge of others would not be questioned while one concentrates
on building the repertoire of knowledge deemed necessary for one’s own specialization, thus
decreasing the likelihood of anomalies being illuminated. How then do educators determine who
needs to know what, and moreover, who decides and why?
When knowledge is scientifically postured it has great potential of going unquestioned.
An unquestioning nature can lead to implementation of standardization and/or specialization of
the knowledge needed. It becomes clear that one’s personal practices and beliefs are in a
discursive relationship with institutional practices that further normalize the current status of
knowing.
Practical Wisdom
Educators’ claims to knowledge are often based on personal experience in and out of the
classroom. Similar to the knowledge of the subject matter, practical wisdom can also allow for

an unquestioning approach to what it is we know. If we see our experiences as the base for our
knowledge, then the ambiguity needed to question what we know diminishes. Consequently,
teachers’ claims of knowledge, when centered solely on their own experiences are limited and
limiting – knowledge exists far beyond any individual teacher’s repertoire of experiences, and
thus as authors of this chapter we are particularly critical of programs, developments, and teacher
training based solely in experience laden knowledge claims 2 . The theory of learning by doing
values accruing knowledge through practical experiences, and thus teachers may limit their
understanding of knowledge to just those experiences claiming that they know because they have
been doing it (teaching) for so long. However, Skrtic (1995) raised the issue of teachers
reducing the inevitable ambiguity in teaching by reifying their knowledge gained through
learning by doing. “Ambiguity in under organized systems is reduced when actors incorporate-
rightly or wrongly into their paradigms an inference about cause and effect. What they act on the
inference as if it were true, a previously loose relationship between cause and effect becomes
tightened and the uncertainty surrounding the effect is reduced” (Skrtic, 1995, p. 209). When an
educator links their claim to knowing with a personal experience, a cause and effect relationship
is formed. Ambiguity is diminished. Additionally, the context and social construction of this
knowledge remains unquestioned making it unlikely the re-evaluation will be needed (Kuhn,
1970). Delpit (1995) states, “we all interpret behaviors, information, and situations through our
own cultural lenses; these lenses operate involuntarily, below the level of conscious awareness,
making it seem that our own view is simply ‘the way it is” (p. 151). In order to avoid reifying
practical wisdom, educators need to connect their knowing to historical, social and political
discourses that normalize certain ways of knowing. In essence educators are better served
2 For example, we are critical of Ruby Payne’s A Framework for Poverty as Payne suggests that ones’ knowledge of
class and/or socio-economic status be concurrent with a set of experiences that Payne offers as truth claims (such
as you are poor if you have ever…. You are wealthy if you have ever….).

through connected ways of knowing as opposed to separate, self indulgent, and ego centered
operating practices that serve as a camouflage to knowledge (Belenky, 1996).
The pursuit of knowledge should not include any illusion of an end point but rather it
should include the acknowledgement that influence and manipulation of discourses that inform
what knowledge is, is unavoidable and in fact, must be embraced. Focus must be less on how
teachers teach through their own particularized knowledge, and more on an interrogation of how
a teachers “supposed knowledge” became the knowledge to be known.
How educators frame the knowledge of their students
Our premise is that, as long as conditions exist to categorize, marginalize and
demonize each from the other, educators will continue to fail to know how successful they are at
creating socially just future educators. But what do we know? What do we trust is the
foundational base that gives instructors a chance to build new lenses so that our students might
entertain multiple perspectives? How can we know that the base once built will leave students
with sustainable, self-regulating filters that consistently alter pre-judgments that lead to racism,
sexism, ageism, ethnocentrism, classism, prejudicial regionalism and exclusion? Is there any way
for those of us who teach “the diversity courses” to know that students that today pledge to be
active participants in creating a more socially just future actually will do so?
Grounding students in their own social and racial identity development:
Teacher education candidates, share with all humans a set of social identities that
motivate thought and behavior. The identities are derived from at least four distinct perspectives.
For the purposes of this foundational construct, these perspectives will be represented by a four
quadrant schematic originally described by Joseph Luft and Harry Ingham as Johari’s Window
(1969). The first or open window contains aspects of ourselves that we reveal to others

consciously. The open window reveals portions of our identity known to us and to others
equally. We are aware of what we are sharing with society and what others know about us. The
size of this window is dependent on the length of time we have known others and our “openness”
about sharing with others about ourselves. A view through the window often identifies physical
attributes, feelings, wishes, and desires, aspirations, attitudes and beliefs, opinions,
achievements…the list is finite, but extensive.
The second or hidden window contains aspects of ourselves that we choose not to
reveal to others and, thereby, is known to us, but consciously kept from others. The size of this
window is also dependent on the length of time we have known others and our “reluctance”
about sharing with others about ourselves. The opaque character of this window owes much to
personality, past experience and current situations. Like the first or open window, it is a result of
personal, familial, societal, cultural and political dynamics and is as much anthropologic as
idiosyncratic. The window can obscure most, but not all of the same identifying characteristics
that an open window can reveal. Individual success at hiding identities is dependent on personal
ingenuity, social context, political control and economic resources to name a few.
The third or blind window contains public aspects of ourselves that we do not control.
These identifying characteristics are not in our conscious sense of who we are. However, because
others can perceive them, they can be made available to us. This portion of our identity is a
potentially contentious aspect of our identity, because others attach value to these characteristics
and we have much less control over this aspect of ourselves. Unless the view others have from
the blind window is brought to our attention, it goes undetected by us. Like the open window, it
frames how others perceive us, but it is not within our locus of control. It influences our actions,
because, as social beings, we seek to know how others perceive us. A wide spectrum of personal

ehaviors can be attributed to our desire to know how others perceive us. The opaque character
of this window owes much to the degree of investment we have in soliciting others’ perceptions
of us, reading social cues and our intelligence in understanding interpersonal signals, cultural
signifiers, micro-messages (Young, 2006) and our ability to reflect intra-personally on our own
behaviors in social situations (Gardner, 1993) . Like the first or open window, it is a result of
personal, familial, societal, cultural and political dynamics and is as much anthropologic as
idiosyncratic. The view through the blind window has an infinite set of perspectives and is as
complex as the number of social and cultural lenses used by humans to know others.
The fourth or unknown window contains aspects of self identity that we are not
conscious of nor are others. Although this source may motivate some or many of our behaviors,
it is not accessible to conscious thought nor external perception. Much has been theorized about
the unknown portion of personal identity, but it eludes sensory investigation.
Teacher preparation strives to broaden candidates’ self-understanding while
simultaneously deepening their vision to notice or anticipate how others perceive them. We rely
on signifiers that indicate growth toward more self-aware and socially active dispositions that
prepare them to resist the hegemonic structures of white supremacist schooling.
The course purpose
Before moving to the ways in which each of the chapter authors look to mark knowledge
and understand knowledge from the teacher candidates we work with it is important to briefly
orient you to the course that is offered at our institution. The three authors of this chapter teach a
single course at the graduate and/or undergraduate levels that addresses issues of diversity, social
justice, and multiculturalism. The course is taught by several faculty members all of whom are
regarded as having specified knowledge and training related to issues of race, class, gender,

sexuality, and identity 3 . At both the graduate and undergraduate level the course is one semester
in length, and involves a variety of pedagogical activities centered on and around central issues
of identity. The course is intended to provide an in depth exploration of the theory and practice
of teaching and learning in a diverse and pluralistic society, where candidates actively explore
the ways in which educational and socio-cultural practices as well as ideologies have worked to
undermine learning opportunities for students. Thus, a presumption that orients the class is the
notion and acceptance that schooling in the context of the United States has been principled in
large part in the racist, classist, (hetero)sexist history of the United States.
A foundation of the course, in terms of building an understanding of contemporary issues
of diversity, is the agreement among professors instructing the course that candidates will
explore the ways in which culture and experience influences the construction and deconstruction
of knowledge, at the societal, institutional, and individual level; this exploration, furthermore, is
intended to problematize teacher candidates own role in the construction and maintenance of a
hegemonic ‘landscape.’ Throughout the course candidates are expected to interrogate issues
related to social (in)justice, with particular emphasis on the investigation the ideologies and
discourses that create inequity in schools and society, resulting in oppression of peoples and the
creation/maintenance of oppressors. The ultimate lens for this exploration is the discursive
operationalization of “isms” in the oppression/hegemony cycle. Throughout the course, teacher
candidates are expected to examine (frame)works that support effective teaching and learning --
particularly helping candidates locate themselves within a paradigm of self-critique and
examination of privilege.
3 While each faculty member who teaches the course is regarded as qualified to teach the course, each professor
brings a variety of unique specializations – thus candidates’ experience in one section are most often different
than the candidates’ experiences in other sections of the course.

To explore the possibility that we can build such a foundational base, let us assume
that a set of instructional practices exists that is theoretically sound and meets with consistent
student agreement that their perceptions have changed as a result. Furthermore, Furthermore, we
look to practices that candidates turned teachers point to learning from their classes on
diversity/social justice education as comprised of a few pivotal moments that lead them to be
socially active teachers. What would such a base be comprised of? The following concepts may
prove to be a fruitful start:
1.) Grounding each candidate in their own social and racial identity development.
2.) Raising candidate awareness of how privilege and power operates in American society.
3.) Reading, observing and discussing the ways that historically excluded groups have been
deculturalized and marginalized through overt, official political and social policies.
4.Generating opportunities for authentic work and/or study that creates a more socially
just environment or serves to disrupt socially unjust practices.
Michelle comment: I am not getting why we are posturing here—we go through and say
all this stuff and then we go ahead and give a list of what we think should be done---I’m just not
comfortable.
Beyond these orientations individual professors have other orientations and frameworks
that help shape the particular offering for a section of the course. Emphasis and focus in the
class ranges from ability through gender, language and literacy practices, and notions of citizenry
and community. Regardless of individual instructors orientations the offering of the courses is
intended to be framed within the mission of the school of education which “…is to provide a
quality educational experience that prepares candidates for distinguished careers in their chosen
profession and for leadership roles in a diverse, rapidly changing, and increasingly technological
Comment [KJFV1]: Kenny says: I sort of
agree…I keep mentally flip flopping. We are saying
we don’t’ and can’t know, but given that we are
offering what we believe. So even though we can’t
know, we do end up believing in something and that
seems to be our point. Maybe we just leave a couple
of these comment bubbles in to give deference to the
fact that this section is a bit uncomfortable. Also
perhaps we need to not assume that those are
positions that anyone is comfortable with, but rather
maybe just were we are or may be in our thinking
through, it may be the paragraph before that is the
culprit as it is a bit exacting in tone.

society.” The mission of the school of education, steeped in foundation of diversity,
achievement, comparison, knowledge, and service is well aligned with the intentions of the
course.
A cruel necessity
The course, as a standalone requirement of the program, presents an inherently
problematic structure. While issues of social justice and diversity provide conceptual framework
to the school of education mission and conceptual framework, it is difficult to ascertain to what
degree issues of social justice, diversity, and multiculturalism are addressed in other courses.
Consequently, for those of us teaching the course (others may think this too), many professors at
our institution, and certainly for those teaching the course, we often view the offering of the
course as a creulcruel necessity; while we would like to see the issues of multiculturalism,
diversity, and social justice incorporated into the program across courses, and be the fundamental
guiding scope of all courses we are cognizant of the fact that issues of multiculturalism,
diversity, and social justice are may not being takening up adequately in a consistent and
programmatic way given the nature of faculty background and trainingthe program including the
sequence and types of courses offered. Michelle comment: I’m not totally comfortable saying
that it’s the faculty but I’d rather say it is how the program has been structured to ensure
diversity outcomes. Thus the course in isolation at least ensures that these issues are taken up at
some point in a candidates program.
So what’s a diversity professor to do?What we as instructors believe marks knowledge
Now that we have explored the theoretical underpinnings of epistemology as well as how
educators frame their own and student’s’ knowledge, we must admit to the practices in which we
have embraced within each of our diversity course sections. As we developed our thoughts for
Comment [KJFV2]: Kenny says: Does this help?
Comment [KJFV3]: Kenny says: I agree, does
this help?
Comment [PMM4]: Jim says: And, besides,
integrating the outcomes throughout the program just
disperses the presumption of knowing without
confronting it meaningfully. At least the ambiguity
of certainty can be expressed in a stand alone course
more consistently.
Comment [KJFV5]: I love this Michelle!

this chapter, repeating questions were, do we really believe that we do notn’t know and if we do
not on’t know then why are we teaching the way we do? It became very clear to us that whether
we professed any knowledge at all to our students in an explicit way made little difference to
student perception of our knowledge given the hierarchialhierarchical structure of our traditional
school system. We came to realize that our acting on pedagogical decision making was in fact
informing others of what we think we know. This was unsettling given our philosophical and
political stances toward knowing. Yet, we all were able to articulate one particular goal for our
students throughout the semester. We began to problematize how we could profess our “not
knowing” yet we repeated particular practices that we must believe give us some sort of
information, and could that “information” be categorized as knowledge?
We came to the understanding that IF we are to know anything, it could only be about
ourselves. So we then identified what it is that we have set as a goal for the candidates in the
course and positioned that within our own set of experiences. Given this position, in the
followigfollowing section, we will share our insights as we explore the goals and the pedagogical
practices that we engage in to convince us that the goals have been met.
Michelle: Knowledge is multiple truths
My experience as a special educator in an urban district has led me to continually
question why teachers do, think, feel and say the things they do. My experience as a
researcher/academic has led me to continually ask what influences each of us to do, think, feel
and say the things we do. This questioning has led me to believe that knowing oneself on both
an intra- and inter-level will lead toward the goal of a more inclusive community. I do enter my
courses assuming that my primarily white, female and middle class pre-service teachers perceive
that they have had little, if any, experience of a social nature with persons not like themselves. I
Comment [PMM6]: Jim says: Or, more
pointedly, even teaching the course at all. We are
making a knowledge claim when we sign up to teach
the course.
Comment [KJFV7]: Kenny says: I think this is a
very important statement, and may actually help
clarify some of the tone that may appear to be
present in the bulleted list earlier – its not really that
we want to say these are the principles, but because
we are perceived as the “deciders” and that our
decisions come to be an understanding that we do
know, we need to have (or do have) a set of guiding
principles.
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold

also assume that they believe that they have not lived multicultural lives. In addition, I assume
that they have been taught to see themselves as the norm. And finally, based on these
assumptions, I assume that they need to examine their own perceptions, beliefs and learning.
This examination is needed both on at a personal level but also how these perceptions, beliefs
and learnings are situated within a greater social context. Therefore, I provide my candidates
with readings and assignments that may challenge their current way of doing, thinking, feeling
and talking with the hope not to change how they think but rather to help them clearly identify
why they think a certain way through the use of a reflective journal. While this activity allows
them to identify experiences that have led them to their own conclusions, it would fall short of
my goal if it stopped there. I then asked my candidates to identify how another person may have
come to different conclusions and how they may be just as “right.” Based on Beleanky’s, et.al
(date), connected knowing, I ask the candidate’s to imagine another person who is just as
intelligent as they are and then imagine what experiences that person may have had that would
lead them to a conclusion different from the one they have expressed. Specifically, after each
reading/assignment they must answer the following questions:
How has this reading affected your thinking and why?
What critical thought/research questions do the author’s ideas raise for you?
What connections to your personal and academic experiences can you make?
How does the reading relate to past readings and discussions for class?
How could another intelligent person think differently than you and why?
The last question on the list has shown to be the most problematic for candidates at first. They
struggle with respectfully presenting a point that is counter to their own. It is within this struggle
though that I look for candidates’ realization that their lens is merely one way of viewing the
world and each human has their own lens as well. Ultimately, my goal is for pre-service teacher
candidates to perceive that all humans are individuals, to believe that all humans are multi-
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Justified

cultural and to teach that any “norm” is a socially constructed concept that must be challenged
daily.:
Kenny: Knowledge is action!
Having received my doctoral training at The Ohio State University and having had the
opportunity to work with Critical Race Theorist Adrienne Dixson (add citations), I operate from
a racial (and consequently gender, class, sexuality, etc.) realism perspective (Bell, add year).
Within this “realism” orientation I am skeptical about the prospect for change given the
tumultuous and slow grinding pace for equity in the United States History and I want to orient
my classes about the reality of racism, classism, genderism, sexualityism, and ableism in the
historic past as well as the current moment while simultaneously exploring the consequences that
no, little, or slow action has for the humans. One contemporary example of my skepticism
centers on the 2008 the presidential pre-election campaign. I often found the discourse relative
to the primaries interesting and frustrating when I would hear a variety of people (both in my
professional and personal life) claim “wow we have really overcome racism and genderism now
that Barack and Hillary can run for President.” Not that having a man of color and a women as
potential presidential candidates is not historical and exciting, but it seems like no real treat that
it took 500 years of white male domination for such a possibility to occur, that once it has
occurred both race and gender have been used to dismiss Obama and Clinton respectively in
many major media outlets, and that even with Obama and Clinton as potential candidates we still
have far more work to achieve relative to race and gender, and thus Obama and Clinton represent
no “overcoming” of isms for the United States.
Important to note is that I have strictly taught the graduate version of this course, I desire
to push past awareness of “isms” and their consequences, and more toward an action based
Comment [PMM8]: Jim syas: I wonder if it
would make sense to refer to all humans as equicultural
and that the normative process of positioning
a dominant culture at the apex of a hierarchy disrupts
the equity in favor of a multiculturalism that
replaces equity with marginalization, exclusion and
dominance.

pedagogy that asks, “now that you know you must do.” Given my orientation to the course I tend
to present candidates with a spectrum of reading throughout the course, fiction as well as non-
fiction, book length as well as article length, to reinforce what candidates may already know, to
expose candidate to both theoretical and pragmatic orientations, and to provide a depth of
scholarship that will help candidates work through developing a theoretical toolkit to assist them
in their journey to taking action. Assignments in the course are structured so that candidates
have the opportunity to experience the reality of isms within the communities they live drawing
to candidates attention the way community resources often work against citizens based on race,
class, gender, sexuality, etc.; candidates for example are asked to approach several local movie
theaters as someone who with impaired hearing and request services, perform grocery shopping
using the metric of 3 feet 5 inches for purchasing to experience the struggles that grocery stores
present for little people, to explore the way race, gender, class, and sexuality are portrayed in
commercials, and to use public transportation to move among three separate locations in both the
urban and suburban areas of Rochester, exposing the way in which public transportation in the
Rochester area forces absorbent waits in between buses for transfers, offers a limited and
confusing schedule, and exposes those who use the bus to weather elements that can put their
health in jeopardy (extreme heat, rain, snow, ice) while waiting for buses. A surface goal of
these assignments is for candidates to experience, hopefully with a different lens that viewed
before, what they may take for granted such as shopping, watching TV and movies, listening to
the radio, and moving around the community. A deeper goal however relates to a belief about
action. I believe that if candidates experience in vivo the “isms” that prevent equity form being
the operating practice of the United States that the candidates will be motivated and called to
action, challenging the both their participation in the reification of isms, and challenging the
Comment [PMM9]: Jim says: Are the “reality
of isms” grounded in a theoretical ism construction
framework as well? If so, this is one more way that
we claim to know. By establishing the “reality” of
isms, we are stating that we know that isms exist
locally and, I presume, everywhere. Is that right?
Formatted: Font: 12 pt

community resources and agencies that not only reify isms but who at times stand to profit from
the reification of isms. As a professor, when I have students write an unsolicited email telling
me that they have written the newspaper, called an agency or community resource, or challenged
discourse they hear in the community that frames people using ‘ismistic’ language I feel as
though some of the knowledge from the toolkit has been learned and put into action.
As we have attempted to establish in this chapter, as an instructor I will never know what
my students know, as that level of metaepistemological understanding seems beyond my grasp; I
am hopeful however, that when action is present movement is being made and perhaps my
students know something that they did not before. My marker of knowledge, that knowledge is
concurrent with action is of course but one view of knowledge but it is certainly the marker that I
feel indicates growth and knowledge. Questions I must ask myself include:
- Is a student only “pursuing” action to please me as the professor? (the answer has to be of
course perhaps)
- To what extent can action be pursued through an uninformed lens and be perhaps more
problematic than the absence of action? (the answer is that many folk have pursued action
against human interest and thus action can both be uninformed and harmful)
- DTo students who do not “act” within the framework of the course know? Do they know
more thant peers whom act? Do they know less than peers who act? Do they know equal
amounts as peers who engage in action (the answer is that of course students who do not act may
have gained tremendous amounts of knowledge in the course but many not be ready or able to
materialize this knowledge into action)
- To what extent is action self serving? Are student who act being selective about when
action occurs and is the action to promote ideals of interest convergence (Bell, 1995)? (the
answer is that as a professor I have no real rubric or means to evaluate whether action is selfserving
or without self interest, and I must be honest that perhaps good action that is self-serving
but informed may be better for the community than acting with no self interest but in an
uniformed manner)

By asking myself these questions I can continue to engage with a paradigmatically robust
questioning of epistemology that I may not be able to engage with simply by marking action as
knowledge without skepticism or question. In a sense asking myself the above questions helps to
keep a modest and hopefully realistic picture of what I might hope for candidates to achieve in a
14 week course taken in isolation, and in many ways removed from any embeddedness in our
teacher education programs. Finally, while action may not be the needed marker for knowledge
(and in fact we propose no marker or set of markers can identify candidate knowledge as that is
beyond our scope) I will continue to look for action and continue to explore the ways in which
my colleagues mark knowledge to build a robust set of possibilities or dispositions that
candidates may display that would indicted that perhaps knowledge is being gained.
Jim: Knowledge is Change
I am a white, middle-class teacher/community activist who has developed over the last
four decades in a rural, multicultural community. My economically tenuous farming community
that has always been economically tenuous and is becoming an increasingly economically
depressed environment thatand has lost most of its non-agricultural jobs. Now, I commute to a
small, private college on the edge of Rochester, New York. My diversity classes are built on the
premise that my sense of identity, my obscured and informed knowledge of teaching influences
candidates in their life-long journey toward increased self-actualization in ways I know, think I
know and don’t know at all. The challenge for me, as for the students candidates in my classes, is
to attempt to analyze my “knowing” in ways that can inform our future teaching. Classes
designed to enhance this journey, start with efforts to increase each candidate’s intra-personal
and inter-personal understanding. It is essential to begin by having students become familiar with
social racial identity theory., Helms (1990) has established a theory of staged development that
Comment [PMM10]: Jim says: It seems very
consistent with the theme of this paper. How do you,
or do you, bring the candidates into this selfinterrogation
process?

predicts states of understanding and social behavior within the framework of racial self-
development. While it is potentially dangerous to over-rely on one theory to explain the myriad
possibilities represented by candidates’ behaviors, Iwe find it helpful for candidates to become
familiar with social development and racial development theory to deepen their understanding of
how their “windows” of identity may develop.
Since culture is a significant factor in our sense of identity, it is critical for candidates to
become familiar with definitions of culture and with their own cultural influences. Candidates
are to create culture wheels for class sharing after they read about culture. The next step is to
explain to others their decision making process for weighting themselves in various categories.
To broaden and deepen self, candidatesstudents are asked, using their cultural pie if they choose,
to create a list of characteristics of identity that shape who they perceive themselves to be. Such a
task brings with it the complexity of identifying “who they are” and through whose lens this self
analysis should be conducted. Candidates are encouraged to reflect on which of Johari’s
quadrants they are using as a lens for self analysis.
The first step then is to create a list of identity characteristics sub-divided into two
columns. One column is for those identities perceived as dominant characteristics in American
society. These identities are perceived by them and/or others to bestow power and privilege in
American culture. In the other column, candidates indicate their excluded identity characteristics.
These are aspects of their identity that they feel have served to limit their access to the full
benefits of American society and/or caused them to feel vulnerable, to experience pain, and to
endure hardship. CandidatesStudents share their identity lists publicly in class and can explain
their choices. Classmates are encouraged to ask clarifying and deepening questions. It is often
the case that candidatesstudents place one characteristic in both columns. For example, Tammy

may say; “I put female in dominant because I have accrued benefits in school from being a
female and I put female in excluded, because I have been stereotyped in my part-time job by not
being allowed to do certain physically tasks.” On occasion, female candidates may explain that
they placed female in excluded, because their mobility in emotionally safe spaces is curtailed by
the high rate of violence against women in American society and that they put female in
dominant, because schools traditional honor high verbal acuity and compliant behavior for which
they have been socialized to excel by a patriarchal political hierarchy.
Diversity classes that intend to have candidates initially feel their own pain, anger and
vulnerability in social contexts and in their own developmental process increase the chances that
those candidates students will be more able to establish affinity with other sub-sets of excluded
identity characteristics that their classmates and fellow society members experience. The
foundation for diversity knowledge has for one of its essential structures the habit of self-
reflection about personal exclusion simultaneous to insight into personal identities that are
bestowed with privilege and power.
Excluded identities are much easier to perceive and accept by candidates (and mostin
many people) than dominant identities. As Allen Johnson indicates in Power, privilege and
difference (2005), people tend to deny and resist the notion that their power and privilege status
even exists. In Diversity classes, it is imperative that candidates not only acquire the capacity to
reflect upon, identify and analyze their excluded identities, but, also, those dominant identities
that give them power over others. This is particularly difficult for candidates to acknowledge
when the power that has accrued to them has been an unearned result of their birthright (i.e. they
are born with “light colored” skin to middle class parents and are perceived by others as
“white”). The duality of identity, seen through multiple perspectives, is a particularly difficult
Comment [IU11]: Michelle says: Could this be a
claim of knowledge? Do we know that our
candidates do not already have an affinity with
“excluded identity characteristics?”

and necessary concept to explore. A fluid, multi-dimensional life-long reflection on personal
identity development is crucial to multicultural pedagogy. As an instructor, I rely on self-
disclosure through writings and oral presentations about the personal growth process each
student follows. I respond to their conceptualization with questions about how their self-analysis
frames their place in a socially dynamic process of dominant and excluded identity formation.
Along the way, I consistently offer amy self-analysis of my continuing identity formation with
each student in interactive responcesresponses to their work. My hope for each of us is that the
collective and individual process of self-reflection in a critical environment becomes habituated
as an antidote to the normalized hegemonic dominant discourse found in most schools within
which they will teach.
Concluding Thoughts
It is our concern to develop a more fully paradigmatic approach to our work, and more on
point to this chapter, that self-implicates our own histories, actions, and privileges in the greater
context of educational research about issues of multiculturalism, diversity, and social justice. By
fully paradigmatic, we wish not to apply a firm and rigid framework that itself becomes a self-
hegemonizing act, nor do we wish to imply that we somehow are capable of “creating a
paradigm.” Rather we purpose that all educational practitioners are ‘already always’ within a
paradigm whether or not the paradigm is partially or fully recognized by the educator herself.
‘Fully paradigmatic’ therefore has greater implications of attending to the paradigm wholly,
recognizing that paradigmatic honesty necessitates attention to epistemology, methodology, and
ontology in tandem.
Multicultural education thinking has a responsibility to move beyond and deconstruct
white able-bodied, monolinguistic, middle to upper class, heterosexual male, privileged,

Christian orientations to pedagogy that have been pervasive in teaching. Historically “othered”
and “over-researched groups (indigenous peoples, people of color, people of low-socioeconomic
status) do not need to become further eclipsed by the gaze of a ‘new’ multiculturalist, perhaps
better informed yet self-indulgent in attempting to reframe the research to continue privileging
white ways of knowing. For this to happen white educational researchers practitioners must
continually seek to challenge the traditions that have negotiated and defended whiteness’ ability
to “…perpetrate domination…” (Gopnik, 1999, p.66) in a dance where white
researcherspractitioners “…pretend to study the manners and customs of all people”
(Halliburton, 1999, p. 793) in the attempt to write the history of white peoples, for white peoples,
and by white peoples and claim to know what others know about the knowledge of their
knowing.
Thus, our conclusion is to offer as a beginning, an invitation to a different more
complicated, vexing dance where ideas keep time and rhythm and where tough questions take
the lead; this dance is a challenge to past practice. We agree that the dance never ends and we
can only approximate the steps even for ourselves let alone those who we teach. We know that
we do not know who will continue to dance or, if continued, what the steps will be. We can
continue to dance ourselves and reflect on the tempo and form of those rhythms. We can then, in
turn, demonstrate those moves to others in a transparent attempt to share the dance. In the dance
lies a simultaneous self-consciousness and abandon that opens the possibility of becoming a
more self-aware human being who might become a more adept teacher.

Gladstone-Brown, Wendy
Presentations
Gladstone-Brown, W., and Schultz, S. (October 7, 2010). "Raising the success rate of foreign
language learners with special needs." New York State Council for Exceptional Children
Annual Convention. Verona, NY.
Gladstone-Brown, W., Schultz, S., and Steflik, A. (October 22, 2010). "Raising the success rate
of foreign language learners with special needs." New York State Association of Teacher
Educators/New York Association of Colleges for Teacher Education.
Arndt, K., Gladstone-Brown, W., Rostetter, D., and Schultz, S. (October 21, 2010). "What's in a
name? The creation and evolution of an inclusive education department." New York State
Association of Teacher Educators/New York Association of Colleges for Teacher
Education.
Cianca, M., Gladstone-Brown, W., and Wischnowski, M. (February 2010). "Planting the seeds of
partnership: Parents as instructors in teacher education." Leadership for Equity and
Excellence Forum. Phoenix, AZ.
Arrington, L., Cianca, M., Gladstone-Brown, W., and Wischnowski, M. (April 2010). "Planting
the seeds of partnership: Parents as instructors in teacher education." YAI
Network/National Institute for People with Disabilities International Conference. New
York.

Parents as Co-instructors
in Teacher Preparation
Building Bridges and Tearing Down Walls
February 16-17, 2010
Phoenix, Arizona
1

Marie Cianca, Ed. D.
Michael Wischnowski, Ph.D.
Wendy Gladstone-Brown, Ed. D.
St. John Fisher College
Ralph C. Wilson Jr. School of Education
Rochester, NY
2

“Everyone says that parent-teacher
conferences should be pleasant, civilized, a
kind of dialogue where parents and teachers
build alliances. But what most teachers feel,
and certainly what most parents feel, is
anxiety, panic and vulnerability.”
-Sara Lawrence Lightfoot,
Harvard University
Time Magazine, February 21, 2005
3

The Importance of Parent-
Teacher Collaboration
Impact on Student Achievement
- Research has found that children perform better
academically when their parents are involved (Coleman,
1991)
Opportunity for Shared Expertise
Insight on student strengths and
characteristics
4

The Importance of Parent-
Teacher Collaboration (continued)
Current parent perceptions that school
communication is “nonempathetic,
distrustful and void of mutual respect”
(Lea, 2006)
Federal and State statues require schools
to involve parents
- IDEA
- ESEA
5

Parent-Teacher Collaboration
in Preservice Education
Few educators receive intensive
preparation in this aspect of education
Few courses devoted to this topic
Rare authentic experiences
6

Who expressed an interest in
parent-teacher collaboration?
Parents of children with special needs
Principals and teachers
Teacher candidates
SJFC School of Education
Social Justice Framework
Diversity
Achievement
Compassion
Knowledge &
Service
7

Origins of St. John Fisher
Collaboration: Research & Background
Missouri FEEL Project adapted by a consortium of
agencies in Iowa
Need for disability awareness to college students,
professors, physicians, and other professional and
community groups
Belief that partnerships between families and
providers are vital
8

Origins of Collaboration between
The Advocacy Center & SJFC continued
A new undergraduate course that combined
interdisciplinary as well as parent-professional
collaboration
NCATE certification that stressed the importance of
knowledge, skills, and dispositions
Philosophy of parents as partners
9

How we made It happen…
Focus groups consisting of community agency
representatives, including higher education
Workshop on “Presenters for a New Attitude”
Speakers’ Bureau established
10

EDUC 440
Collaboration for Inclusion
11

COURSE ELEMENTS
Teams and
Teamwork
Teacher-Teacher
Teacher- Parent
Family Presentations and
Family Projects
Dispositions
And
Personal
Growth
Co-Teaching
12
12

Leading by Example
in Preservice
People learn through observing others’ behavior, attitudes, and
outcomes of those behaviors.
-Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
13

Co-Teaching by Example:
An Investigation of College Faculty Co-
Teaching
• Examination of the experience of two co-teaching faculty
• one in childhood education
• one in special education
• Development and implementation of a co-teaching model to prepare
teacher candidates for inclusion and family partnerships.
• Responded to the need for better undergraduate preparation for
teacher candidates who will be working within inclusive settings.
14

Co-Teaching by Example
Model for teacher candidates
Elements for an effective co-teaching
relationship
Opportunity to see modeling of co-teaching
practices and how to adapt lessons and
experiences
15

Co-Teaching by Example Main Themes
Building Relationships
Implementing a Co-teaching Pedagogy
Modeling of Co-Teaching Pedagogy
Negotiating Roles, Responsibilities and Parity
while Co-Teaching and
Setting the Stage and Using Space.
16

Family Project/ Team Presentations
Student Teams
Teams receive the IEP for their family.
Teams write and send a letter of introduction to their family.
Teams initiate a face-to-face family interview.
Teams identify, review and synthesize the literature and
resources related to the family’s identified area of interest.
Teams have ongoing communication with their family.
Teams present their findings to the family and to the entire
class.
Parents and
Families
Parents provide their child’s IEP to
their team.
Each family meets with its
assigned team after receiving
the letter of introduction.
Parents provide ideas to their teams
for identified areas of interest.
Parents provide ongoing input
to their team.
Parents speak to the entire
class and share their family
stories and developed in the
“Presenters for a New
Attitude” training.
Parents return to the
classroom to hear the teams
presentation on their area of
interest.
17

Teacher Candidate
Comments ( Before)
18

Parent Comments
( Before)
19

Teacher Candidates Initiate a Face-to-Face
Interview with the Family
Importance of parent-teacher conferencing
Going from a paper child and a paper family to a “real” child and a
“real” family
The beginning of an ongoing, collaborative relationship
20

Families Present To Class
Uniqueness of each family
and each family’s story
21

Teacher Candidate Teams identify a family topic,
review the literature and explore community
resources
Mutual learning and benefit
Responsiveness to child and family issue
Literature review and exploration of community resources
Community connections
Application of knowledge and skills
22

Teams Co-Present to Families
Presentation skills to peers and adults
Increased knowledge of resources and policies
23

Teams Co-Present to Families(continued)
An atmosphere of partnership and collaboration
Positive contributions to a family’s journey
24

Outcomes
25

Teacher Candidate
Comments ( After)
26

Parent Comments
( After)
27

“We learned understanding and empathy for parents
and children. This not only helped us develop as
people but as future teachers. We hope to carry this
understanding through to our classrooms.”
28

“We gained a future resource
in the parent.”
29

Questions, Comments, Ideas…
Michael Wischnowski, PhD
St. John Fisher College
Rochester, NY
mwischnowski@sjfc.edu
Colleen Brown
The Advocacy Center
Rochester, NY
brown@advocacycenter.com
Marie Cianca, EdD
St. John Fisher College
Rochester, NY
mcianca@sjfc.edu
Wendy Gladstone-Brown, EdD
St. John Fisher College
Rochester, NY
wgladstone-brown@sjfc.edu
30

Hildenbrand, Susan
Publications
Hildenbrand, S. (2010). You really have to specify what you’re talking about when you say “coteaching”:
Student teachers in co-taught classrooms. Excelsior, 5(1), 4-18.
Cianca, M., Wischnowski, M., Hildenbrand, S., & Kelly, D. (2010). Collaboration for inclusion:
Authentic experiences in teacher preparation. Excelsior, 5(1), 19-34.
Presentations
“Home-School Partnerships.” Dixon, A., Hildenbrand, S., Scism, S., & Stevenson, M. Presented
at the “Success from the Start: Strategies for the Journey to Adulthood” Conference at St.
John Fisher College. September 24, 2011.
“Learning Our Way Through: Collaborative Self-Study in an Evolving PDS Partnership, 2011
AERA Annual Meeting (With Dr. Chinwe Ikpeze, Dr. Kathy Broikou, Ms. Sharon
Christman, and Dr. Wendy Gladstone-Brown). New Orleans, LA. April 9, 2011.
Invited Speaker, University of Rochester, ED 501: Cohort Four Seminar“, Presentation entitled,
“The Dissertation Process: What It Takes to Get it Done,” January 20, 2011.
“Doing For is Not Providing For: Scaffolding Independence While Maintaining High
Expectations,” TASH Conference (With Dr. Whitney Rapp). Denver, CO. December
10, 2010.
“Preparing Teacher Candidates for Parent Partnerships: An Evaluation of a Preservice Course,”
Round Table Session at the American Evaluation Association Conference. San Antonio,
TX. November 13, 2010.
“Doing For is Not Providing For: Scaffolding Independence While Maintaining High
Expectations,” New York State Council for Exceptional Children Annual Convention
(With Dr. Whitney Rapp). Saratoga Springs, NY. October 8, 2010.
Monographs
Hildenbrand, S. & Leve, H. (2010). A commitment to change: One district’s journey towards
inclusion. Duets and Dialogue: Voices on Inclusive Practice in Our Schools. Midwest
Region New York Higher Education Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling.

Reading 4: A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey Toward Inclusion
Introduction by: Ellen Contopidis, PhD
Associate Professor, Nazareth College
As a teacher educator preparing future inclusive educators, I often find myself responding to my
students’ experiences with inclusion as “bad examples of a good idea.” The common element of
these bad examples is that they are often the description of a place, a classroom, a service, a
teacher or a child. Never do these bad examples reflect a philosophy or a culture within a
system. Dr. Harold Leve’s leadership of transforming his school to an inclusive instructional
environment is founded in a strong vision of social justice. The tools of collaboration, coteaching,
consultant models, common planning and quality professional development were all
used along the journey. Yet, tools they were and would have been ineffective if not grounded in
a vision that allowed a transformation to a “mindset of a more inclusive philosophy.”
Hildenbrand and Leve are very pragmatic in their description of the journey. They provide
specific details that can be replicated or morphed to be used in other school systems. They also
clearly demonstrate that leadership is key to transforming a school’s culture. Active leadership is
an important catalyst for system change.
34

A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey towards Inclusion
Susan Hildenbrand and Harold Leve
Introduction
“This is an inclusion model; we acknowledge the challenges, and we
figure out – together – how to make it work. We don’t abandon people
who are having trouble. We don’t celebrate “I won” unaware or
indifferent to those who are struggling” (Sapon-Shevin, 2007, p.7).
With the passage of the No Child Left Behind legislation in 2001, the educational system
assesses the majority of students with disabilities using the same statewide standards-based
assessments as their general education peers. Similarly, this legislation requires schools to look
at different service-delivery options for special education (Weiss & Lloyd, 2002). As a result,
districts are placing more students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms with their general
education classmates (Bouck, 2007). In fact, almost half of all students with disabilities are
served in general education classrooms with their non-disabled peers for more than 79% of the
school day (U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
However, it is not a simple or easy task to make this move to placing students in
inclusive classrooms instead of a traditional segregated or pullout system of delivery. East
Rochester Elementary School, under the leadership of Dr. Harold Leve, and working
collaboratively with Donald Shuryn, the districts’ special education coordinator, did just that
and began the amazing journey towards an inclusive elementary school where all learners are
welcomed as a part of their learning community.
It Will Never Happen! Where Do We Start?
Even though East Rochester Elementary School had primarily self-contained classrooms
for many years as the service option for special education services, there was little academic
and social growth for the students in these classrooms within this traditional service delivery
model. At the time of the beginning of the transformation, there was also a first cohort of
students placed in an integrated kindergarten classroom. As this group of students began their
educational experiences, we, as a school, began the transition from self-contained to inclusion.
In addition, the New York State Education Department audited the school district’s special
education department in the early 2000s. The 2003-04 NYSED School Report Card Information
about Students with Disabilities reported the percentage of students at East Rochester
Elementary identified with disabilities was 15.3% at the time, which was above the statewide
average of 11.9%. The 2003-04 report card also showed that 14.2% of the district’s special
education students were in segregated settings, compared to the statewide average of 6.6%.
Therefore, Dr. Leve was even more convinced that collapsing the self-contained
classrooms and replacing them with co-taught, inclusive classrooms would be a positive step to
35

eaking the social barriers between the students with disabilities and typical students while at
the same time possibly improving scores on state- wide exams. Dr. Leve and his support team
thoroughly researched the benefits of inclusion for students with and without disabilities and
acted on the school’s vision of social justice for all learners in his building by setting up inclusive
classrooms (Hunt, Hirose-Hatae, Doering, Karasoff, & Goetz 2000; Peck, Staub, Gallucci, and
Schwartz 2004).
This unyielding, transparent, and continuous administrative support directly affects the
viability of the decision to commit to this philosophical shift in the placement of students with
disabilities within a school hierarchy. Among teachers who co-teach, administrative support is
frequently stated as the number one need that is instrumental in the in the success of the
teachers’ collaboration (Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie, 2007). If the commitment to
inclusion is not fully supported by the principal it is difficult to make this paradigm shift in how a
school delivers special education services. As Friend and Cook (2004) discuss, administrators
must possess a “general understanding of the importance of collaboration, the role of the
administrator in fostering a school climate supportive of collaboration, and enough knowledge
about collaborative activities to make them a reality” (p. 282).
Dr. Leve speaks the language of inclusion, creates, and supports opportunities for his
teachers to be able to successfully collaborate in this new model of delivery, including
professional development opportunities surrounding co-teaching. More importantly, Dr. Leve
is present at all trainings centered on inclusion and co-teaching and continues to provide
opportunities for further educational opportunities in differentiation and collaboration. This
professional development agenda resulted in collaboration between Dr. Leve and professors
from St. John Fisher College, who provided training for this inclusive model.
However, this inclusive pedagogy was not widely accepted at the beginning, and many
in the school thought it was a concept that would never happen, would certainly not last and
would not produce the growth in assessments that was predicted. Dr. Leve pushed on,
eliminated one self-contained classroom at a time, and watched the positive results begin to
appear.
Let the Journey Begin: Baby Steps
The transformation of the elementary school began with the elimination of the first of
the established self-contained classrooms, the K-1-2 classroom. During the planning year
before this classroom was dissolved, Dr. Leve, with administrative input, sought out the general
education teacher that would be open to an inclusive classroom and would be willing to
collaborate with the temporarily displaced special educator teacher to plan and deliver
differentiated instruction for all learners. When these two teachers agreed to be a part of this
inaugural inclusive classroom, Dr. Leve formally reassigned the special education teacher to coteach
in this general education classroom at the first grade level, and the teacher assistant was
utilized across several classrooms. According to Scruggs, Mastropieri, and McDuffie (2007), in
order for co-teaching to be a successful pairing, there needs to be a level of choice and
36

volunteerism on the part of the co-teachers. Although Dr. Leve purposely approached certain
teachers and encouraged them to think about becoming partners in an inclusive classroom, he
did not mandate this situation, but allowed for a comfortable level of teacher choice.
Dr. Leve also worked very closely with the district coordinator for the Committee on
Special Education, Donald Shuryn, and through a collaborative effort, they made the
commitment to draft Individual Education Plans (IEPs) that offered an integrated classroom as a
placement option. This co-taught classroom was not presented as an option on the continuum
of services prior to this transformation to inclusive education. The students with disabilities
were then returned to the general education classrooms, including the co-taught classroom,
and the remaining students were supported by other special education teachers in a consultant
model. The inclusion experiment began…
The Journey Continues: Next Steps
Each year after the initial inclusive, co-taught classroom was launched, the remaining
two self contained classrooms at the 3-4 and 5-6 level were also closed, and the students with
disabilities assigned to these classrooms were placed back into general education classrooms.
As with any new referendum for change, there were growing pains from the faculty and staff,
and a small number of students left the school to return to other more restrictive placements in
other settings. The early resistance to integrating special education students into general
education classrooms can best be expressed as a long-standing, traditional mindset that
general education students are the responsibility of the general education teachers and special
education students are the responsibility of the special education teachers. Even though
several teachers volunteered to teach in integrated classrooms, they still needed to change
their mindsets. For example, at the start of integrated classes, the expectation was that all
instruction would take place in the general education classroom. What was found was that
some of the special education teachers were still taking “their” special education students to
other classrooms for their instruction.
To transform this mindset to a more inclusive philosophy, the participating teachers
were provided professional development about inclusive practices and how to deliver all
instruction within the four classroom walls. Next, the “extra” special education classrooms
were gently absorbed and utilized by other service providers, thereby providing the physical
constraints to support the inclusive mindset. Finally, the teachers were encouraged to think
and talk about all students being the responsibility of all teachers, regardless of classification.
For example, the administration leads by example by always saying both teachers’ names when
referring to integrated classrooms. The integrated teachers are proud that their students often
don’t know who the special education teacher is and who the general education teacher is in
the classroom. Equally, students have difficulty identifying special education students from
their general education peers.
37

For this restructuring to occur, Dr. Leve had to re-conceptualize the whole idea of
special education programming in his building, and he spread and supported the belief that
special education is defined as the delivery of services, but not a particular place or classroom.
By reconfiguring the delivery of services, Dr. Leve was able to operate his entire building
in the spirit of the logic model for the delivery of specialized supports and services which
“focuses on what students need rather than what they are in terms of a categorical service
system” (Sailor, 2006, p. 127). No longer were the students with disabilities isolated according
to their disability, but were now given the freedom to experience a general education
experience while still receiving the support they needed to be successful regardless of their
disability. In addition, with this new integration model of service delivery, the supports and
modifications took place within the general education classroom, which is a way to benefit the
maximum number of students, and the delivery of services was shifted from the classroom to
the school, using all of the available resources to enrich the educational experience of all the
students in the school (Sailor & Roger, 2005).
Reaping the Rewards and Facing the Challenges: Final Thoughts
There are data supported rewards from this commitment to inclusion at all grade levels,
but barriers to a completely inclusive building also exist. The first cohort of students to
experience inclusion was in fifth grade in 2008-09. On the New York State English Language
Arts assessment, 90% of East Rochester students with disabilities achieved levels 3-4 compared
to 46% of students with disabilities in similar schools. 86% of East Rochester students with
disabilities scored levels 3-4 on the NYS mathematics assessment compared to 46% of students
with disabilities from similar schools. On the fifth grade social studies assessment, 95% of East
Rochester students with disabilities scored at levels 3-4. (No similar school data available on
the NYS social studies assessment.) In addition, the NYSED 2008-09 School Report Card for the
East Rochester School District also reported that 4.2% of students were in segregated settings,
compared to 14.2% in 2003-04, which is a powerful statistic that illustrates this broken
paradigm of a separate education for students with disabilities.
There are also more subtle rewards observed, such as a decrease in social isolation for
students with disabilities who have now become full members of the general education
classroom. In addition, the teachers have begun to embrace the collaborative culture of
inclusion, which acknowledges the expertise of each member of the staff. This philosophy of
inclusion was a gradual mindset that took hold slowly as the all of the stakeholders began to
see the positive effects of inclusion for all of the children in the elementary building.
Although a future vision is a completely inclusive system of delivery of special education
services, there remain three district-based self-contained classrooms in the elementary school
building. However, these classrooms allow for a continuum of services for those students who
are unable to be supported in the inclusive classrooms at this time but are able to remain in
their home school. Non-traditional delivery models are used within these classrooms as well,
such as reverse mainstreaming where students without disabilities are brought into the self-
38

contained classrooms to receive additional support not provided in the general education
classroom and to provide role modeling for the students in the segregated settings.
Embracing change, whether or not it is the right thing to do, can be an insurmountable
task for a traditional system that is used to doing things the way they have always been done.
When change is approached and supported from the top down, this shift, no matter how large,
is attainable if done one-step at a time and allows for true buy in from all involved parties. East
Rochester Elementary School took hold of the vision of inclusion and is making it a reality one
classroom at a time. The transition process is just that…a process. It takes time for people’s
perceptions and perspectives to shift. Some people’s perceptions change faster and easier than
others. We have made co-teaching one of our building initiatives and have provided the
professional development to teachers to ensure their success and that of their students.
Although the ultimate results remain to be seen, this paradigm shift has already produced
measurable academic gains and a decrease in the number of students in segregated settings,
but the most significant gain is in the feeling of community that permeates from every aspect of
the school.
Information about the authors: Dr. Susan Hildenbrand is Assistant Professor at St. John Fisher
College in the Inclusive Education Department. Dr. Harold Leve is principal of East Rochester
Elementary School.
References
Bouck, E.C. (2007). Co-teaching…Not just a textbook term: Implications for practice.
Preventing School Failure, 51(2), 46-51.
Friend, M. & Cook, L. (2003). Interactions: Collaboration Skills for School Professionals.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.
Hunt, P., Hirose-Hatae, A., Doering, K., Karasoff, P., and Goetz, L. (2000). Community
is what I think everyone is talking about. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5),
305-317.
Peck, C.A., Staub, D., Gallucci, C., & Schwartz, B. (2004). Parent perception of the
impacts of inclusion on their nondisabled child. Research & Practice for Persons
With Severe Disabilities, 29(2), 135-143.
Sailor, W. (2006). The quest for ordinary lives: A legacy and a challenge to the status
quo. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, (31)2, 127-129.
Sailor, W. & Roger, B. (2005) Rethinking inclusion: Schoolwide applications. Phi Delta
Kappan, March 2005.
Sapon-Shevin, M. (2007). Widening the Circle: The Power of Inclusive Classrooms.
Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
39

Scruggs, R.E., Mastropieri, M.A., & McDuffie, K.A. (2007). Co-teaching in inclusive
classrooms: A metasynthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children,
73(4), 392-416.
A Commitment to Change: One District’s Journey towards Inclusion
Extended Learning Opportunities
1. What are five things that Principal Leve did to support the transformation of the
elementary school to an inclusive environment?
2. What are two collaborative relationships that Principal Leve engaged in and what
were the goals of these relationships?
3. What was the re-conceptualization that Principal Leve and his faculty experienced?
4. Sapon-Shevin writes of “inclusion: a matter of social justice.” The authors of this
article speak of the school’s “vision of social justice.” Speak to your understanding
of the connection between inclusion and social justice.
5. What would have to happen in your school to move toward a more inclusive
environment? Which of the activities initiated by Principal Leve would be a starting
place or next steps, in a movement toward a more inclusive environment in your
school?
Additional References:
Habib, D. (Producer). (2009). Including Samuel [DVD]. Available from
http://www.includingsamuel.com/store.aspx
Sapon-Shevin, M. (2003). Inclusion: A matter of social justice. Educational
Leadership, 61, 25-28.
Valle, J.W & Conner, D.J. (2011). Rethinking Disability: A disabilities studies
approach to inclusive practices. NY: The McGraw Hills Companies, Inc.
40

Ikpeze, Chinwe
Publications
Ikpeze, C.H. (in press). "Increasing teacher candidates' reflection with technology." In J. Yamamoto
(Ed.). "Technology implementation and teacher education: Reflective models."
Ikpeze, C. (2009). "Transforming classroom instruction with personal and technological literacies." The
NERA Journal, 44(2), 31-40.
Ikpeze, C.H. (2009). "Integrating technology in one literacy course: Lessons learned." Journal of Literacy
and Technology, 10(1), 2-39.
Ikpeze, C. H. (2009). "Writing for real purpose." Learning and Leading with Technology." 36(7), 36-37.
Presentations
Ikpeze, C. H. (2011, April). Navigating culturally responsive pedagogy in teacher education. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, LA.
Ikpeze, C. H., Broikou, K.A., Christman, S., Hildenbrand, S., Thompson, C., & Gladstone-Brown, W.
(2011, April). Learning Our Way Through: Collaborative Self-study in an Evolving Professional
Development School (PDS) Partnership. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Ikpeze, C. H. (2011, April). Walk in my own shoes? Reflections of a foreign-born educator. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New
Orleans, LA.
March, 2011: Teaching in a digital classroom. Presented at the Think About Teaching Conference. St
John Fisher College, Rochester, NY.
October, 2010: With Gloria Jacobs: Podcasting: Moving Instruction beyond the School Wall. Presented at
the New York State Middle School Association’s 30th Annual State-Wide Middle School
Conference, Rochester, NY
February, 2010: With Shirley Sommers, Immaculee Harushimana, and Namulundah Florence.
Globalizing teaching and learning: Perspectives of African Born Educators and Students in
Urban Areas. Paper presented at the Association of Teacher Educators’ conference, Chicago, IL.

Kelly, Daniel
Publications
Cianca, M., Hildenbrand, S., Kelly, D., and Wischnowski, M. (2010). "Collaboration for
inclusion: Authentic experiences in teacher preparation." Excelsior. 5(1), 19-34.
Presentations
Kelly, D.Y., Rostetter, D., and Schultz, S. (December 9-11, 2010). "Least restrictive
environment: The unfulfilled promise of integration." 35th Annual TASH Conference.
Denver, CO.

Liles, Jeff
Publications
Arndt, K. and Liles, J. (Spring 2010). "Preservice teachers' perceptions of coteaching: A
qualitative study." Action in Teacher Education: The Journal of the Association of
Teacher Educators. 32(1): 15-25.
Presentations
Liles, J. (January 2010). "Librarian as Educator: From Theory to Practice." The Library
Instruction Leadership Academy (LILAC).
Liles, J. (January 2010). "Knowing Our Learners." 2010 Information Literacy Summit.

Preservice Teachers' Perceptions of Coteaching: A Qualitative Study
Authors: Arndt Katrina, Liles Jeffrey
Country or Region: USA
(Spring 2010) | Type: Summary
Source: Action in Teacher Education v. 32 no. 1 (Spring 2010) p. 15-25.
(Reviewed by ITEC Portal team)
The purpose of this research was to explore attitudes about and practices of preservice
special and social studies education teachers toward coteaching
Method
The authors are both faculty members in a small college in the Northeast United States,
teaching in an education department. All PSTs in this study were enrolled in a sequence
of classes that included supervised experience in classroom settings, and all were
student teaching.
The study included systematic instruction and exploration of coteaching models and
modeling coteaching for students. PSTs practiced coplanning, coteaching, and assessing
a content area lesson, and they reflected on the process of collaboration.
Participants
This research was conducted with two classes of PST education teachers: one group of
12 PSTs in elementary and special education and one group of 17 PSTs in secondary
social studies. Participants were predominantly young White adults ranging in age from
19 to 23. One PST in social studies was changing careers and was in his 40s with a
family. The majority of special education PSTs were women (11 of 12); the majority of
social studies PSTs were men (14 of 17).
Data were collected through written reflections, focus groups and presentations.
Discussion
Two findings emerged in this study. First, the students were open minded about
coteaching but had concerns about the process. In other words, the academic programs
and manifest goals of teacher education programs are most often generally achieved.
This is important because it suggests that we can influence our PSTs' attitudes and
values and increase the likelihood that they will adopt best practices in their own
classrooms.
Second, the students conceptualized their fields -- special education and social studies -
- as separate spheres of knowledge and practice, quite isolated from each other, and
they perceived their roles as coteachers as different as well.
This finding also indicates that the structure and design of the program shape the
students' perceptions in a way that can later interfere with their ability to develop and
put into practice effective coteaching models.

Implications for Practice
Three implications for teacher preparation programs emerged from this study.
First, secondary special education PSTs need to be competent in the content they
teach.
They need to be comfortable discussing lesson plans and directly teaching whole-group
activities.
Second, PSTs in all areas need practice collaborating and differentiating instruction. All
teachers are responsible for differentiated instruction, and this needs to be
communicated clearly and regularly for all PSTs.
Third, PST educators need to be aware of and so work to address the gap between
their discourse about practices in schools and their own practices.

Llewellyn, Doug
Publications
Llewellyn, D., Travers, J., & Wischnowski, M. (in press). Building leadership through action
research. The Science Teachers Bulletin,75(1).
Llewellyn, D. (2011). Differentiated science inquiry. In L. Laud (Ed.) The best of Corwin:
Differentiated instruction in literacy, math, and science. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Llewellyn, D., & Rajech, H. (2011). The role of argumentation in science inquiry: Doing what
scientists really do. Science Scope, 35(1), 22-28.
Llewellyn, D. (2010). Thinking spatially: Taking observation, classification, and
communication to a higher level of reasoning. In Liftig (Ed.) Tried and true: Time-tested
activities for middle school. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Llewellyn, D. (2011). Differentiated science inquiry. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
Llewellyn, D., & van Zee, E. (2010). Action research: Expanding the role of classroom teachers
to inquirers and researchers. Science Scope, 34(1), 10-15.
Llewellyn, D. Blocks and Beyond: Strengthening Early Math and Science Skills Through Spatial
Learning in Science Scope (March, 2011), v. 34, #7, pp. 105-106.
Presentations
Differentiated Science Inquiry. Science Teachers Association of New York State, Rochester, NY
(2010); Toronto District School Board, Toronto, Canada (2011); Aldine Independent
School District, Houston, TX (2011).
Effective Questioning Skills. Toronto District School Board, Toronto, Canada. 2011.
Teaching High School Science Through Inquiry. Wildwood Upper School, Santa Monica, CA.
2011.

Fostering
Argumentation Skills
Doing What Real Scientists Really Do
by Douglas Llewellyn and Hema Rajesh
Elementary and middle school teachers often
provide students with hands-on activities
or even inquiry-based investigations
that emphasize science process skills such
as observing, classifying, identifying and controlling
variables, hypothesizing, experimenting, and collecting
and analyzing data. These activities and investigations
are frequently accompanied by the teacher
saying, “Wow, now you’re acting like a scientist.”
Unfortunately, this type of comment often reinforces
the misconception that the “scientific method” is the
Holy Grail with which experts investigate the natural
world. Without a realistic perception of the work of
real scientists, there may be little hope of achieving
national scientific literacy. The purpose of this article
therefore is threefold: (1) to illustrate how scientific
argumentation paints a more accurate picture of the
work that scientists really do and, more importantly,
(2) to demonstrate how teachers can foster argumentbased
science inquiries where students generate arguments
to support their claims using relative and
supportive evidence, and (3) to show how students
can use scientific reasoning skills to analyze and communicate
the findings of their investigations.
22 SCIENCE SCOPE
The case for argumentation is supported by the
National Research Council’s “Five Features of Science
Inquiry” (NRC 2000), in which the NRC states that with
science inquiry the learner
• engages in scientifically oriented questions;
• gives priority to evidence when responding to
questions;
• formulates explanations from evidence;
• connects explanations to scientific knowledge; and
• communicates and justifies explanations.
From these points, two keywords stand out that
reveal the true nature of science: evidence and
explanations. This article will further describe how
teachers of science can foster scientific reasoning skills
at the conclusion of a lab by emphasizing scientific
argumentation—a progression where students (1)
investigate questions and assumptions from a puzzling
phenomenon or event, (2) use the data from a selfdesigned
investigation to make a claim and justify and
defend the claim with supporting evidence, and (3)
provide a scientific explanation based on the findings.

FIGURE 1
Explanations
What is the structure of a
scientific argument?
Scientific-argumentation cycle
Supporting
Evidence
Observations
Scientific
Argumentation
Claims
The progression of a scientific argument frequently
commences with an observable event (see Figure
1). This may be presented by the teacher in the form
of a demonstration, a discrepant event, an initiating
exploration, or any perplexing phenomenon that
causes students to raise questions that they can
later investigate. The process also involves students
declaring what they already know about the event
(their prior knowledge) and describing several
assumptions as to the causes or promising solutions
to the question or problem. In this case, the
assumption is a statement that describes a natural
phenomenon or a framework to construct a possible
answer to the question being studied. It can lead to
a tentative answer or solution (hypothesis) to the
question.
Next, students design and carry out an investigation
and then collect and analyze the data to look for
patterns and relationships among the variables
examined. From the data and patterns, one or more
claims are constructed. The claim is an assertion
or conclusion that attempts to answer the original
question. The claim is then supported by evidence.
The evidence is extracted from that data in the form of
observations and measurements, which supports the
legitimacy of the claim and is justified and defended
via oral presentations or written argument-based lab
reports. Finally, students structure explanations during
the presentations or reports that account for the claims
and evidence.
Questions
and
Assumptions
The illustration in Figure 1
poses an interesting quandary—
which comes first, the claim or the
evidence? Similar to the chicken-orthe-egg
dilemma, in the formation
of the claim, data and evidence
are used to generate the claim.
However, in the communication of
the claim, the evidence supports
the claim and is usually followed by
the statement of the claim.
Data versus evidence
The difference between data and
evidence is sometimes confusing.
Simply, data are the information
and measurements from an
investigation. Evidence is a particular subset of data
an investigator uses to support or refute a claim.
Because many students are already familiar with forensic
science by way of crime shows such as CSI,
an example for students is the crime scene, which is
usually loaded with data. In the legal system, the prosecutor
or district attorney uses the data to make one
claim based on selected evidence, while the defense
lawyer extracts evidence from the same set of data to
make a contrary claim. It is then the jury’s responsibility
to decide which claim is best proven based
FIGURE 2
Comparing data and evidence
Data
Evidence
September 2011 23

Fostering ArgumentAtion skills
FIGURE 3
upon the preponderance of the evidence. Hand et al.
(2009) provide a clear relationship between data and
evidence, showing that all the data collected during
an investigation may not be relevant to the question
being investigated (see Figure 2). See “Data Versus
Evidence: Investigating the Difference” in this issue
for additional information on this topic.
Argumentation in everyday life
Whether we realize it or not, we are
constantly bombarded with claims
by today’s media. We hear claims
about how to lose weight, how to
stop smoking, the effects of global
warming, the benefits of herbal
medicines, or how to make sound
financial investments. During the
months leading up to an election,
claims by political candidates are
repeated in infomercials and flyers
that fill mailboxes. Deciding which
candidate is telling the truth with
accurate and relevant evidence
can be a daunting decision. Thus,
understanding the connection
between claims and evidence
becomes a skill extending beyond
the science classroom.
Fostering scientific
reasoning skills
If scientific inquiry asks, “What
if…?,” then scientific reasoning
asks, “Why…?” Scientific
reasoning is the logic behind
scientific inquiry. Becoming sci-
24 SCIENCE SCOPE
Reasoning links claims to evidence
Observations Claims Evidence
FIGURE 4
entifically literate im-
plies being able to
use scientific reason-
ing skills. In argumen-
tation, students use
scientific reasoning
skills when explaining
how the claim and the
evidence are connected.
In their oral defenses,
students link
the claim to supporting
evidence by using reasoning skills (see Figure 3).
But, like inquiry, we should not expect that reasoning
skills develop implicitly. Initially, students need to be
explicitly taught and nurtured through concrete experiences
of simple, observable discrepant events,
where teachers use questions and prompts to elicit
“evidence-based” explanations. Before engaging students
in scientific argumentation, several pre-activities
promoting scientific argumentation can be tapped
Reasoning
Day-by-day plan
Day 1 Introduction and discussion of a soil profile.
Day 2
Day 3
Day 4
Day 5
Days 6
and 7
Day 8
Day 9
Discussion about the factors that promote soil fertility.
Students walked around the school campus to observe
the rich biodiversity there and identified rationales about
what promoted growth. Safety procedures reviewed.
In groups of four, students collected soil samples from
different areas throughout the school.
Using the school library and online resources, students
researched and discussed procedures to analyze the soil
samples.
Students collected the required materials from the laboratory
and started to test their soil samples.
Students completed the test and analysis. Students completed
their QCEE sheets.
Students prepared charts for their argument-based
presentations.
Using the QCEE sheets, groups presented their claims
and evidence while the rest of the class pointed out
strengths and limitations of the findings, often offering
alternative explanations and counterclaims.

as students struggle with the task of
proposing, supporting, critiquing, FIGURE 5
refining, justifying, and defending a
position. These activities center on
students making observations and
inferences. Later, through additional
practice, they will become more
adept at linking claims to evidence.
In one activity (Llewellyn
2007), students are presented
with six small, sealed juice or milk
containers; each contains a common
object such as a battery, a rubber
ball, a Styrofoam ball, several
marbles, a domino or wooden
block, or a penny. Each of the same
objects is placed in a clear, plastic
baggie so students can easily see
it. Students then shake each closed
container, make observations using
the senses of hearing and touch,
and infer which object in the container matches the
object in the bag. The container remains closed after
students have made all of their inferences. Students
need to rely on their observations to make justifiable
inferences and conclusions.
A second activity (Llewellyn 2007) involves a typical
black box model. Here, students are presented with a
sealed shoe box containing two wooden blocks glued
to the bottom of the inside of the box and a marble.
Like with the juice boxes, students make observations
to infer the location of the wooden blocks by sliding
the marble back and forth inside the box. By drawing
an illustration, students can make a model as to the
location of the two blocks—hereby making a claim
based on the evidence collected.
Mystery Hands is a third activity that is simple to
do. The teacher tapes a sheet of butcher paper across
the opening of an open door frame. Two holes, about
15 cm (6 in.) in diameter, are made side by side near
the center of the paper. A “mystery person,” in the
hallway side of the door, places his or her hands
through the openings. The mystery person can be an
adult from the school or another student. Students on
the classroom side of the paper approach the hands,
make observations about the hands and fingers, and
draw inferences about the person on the other side. Is
the mystery person a male or a female? How old is the
person? What kind of work does the person do?
Similar activities, such as the familiar Track Stories,
QCEE template
Fostering ArgumentAtion skills
Question
Claim Evidence
Explanation
can be used to have students make observations and
inferences (AGI 1984). These basic science process
skills serve as rudimentary scaffolding for making
claims and citing supporting evidence.
Flaws in scientific reasoning
It is often said that middle school students are good
at school-yard arguing, but not at using the skills of
argumentation and scientific reasoning. Without explicit
instruction, students often make claims based
on their opinions and previously held, naive conceptions.
Students’ lack of prior experiences and opportunities
initiates many of their claims and explanations.
To help students develop skills in argumentation and
reasoning, we need to provide sufficient “think time”
for students to give their explanations. This means
allowing students to complete their thoughts and responses
without interruptions from other students or
the teacher. In our fast-paced, time-constrained curriculum,
this is a paramount challenge to rise above.
Flaws in students’ reasoning can also be overcome
by teachers’ questions and prompts that promote
scientific argumentation. Verbal prompts include the
following:
• What assumptions can you make about the
observation?
• What is the basis for your claim (or inference)?
September 2011 25

Fostering ArgumentAtion skills
• What evidence did you collect
that supports your claim, your
idea, or your hypothesis?
• Why do you think this is so?
• What do you mean by…?
• Does the evidence support or
refute your claim?
• Are the data biased? Are the data
reliable?
• How would you interpret the data
and evidence?
• What is the relationship between
the independent and dependent
variables?
• What do the data say or imply?
• What conclusions can you draw
from the evidence?
• How does the evidence support
or refute your claim?
• How is one variable dependent
upon another?
• What explanation can you propose
from the evidence collected?
• How do the results support what
you expected?
• How do the results support what
you already knew about the
phenomenon?
• Can you develop an explanation
from the results?
• Can you construct a model to
support your explanation?
• Were your original assumptions
about the question correct?
• How will you defend your
findings?
One teacher’s story
In this section, coauthor and science teacher Hema
Rajesh recounts her first experience in integrating
argumentation into inquiry investigations at the TVS
Academy in Hosur, India. Here is Hema’s story:
In grade 9 at the TVS Academy in Hosur, India, students
study the factors that promote soil formation.
26 SCIENCE SCOPE
FIGURE 6
Student QCEE template 1
Question: Will this soil sample support good vegetation?
Claim
The area from where the soil was
taken was arid; it will not be able to
support vegetation. The soil has too
much sand and gravel.
The humus layer in the soil is low
because it formed a smaller layer
while the soil was sediment.
The pH would be 7 or 8, as we do
not use chemicals that would be
either acidic or alkaline on the soil
or on plants at the school campus.
We think the water retention of the
soil would be low, as the soil has
low humus content.
The soil may have some nutrients
present because the soil is not
disturbed.
Evidence
Gravel = 20%
Humus = 7%
Clay = 7%
Coarse sand = 6%
Fine sand = 60%
Humus content = 7%
pH = 8
Explanation
30% per 10 g of the soil
The soil has nitrates, sulfates, and
iron.
From the evidence, we can infer that the soil cannot support heavy vegetation
as the humus content is very low. 60% of the soil is sand, which
makes it difficult to support the growth of plants. The pH of the soil is 8,
so it can support good vegetation. But the humus content is low, so the
soil is not fertile. The water-retention capacity is high. This may be due to
the presence of clay in the soil, or we might have taken wrong readings.
Therefore, we can say that our soil has ideal pH, but other factors are not
suitable to support thick vegetation. Maybe over the course of time, humus
may enrich the soil due to the biological degadation by the microbes.
Instead of having them do typical laboratory experiments
and write a report, I wanted a different
approach that would make the class lively and enable
students to justify their results through arguments—just
like real scientists do. I was motivated
when I read the article “Generate an Argument: An
Instructional Model” by Victor Sampson and Jonathon
Grooms in The Science Teacher (2010). After

an introductory soil lesson, I asked
students to observe the biodiversity
in our school campus, which
is filled with over a hundred flowering
plants. Students immediately
stated an assumption that because
the soil supported a great number
of plants, it was rich in humus content.
This assumption set the ball
rolling. The big question students
came up with was “What promotes
soil fertility?” To explore this aspect
of the soil, students decided to
identify the pH of the soil, humus
depth (along with other layers in
the soil), humus content in percentage,
water-retention capacity,
and qualitative estimation of mineral
ions (such as sulfates and nitrates)
as variables that impact soil
fertility. The timeline for the nineday
lesson is found in Figure 4.
Students first divided themselves
into seven groups comprising four
members per group. They then
chose various locations on the
school campus from where they
took soil samples for analyses. Safety
note: Safety glasses and gloves
must be worn when collecting soil
samples and testing soil. Collection
sites must be screened by the
teacher for biological and chemical
contaminants. The soils were taken
from areas where the vegetation
was high, moderate, and low. From
learning about soil factors in the
FIGURE 7
lower grades, they initially assumed that the humus
content varied. Students also came up with another
assumption: that the pH of the soil would range from
6 to 8 because the soil was free from chemical pollution
that would alter the pH, and because they saw
plants growing luxuriantly on the school campus. In
regard to safety measures, the proper handling of
acids was given prior to the procedure. In addition,
while digging in the soil for samples, students were
supervised by the teacher and the school gardener.
From the data, students were able to relate that
clay and humus content in the soil increased the
water-retention capacity of the soil. If the soil appeared
Student QCEE template 2
Fostering ArgumentAtion skills
Question: Is the soil fertility high or low?
Claim
Evidence
The area from where the soil
was taken was undisturbed with
royal palm trees. Since the soil is
undisturbed, we think the humus
layer would be high in terms of
depth of the soil.
The percentage content of humus
in the soil would be high.
The pH of the soil must be neutral
or slighty basic.
The water-retaining ability of the
soil will be low.
The soil may have some nutrients.
Gravel = 44%
Humus = 16%
Sandy soil = 40%
Humus content = 8%
pH = 7
Explanation
4% per 10 g of the soil
The soil contains nitrates, sulfates,
and iron.
The soil shows only three well-marked zones. Clay is totally absent and
the depth of the humus layer is very small. The humus content is medium.
The sample does not have clay, which would be helpful in retaining water.
As the water is supplied externally, the plants are able to grow. But as
the soil is neutral, it is ideal for supporting good vegetation. To enhance
fertility we can supply organic manures to the soil so that pH balance is
not disturbed. As the nutrients are present in the soil, organic manures will
further increase the nutrient concentration in the soil.
red to dark brown, it indicated the presence of iron
in the soil. To help students summarize their data
as follow-up claims and evidence, I provided them
with a question-claim-evidence-explanation (QCEE)
template (see Figure 5).
When the groups analyzed the data and documented
their claims on QCEE templates (see Figures
6 and 7), they were able to determine whether the
findings were concordant or not. For instance, Group
3 had reported that the humus content was only
0.14%, which was very low for the soil. After hearing
counterarguments from peers, students in the group
agreed that they had made a mistake, repeated their
September 2011 27

Fostering ArgumentAtion skills
experiment, and found that the humus content was
2.6%. During their oral defenses, students were able
to argue as to how the soil promoted growth even
though the water-retention capacity and clay and
humus content were not very high. Each group came
away with a justification as to how its soil promoted
plant growth in the locality. Later, students decided
to extend their study of soil by further analyzing
the mineral nutrients in the soil sample and also
comparing their sample with soil samples taken
from an organically farmed area and an inorganically
farmed area.
As the teacher/facilitator in the argumentation
process, I had immense satisfaction seeing students
negotiate meaning through argumentation while
truly working like scientists. Instead of merely
conducting the investigations with set procedures
and stating the results, students looked for patterns
and relationships among the variables and made
oral arguments justifying their claims and evidence.
Many students have also extended their findings
into further investigations. I link up the class with
the Soil Research Centre, where they are exposed
to new techniques and have access to sophisticated
instruments for soil testing and analysis. This gives
them an opportunity to work in a well-established
laboratory, side by side with professional scientists.
In the end, the entire process of generating an argument
as an instructional model helped me to modify
a traditional lab activity into a highly dynamic process
that led to fostering scientific reasoning while
promoting the real work of real scientists.
Conclusion
Science teachers should be mindful that two new
standards projects, the Common Core State Standards
(www.corestandards.org) and the Conceptual
Framework for New Science Education Standards
(to later evolve into the Next Generation Science
Standards, see www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/
Standards_Framework_Homepage.html), emphasize
having students develop skills and competencies
in scientific argumentation. This places argumentbased
inquires on the horizon for science-curriculum
and professional developers. Thus, in getting ahead
of what’s to come, science leaders should initiate
opportunities where teachers learn to modify their
existing inquiry labs into a format where students
develop precise claims supported by evidence and
28 SCIENCE SCOPE
justify and defend such claims in oral and written
arguments to their peers. During these arguments,
other students will be encouraged to pose counterclaims
and consider alternative evidence and explanations.
Throughout this process, students will gain
a realistic view of the nature of science and develop
proficiencies in reasoning and communication.
The ability to question, inquire, discover, and
express new ideas is a key critical competency for
the 21st century. Developing sound scientific argumentation
and reasoning skills in school will lead to
proficient decision making later in life. According
to Carl Sagan, “Both skepticism and wonder are
skills that need honing and practice. Their harmonious
marriage within the mind of every schoolchild
ought to be a principal goal of public education”
(1996, p. 306).
Lastly, transformation through scientific argumentation
involves shedding outmoded skins and
altering our understanding of the dimensions of
scientific literacy and the actual work of scientists.
Moreover, it reconstructs our attitudes and beliefs
about what motivates authentic student learning and
the true nature of science inquiry. n
References
American Geological Institute (AGI). 1984. Investigating
the earth. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Hand, B., L. Norton-Meier, J. Staker, and J. Bintz. 2009.
Negotiating science: The critical role of argument in
student inquiry. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Llewellyn, D. 2007. Inquire within: Implementing inquirybased
science standards in grades 3–8. 2nd ed.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
National Research Council (NRC). 2000. Inquiry and the
national science education standards. Washington, DC:
National Academies Press.
Sagan, C. 1996. The demon-haunted world. New York:
Ballantine Books.
Sampson, V., and J. Grooms. 2010. Generate an
argument: An instructional model. The Science Teacher
(77) 5: 32–37.
Douglas Llewellyn (dllewellyn@sjfc.edu) teaches
science education courses at St. John Fisher College
in Rochester, New York. Hema Rajesh (hema_sghs@
yahoo.com) teaches biology and is the science
coordinator at the TVS Academy in Hosur, India.

Maples, Joellen
Publications
Groenke, S. and Maples, J. (2010). "Young adult literature goes digital: Will teen reading ever be
the same?" The Alan Review. 37 (3), 38-44.
Arndt, K., Maples, J., & White, J. (2010). "Re-seeing the mighty: Critically examining one film’s
representations of disability in the English classroom." English Journal. National Council
of Teachers of English. 100(2): 77-85.

Young Adult Literature Goes Digital: Will Teen Reading Ever Be the Same?
Susan L Groenke; Joellen Maples
ALAN Review; Summer 2010; 37, 3; ProQuest Education Journals
pg. 38
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Paterson, Wendy
Publications
Paterson, W.A. (May 2010). Diaries of a Forgotten Parent: Divorced Dads on Fathering Through
and Beyond Divorce. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press.
Presentations
Paterson, W. A. (April 1, 2011). Diaries of a Forgotten Parent: Divorced Dads on Fathering Through
and Beyond Divorce. First Friday Lecture Series, St. John Fisher College.

News Detail
Dr. Wendy Paterson is Featured Speaker at April First
Friday Lecture Series
03/29/2011
On Friday, April 1, Dr. Wendy Paterson, Dean of St. John Fisher College's Ralph C. Wilson, Jr.
School of Education, will serve as the First Friday Lecture Series speaker. Her presentation is
based on her recently published book, "Diaries of a Forgotten Parent: Divorced Dads on
Fathering Through and Beyond Divorce." The lecture will take place in the Joseph S. Skalny
Welcome Center at 10:00 a.m.
In this lecture, Dr. Paterson opens an intimate window on the lives of divorced men. Since her
first book focused on divorced and single-parent mothers, she has continued her interest in
investigating the lived experiences of divorced and single parents whose voices are often notably
absent from literature that focuses on the negative effects of divorce on marriage and the family.
Most literature on divorce primarily examines its effects on women and children, so fair and
personal accounts of the lived experiences of custodial and non-custodial fathers are far less
available.
In this lecture, Dr. Paterson presents a picture of her qualitative research study of ten American
men who shared with her their intensely personal reflections of guilt, pain, frustration, sacrifice,
loneliness, and pride as they experienced the metamorphosis of their fathering as divorced men.
In the book, she deconstructs the societal myth that fathers are less valuable parents than mothers
and thus their roles are more expendable in the proceedings of divorce and custody. Her research
intends to illuminate critical conversations about the effects of divorce on families, schools, and
society.

The First Friday Faculty Lecture Series is designed for individuals who are interested in hearing
learned perspectives on a variety of topics from members of the St. John Fisher College
community.
Parking is available in Lots A and B off of the main entrance to the College at East
Avenue/Fairport Road. For more information about the lecture series or to register for the April 1
event, please contact Tiffany Carnevale at (585) 385-8354 or tcarnevale@sjfc.edu.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Rapp, Whitney
Publications
Rapp, W.H., & Arndt, K. A. (in press). Teaching everyone: A non-categorical introduction to
inclusive education. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing Co.
Rapp, W.H., (2009). Avoiding Math Taboos: Effective Math Strategies for Visual Spatial
Learners. TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, 6(2) Article 4. Retrieved [February 8,
2010] from http://escholarship.bc.edu/education/tecplus/vol6/iss2/art4
Presentations
Hildenbrand, S., & Rapp, W. H. (2010, December 10). Doing for is not providing for:
Scaffolding independence while maintaining high expectations. Session presented at the
annual conference of TASH, Denver, CO.
Hildenbrand, S., & Rapp. W. H. (2010, October 8). Doing for is not providing for: Scaffolding
independence while maintaining high expectations. Session presented at the annual
convention of the New York State Council for Exceptional Children, Saratoga Springs,
NY.
Invited presenter on Differentiated Instruction, Rochester Leadership Academy, May 11, 2010.
Invited workshop presenter on Differentiated Instruction, East Rochester Central School District,
February 1, 2010.

Avoiding Math Taboos: Effective Math
Strategies for Visual-Spatial Learners
Whitney H. Rapp
A Feature Article Published in
TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus
Volume 6, Issue 2, December 2009
Copyright © 2009 by the author. This work is licensed to the public under the Creative Commons Attribution
License

Avoiding Math Taboos: Effective Math Strategies for
Visual-Spatial Learners
Whitney H. Rapp
Abstract
Mathematics concepts are most often taught using auditory, sequential instructional methods.
Not only are these methods ineffective when used with visual-spatial learners, they may be detrimental
to both academic and emotional progress. Ways in which visual-spatial learners process
information are explained. One child’s story is presented, illustrating both negative academic and
emotional impact on a visual-spatial learner who possessed exceptional math ability but performed
increasingly poorly in math class. An extensive list of effective strategies and resources
for teachers is provided.
Keywords
Visual-spatial learners, giftedness, math strategies
SUGGESTED CITATION:
Rapp,W.H., (2009). Avoiding Math Taboos: Effective Math Strategies for Visual Spatial Learners.
TEACHING Exceptional Children Plus, 6(2) Article 4. Retrieved [date] from
http://escholarship.bc.edu/education/tecplus/vol6/iss2/art4
2

Math Taboos in the Car
A friend and colleague told me a story
that occurred during a family road trip. One
of their children was in the back seat doing
her math homework. Lucky for her, she was
sitting behind two great math minds. My
friend is a college professor of math education
in a teacher preparation program. Her
husband is a college professor of mathematics.
The exchange went something like this:
Rachel asked, “23 x 6? I forgot how to
do it.”
What’s 3 x 6?” prompted her father.
“18.”
“Okay, then,” said Dad, “just put
down the 8 and carry the one. Now....”
“Wait!!” interrupted my friend,
“She’ll never understand what she’s really
doing if she just follows the steps!”
While Rachel may have been perfectly
happy to complete her homework quickly by
following her father’s simple instructions and
memorizing the steps, my friend was right.
Lower level, auditory processing of the steps
may not result in a true understanding of the
foundational concepts, including the overall
concept that the multiplication of a times b
means a groups of b. If not riding in the car, it
is likely that Rachel’s father would have taken
the time to draw or otherwise illustrate the
underlying concepts of the problem at hand.
In a situation that did not lend itself to creating
visuals or using manipulatives, he resorted
to a quick, traditional, and solely auditory
method of teaching math skills. Teaching
memorization of sequential steps in order to
solve a math problem does a disservice to all
math learners. However, it is particularly detrimental
to visual spatial learners.
3
Auditory Sequential Learners v. Visual-
Spatial Learners
Auditory-sequential learners tend to
do well in school where the curriculum, materials,
and teaching methods are predominantly
sequential and provided in auditory format
(Haas, 2003). Relating back to the story about
doing math in the car, auditory-sequential
learners would readily be able to recall their
math facts, memorize the steps to complete
the multiplication equations, answer the
homework problems correctly, and earn
straight A’s in math without ever truly understanding
the underlying mathematical concepts.
While these characteristics provide
certain advantages in learning mathematical
concepts (e.g. finding patterns easily and
thinking pictorially), over-reliance on
auditory-sequential math teaching methods
pose stumbling blocks for visual-spatial
learners both academically and emotionally in
this subject area (Silverman, 2002). Relating
this to the story in the car, visual-spatial
learners would share the disadvantage of
missing the underlying mathematical concepts.
Also, they may not be able to recall
math facts, nor readily be able to memorize
the steps to complete the multiplication equations.
Thus, visual-spatial learners are not
likely to get correct answers to the homework
problems (academic stumbling block), subsequently
leaving them with a lowered selfesteem
and a perceived deficit in mathematical
ability (emotional stumbling block).
Math Processing and Impact on Visual-
Spatial Learners.

Auditory Sequential Learners
• Are left-hemispheric learners;
• Think primarily in words;
• Have a good sense of time;
• Are step by step learners;
• Follow oral directions well;
• Are well-organized;
• Memorize linear instructions and arrive at one correct answer;
• Progress readily from easy to difficult material.
(Silverman, 2002).
Visual Spatial Learners
• Are right-hemispheric learners;
• Think primarily in pictures;
• Relate well to space but not to time;
• Are whole concept learners;
• Read maps well;
• Have unique methods of organization;
• Learn best by seeing relationships or patterns;
• Learn complex concepts easier than simple ones.
(Silverman, 2002).
Mathematics, by simplest description,
consists of symbols and what the symbols
represent. Auditory-sequential instruction of
math often separates the symbol (number)
from what it represents. If one is competent in
auditory-sequential processing, in other words
a predominately left-hemispheric or leftbrained
learner, he can manage to succeed in
math in ways that success is most often defined
in school - homework and test questions
answered correctly with all work shown. The
process will ensue as follows:
4
1. Listen to the teacher explain the
steps.
2. Copy the sample problem(s) from
the board in the order as completed
by the teacher.
3. Memorize the steps used to complete
the sample problem(s).
4. For any new problems, plug in the
new numerals and follow the
memorized steps.
5. Show all work by writing out the
steps completed in a linear display.

Table 1: Flowchart of visual-spatial learner’s processing.
Teacher is saying
something.
Listen to the
teacher again.
Teacher is on the
next problem
already.
Stop.
Confused.
However, for a learner who is competent
in visual-spatial processing, a predominately
right-hemispheric or right-brained
learner, the experience will resemble something
like the diagram above.
Within this flowchart of the visualspatial
learner’s processing, several things are
occurring:
5
1.Translation to visual imaging and
increased processing time. The
“Over-reliance on auditorysequential
math teacher methods
may pose stumbling blocks for
visual-spatial learners both academically
and emotionally.”
Attempt to
translate the
teacher’s words
into a video.
Successful
Begin to gain
understanding
of the problem
to be solved.
Unsuccessful
Stop.
Confused.
visual learner needs to see the information
rather than hear it in
order to make sense of it. This is
not the same as an auditory processing
disorder. The visual spatial
learner can decipher auditory input,
but needs to translate it to
visual images if any true learning
and application is to occur. Anytime
a teacher is presenting information
auditorally, the visualspatial
learner is listening to the
words, then actively creating a
video, photograph, icon, or other
image in her brain – often while
doodling, twirling her hair, or fiddling
with an object at her desk
which helps her with this translation
process (Freed, Kloth, & Billett,
2006; Haas, 2003; Silverman,

6
2002). This takes additional processing
time, which leaves the
visual-spatial learner behind. In
addition, she may be accused of
daydreaming rather than paying
attention to the lesson, when in
fact, she is as actively involved in
learning the lesson as the rest of
the class.
2. Whole concept learning and
‘showing your work’. Visualspatial
learners grasp concepts
holistically rather than in parts
(Haas, 2003; Silverman, 2002).
What may seem to the auditorysequential
learner like a logical
progression of steps to solving a
math problem, seems jumbled and
disjointed to the visual-spatial
“She may be accused of daydreaming
rather than paying
attention to the lesson, when in
fact, she is as actively involved
learner. If the task at hand is presented
in a meaningful way so
that the visual-spatial learner sees
a real-world application for finding
a solution to the problem, he
will arrive at a solution by constructing
and synthesizing a larger
conceptual framework that incorporates
the concepts to be learned.
It may be very difficult for the
visual-spatial learner to ‘show his
work’ after this process. There is
not a finite set of steps followed
in a specific order. It is an overall
understanding of a problem and
multiple ways of arriving at the
solution. A visual-spatial learner
in second grade compared having
to show his work in math to having
to explain how he knows that
C is the letter c, “I can’t tell you
how I know it. I just know it.”
This poses problems for the
learner when placed in a class
where the teacher insists that the
answer is correct (implying that
learning has occurred) only when
the work is shown, step-by-step.
3. Simple versus complex tasks.
Visual-spatial learners often understand
complex problems much
more readily than simple ones.
The explanation for this involves
the roles of the two hemispheres
of the brain, which deal with information
processing in very different
ways. The left hemisphere
better handles recall, memorization
tasks, verbal fluency, syntax
and grammar, time, and sequence.
This is the visual-spatial learner’s
weaker hemisphere. The right
hemisphere of the brain better
handles visualization, synthesis,
spatial orientation, and broader
concept formation. This is the
visual-spatial learner’s stronger
hemisphere. A simple task involving
knowledge recall engages only
the left hemisphere of the brain, so
the visual-spatial learner is operating
at a disadvantage. When the
task becomes more complex, requiring
application, synthesis or
evaluation of information, both
hemispheres of the brain are engaged
together. Now the visual-

spatial learner is using his preferred
and stronger hemisphere, so
the complex task is easier to accomplish
(Silverman, 2002).
4. Writing. Many visual-spatial
learners have difficulty with writing,
whether it is copying from the
board or showing the steps to their
work. An associative (secondnature)
task for auditorysequential
learners, writing is a
cognitive task for visual-spatial
learner , due in part to motor difficulties
that accompany right-brain
dominance. Freed, Kloth, & Billett
(2006), explain this by saying,
“the very act of writing requires
tremendous concentration, which
takes away from the ability to focus
on the task at hand. When
children write, it’s more difficult
for them to visualize because they
are looking down at the page”
(p. 6).
There are areas of math that tend to be
strong for visual-spatial learners because they
lend themselves well to visual processing and
spatial reasoning. Some examples of these are
geometry, money, roman numerals (still a
symbol system but based on a pattern and positioning
of the figures), fluids, and maps.
However, mastery of computational math
skills is often used as a gatekeeper to these
higher concepts. As Haas (2003) states, “this
teaching strategy often works against visualspatial
learners. Typically, they are not very
attentive to detail. They are prone to computational
errors or missing a negative sign” (p.
31). The academic impact of this is misunderstanding
of math concepts and declining
grades. The emotional and psychological impact
may be much greater.
7
Tyler’s Journey
The following examples illustrate the
experiences of one visual spatial learner from
pre-school through fifth grade. The examples
are drawn from collected documents as well
as conversations with his teachers and parents.
An extremely bright boy, Tyler reached
all infant and toddler developmental milestones
on the early side - talking at nine
months, walking at ten months, dressing independently
and toilet training by two and a
half years.
At an early age, Tyler began demonstrating
strengths in understanding math concepts.
At two, this young mathematician
climbed the staircase in his home, counting
out each time his left foot stepped down, “1-
2-3-4-5-6!” When he reached the top, he
proudly exclaimed, “There are 12 steps!”
Even though he had only counted every other
step, he immediately doubled the number, understanding
that there were two groups of 6,
or 12.
At four, Tyler brought himself out of a
brief reverie at the dinner table to ask, “Does
counting ever stop? I don’t think counting can
ever stop.” Promptly being informed that indeed
counting does not stop and this is the
concept of ‘infinity,’ a new word was indelibly
added to Tyler’s already impressive vocabulary.
In October of his kindergarten year,
Tyler was assigned a color-by-number page
with six pumpkins, arranged in two columns
of three each. He colored the three pumpkins
on the upper left correctly and the three in the
lower right incorrectly, according to the numbers
on the page. When asked why, he replied,
“because when I folded it diagonally, I
wanted it to be symmetrical.” Later that
school year, Tyler was invited to leave the
classroom twice a week to join first and second
graders for extended study in geometry.

He thrived and added words like pentagonal
trapezohedron to his everyday vocabulary.
What’s the problem, one might ask?
Well, at some point, usually first grade, math
in school takes on much less of a discovery
approach and transitions over to numerals on
papers, equations with precise symbols,
worksheets, and even journals where Tyler
was expected to record in writing how he
reached his correct answers. Most of the
pages in Tyler’s journal read, “I jst nu it” [I
just knew it]. Even an understanding firstgrade
teacher who was willing to brainstorm
It wasn’t long until the mere thought
of ‘doing math’ (no longer a discovery learning
process involving the space and patterns
around him, rather finite exercises that emphasized
sequence, memorization, writing,
and timed tasks) made Tyler anxious and
8
additional recording strategies was not
enough to counteract a district-wide curriculum
that required evidence of math achievement
in a format that was a far distant match
for Tyler’s strengths.
Through second grade, Tyler’s dislike
for ‘math’ as he now thought of it grew, until
he consistently reported it to be his weakest
and most abhorred subject in school. During
third grade his perception of math came to
equate the marks on his papers, of which this
is a representative sample:
withdrawn. By fifth grade, Tyler was classified
as Other Health Impaired with an Individualized
Education Program for difficulties
with executive functioning, anxiety, and sensory
integration. The Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test-II (Wechsler, 2001) was

administered to Tyler as part of his comprehensive
evaluation for a disability. Tyler
scored in the 90 th percentile on the Math Reasoning
subtest but 27 th percentile on the Numerical
Operations subtest. The diagnostician’s
summative comments on the Individualized
Education Program (IEP) included:
Math is [Tyler’s] most challenging
subject in school. He is aware of this
and is reluctant to take risks. He prefers
to do math mentally, and is frustrated
when asked to show his work or
write about his thinking. His mathematical
reasoning skills are superior,
but his computation skills are weak.
Further, Tyler reported himself to be
“dumb, especially at math.” This distorted
self-perception of his abilities in general and
particularly in math led to damaged relationships
with his teachers. When they commented
on how smart he truly was in math,
Tyler felt as though they were teasing him
and formed a mistrust of the encouragement
they intended. What came next was a slow
and arduous journey, filled with activities
geared toward visual-spatial learners, to get
Tyler back on the road to confidence in himself
and his math abilities.
Math Strategies and Resources for Visual-
Spatial Learners
First and foremost to remember when
planning math activities for any learner is
that, “math is not about memorization or drill
or speed. It’s about patterns: seeing interesting
relationships about numbers” (Silverman,
2002, p. 302). Visual-spatial learners are particularly
adept at these skills, so providing
them with opportunities to demonstrate them
in ways other than drill worksheets will bring
them out.
9
Provide as many different manipulatives as
possible
Visual-spatial learners will visualize
different problems in different ways, so one
type of manipulative will not be optimal for
all learners or all tasks. Here are some to start
with: unifix cubes, legos, drinking straws,
paper clips, buttons, geoboards and rubber
bands, peg boards, beads and strings, checkers,
and coins. Keep collecting!
Incorporate physical movement
Not all visual-spatial learners are
bodily-kinesthetic learners, but physical
movement will add to the visual images that
are necessary for conceptual understanding.
Have learners shape themselves like the numerals
they are learning. Have them group
themselves into sets for addition or multiplication.
Rather than counting or measuring
drawings on paper, have them move around
the classroom or entire school counting and
measuring real objects.
Play or create math games
Board games and card games are inherently
visual. In fact, most can be played
without any auditory input at all. There are
games already on the market that utilize math
skills, including Candyland, Monopoly,
Othello, Spirograph, Uno, Battleship, Rubik’s
Cube, Chess, and Checkers. Others can be
found in resources such as 25 Super Cool
Math Board Games, by Lorraine Hopping
Egan. Best yet, have learners create their
own math board games using existing boards
and pieces, or ones of their own design. Silverman
(2002) shares an example of students
who modified the pieces of a Stratego game
so that each contained a multiplication math
fact. In an attack, the higher product won the
square.

Offer opportunities to do math on the computer
There are several math software programs
available as well as math websites. Try
these for starters:
• Interactive Math Games at
www.gamequarium.com/math.htm
• Building Big: Shapes Lab at
www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/lab/s
hapes.html
• Math Cats at www.mathcats.com
• Cool Math 4 Kids at
www.coolmath4kids.com
Incorporate art with math
Every classroom has a plethora of art
materials – crayons, markers, paper, paints,
easels, glue, glitter (if the teacher is brave!),
scrap fabric, recyclables. However, too many
times, the art supplies come out for art time
and are then put away for academic time.
Part of planning for visual-spatial learners is
to understand that academic time needs to be
art time simultaneously. Keep those art supplies
out and available! The following books
will get you on your way:
• MathART Projects and Activities:
Dozens of Creative Projects
to Explore Math Concepts
and Build Essential
Skills, by Carolyn Ford Brunetto;
• Mathterpieces, by Greg Tang;
• Cartooning with Math, by Bill
Costello
• Comic-Strip Math:40 Reproducible
Cartoons with Dozens
of Funny Story Problems that
Build Essential Skills, by Dan
Greenberg.
10
Allow output that does that not involve writing
Other ways for visual-spatial learners
to demonstrate what they know include drawing,
making audio-recordings of their explanations,
dictating to a scribe, computer representations
such as Power Point, and hands-on
projects.
Allow for extra processing time
The most important strategy you can
use along with any of these others is to allow
more time to complete tasks. It goes without
saying that creating art projects, designing
and playing board games will take longer than
completing a pencil-and-paper task. However,
even thinking through an explanation
will take longer for a visual-spatial learner,
because he will need to make that translation
from your words to his visual images.
Give math problems a real world application
Many students who are gifted and/or
visual-spatial learners have a raised awareness
of and sensitivity to global issues. By
teaching math concepts in the context of social
justice, more than one need is being met.
Rethinking Mathematics: Teaching Social
Justice by the Numbers, edited by Eric Gutstein
and Bob Peterson, provides a multitude
of examples for teaching math across the curriculum,
infusing social justice into math
class, and incorporating the learners’ backgrounds
into math. Here is just one example
that builds on the math concept of percentages:

Here are Illinois data based on police reports from 1987 - 1997
• In an area of about one million motorists, approximately 28,000
were Latinos.
• Over this period, state police made 14,750 discretionary traffic
stops.
• Of these stops, 31,000 were of Latino drivers.
Have students set up their own simulations of this situation using cubes (in
this example, one could use three different colored cubes our of 100. or one
out of 28, to approximate the ratio or Latinos). Have them pick and replace
a cube 100 times, record the data, and calculate the results of simulating
100 “discretionary” stops.
• What percentage of the motorists in part 3 were Latinos?
• What percentage of the discretionary traffic stops involved Latinos?
• How did you set up the simulation? Why did you choose those
numbers?
• In your simulation, how many Latinos were picked out of 100 picks
and what percentage was that?
• Do the results of your experiment support the claim of racial profiling?
Why or why not?
(Gutstein, 2005, p.17).
Conclusion
In summary, do not teach math like you are in
the car. If you must teach auditorally, use
visualization strategies, allowing the learner
to create a picture or movie in her head. An
effective way to do this is to start with the
equation and turn it into a story problem. Allow
the visual-spatial learner time to translate
this into visual images and help fill in the details.
Then present the learner with the end
goal. Avoid coaxing through the steps you
would use. Give her room to work through
the problem her way, which is apt to be holistic
and spatial – and as equally effective!
11

References
Building big: Shapes lab. (n.d.). Retrieved
October 6, 2007, from Public Broadcasting
System Web site:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/buildingbig/
lab/shapes.html
Brunetto, C. F. (1997). MathART projects and
activities: Dozens of creative projects
to explore math concepts and build
essential skills. New York: Scholastic
Books.
Cool Math 4 Kids (n.d.). Retrieved June 4,
2008 from Cool Math 4 Kids website:
http://www.coolmath4kids.com
Costello, B. (1998). Cartooning with math.
Upper Marlboro, MD: Thinkorporated.
Egan, L. H. (1999). 25 super
cool math board games. Jefferson
City, MO: Scholastic Professional
Books.
Freed, J., Kloth, A., & Billett, J. (2006).
Teaching the gifted visual spatial
learner. Understanding Our Gifted,
18(4), p. 3-6.
Greenberg, D. (1998). Comic-strip math: 40
reproducible cartoons with dozens of
funny story problems that build essential
skills. New York: Scholastic
Books.
Gutstein, E. (2005). Driving while black or
brown: A mathematics project about
racial profiling. In E. Gutstein and B.
Peterson (Eds.), Rethinking mathematics:
Teaching social justice by the
numbers (pp. 16-18). Milwaukee, WI:
Rethinking Schools.
12
Haas, S. C. (2003). Algebra for gifted visualspatial
learners. Gifted Education
Communicator (Spring), 34 (1), 30-
31; 42-43.
Interactive math games. (n.d.). Retrieved October
6, 2007, from
Gamequarium.com Web site:
http://www.gamequarium.com/math.htm
Math cats. (n.d.). Retrieved October 6, 2007,
from Math cats Web site:
http://www.mathcats.com
Silverman, L. K. (2005). Teaching mathematics
to non-sequential learners.
www.gifteddevelopment.com
Silverman, L. K. (2002). Upside-down brilliance:
The visual-spatial learner.
Denver: DeLeon.
Tang, G. (2003). Mathterpieces. New York:
Scholastic Books.
Wechsler, D. (2001). Wechsler Individual
Achievement Test – Second Edition
[norm-referenced assessment]. San
Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment,
Inc.
About the Author:
Dr. Whitney H. Rapp is an Associate
Professor in the Ralph C.
Wilson, Jr. School of Education at
St. John Fisher College in Rochester,
New York.

Reed, Diane
Publications
Reed, D. (2012). Taking Risks and Sustaining Strength. Strachan, J. & Lazaridou, A., Giving
Life the Shape of Social Justice: Women Educational Leaders Worldwide. American
Association of School Administrators and New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education
Inc., (Submitted for publication September 2010. Anticipated release date 2012.)
Reed, D. (2011). Resilient women leaders in turbulent times: Applying the leader resilience
profile to assess women’s leadership strengths. Macha, H., & Fahrenwald, C., (Eds.)
Gender and Education - Towards New Strategies of Leadership and Power., Budrich
Press. (Presently in publication. Anticipated release date Winter 2011/2012. Published
in English and German.)
Presentations
Reed, D. (2011, September). Resilient Women Leaders in Turbulent Times: Applying the Leader
Resilience Profile® to Assess Women’s Leadership Strengths. Presented at the Third
International Women’s Leadership Conference at the University of Thessaly, Volos,
Greece Sponsored by American Association of School Administrators and the University
Council for Educational Administrators.
Reed, D. (2011, June). Leadership in a Time of Challenge. Presented at Waterloo Community
School District Administrative Retreat. Waterloo, Iowa.
Reed, D. (2011 April). Administrator-Union Relations: Can it ever be Win/Win?. Presented at
New York State Association for Women in Administration. Rochester, New York.
Reed, D. (2010, November). The Nine Strengths of a Resilient Leader. Presented at School
Administrators Association of New York State 2010 Annual Conference.
Reed, D. (2010, November). Resilient Female Leadership for Turbulent Times. Presented at
American Association of Women in School Leadership Forum.
Reed, D. (2010, October). Nine Strengths of Resilient Leaders. Presented at New York State
School Boards Association Annual Conference
Reed, D. (2010, October). The Nine Strengths of A Resilient Leader. Presented at New York
State Association for Women in Administration. Rochester, New York.

Reed, D. (2010, September). Resilient leadership for Turbulent Times: Critical Strategies for
Superintendents to not only Survive but Thrive in the Bold Time of School Reform.
Presented at New York State Council of School Superintendents Fall Leadership Summit.
Reed, D. (2010 September). Resilient Leadership in a Time of Challenge. PASA &
Westmoreland Intermediary Unit 7, Superintendents’ Annual Workshop. Seven Springs
Mt. Resort.
Reed, D. (2010 August, September, November). Become a Resilient Frontrunner. Presenting at
New York State School Board Officer’s Academy. Latham, Islandia, Fairport and White
Plains, New York.

Former Superintendent at Honeoye Falls-Lima
School District in Upstate New York for 14
years.
Presently Associate Professor and Co-Chair of
Graduate Educational Leadership Department,
St. John Fisher College, Rochester, NY
Website: http://soe.sjfc.edu
E-mail: dreed@sjfc.edu
2

Agenda
8:00 8:45 – 8:30 – 9:30 Introductions Introductions and and Overview Pre-activity of Day’s Agenda
9:30 – 10:15 Overview of Resilience and
8:30 – 9:00 Pre-Activity
Results of Roanoke Survey
9:00 – 9:30 Overview of Resilience
10:15 – 10:30 Break
9:30 – 10:00 Results of Waterloo Administrative Survey
10:30 – 11:00 Reflection on the Journey
10:00 – 10:15 BreakStepping
Stones
10:15 11:00 – 10:45 – 11:30 Reflection Core Values on the Journey
11:30 – 1:00 Stepping Lunch Stones with Activities
10:45 1:00 – 11:15 – 1:30 Core Values The Resilience Cycle
11:15 – Noon Alignment Leadership Resilience Profile
Noon 1:30 – 1:00 – 2:15 LunchDeveloping
Professional Growth
1:00 – 1:45 The Resilience Opportunities Cycle to and Strengthen Your Leadership
Leaders
Resilience Resilience Profile
1:45 2:15 – 2:15 – 3:00 Developing DeWitt Professional Jones DVD, “Extraordinary Growth Opportunities Vision” to
Strengthen Leader Resilience
2:15 – 2:45 Efficacy
2:45 – 3:15 Work/Life Balance
3:15 – 4:00 DeWitt Jones DVD, “Celebrate What’s Right With
The World”
3

Set expectations and tone for today’s work
Respect and collegiality
Confidentiality and trust
All voices heard
Accountability for own learning
Cell phones off
No E-mailing
Other
4

Provide a framework for thinking about
resilience
Provide practical tools, strategies and
thinking to take back and implement
during 2011 - 2012 year
5

“A Cup of Coffee”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3NgzQ9Pcsg
6

Write 3 things that you think you know about
Leadership Resilience
Write 2 interesting facts about yourself
Write 1 thing you want to know more about
on the topic
Discuss and share
7

Authors
Dr. Diane Reed
Dr. Jerry Patterson
Dr. George Goens
Published: Rowman and Littlefield Education,
Lanham, MD. 2009
8

Book provides leaders with concrete, ‘how to’
strategies for strengthening their leadership
skills in the face of adversity.
Addresses specific needs and skills required to
help leaders be successful in tough times.
Includes first-hand accounts of how leaders
apply the concepts in real world work.
9

Warren Bennis
American Psychologist Journal
January 2007 pg. 5
“I believe adaptive capacity or resilience is the
single most important quality in a leader, or in
anyone else for that matter, who hopes to lead
a healthy, meaningful life.”
12

Reflects a pattern of how individuals view
their current reality and how they assess
probability of influencing the future.
13

A resilient leader demonstrates the ability to
recover, learn from, and grow stronger when
confronted by adversity within the
organizational context.
14

Resilience is a long-term, not a short-term,
construct. A person’s resilience reflects an
overall orientation or approach to how one
responds to adversity.
Leadership resilience refers to one’s resilience
within the particular context of one’s
leadership role.
15

The term “resilient leader” is not synonymous
with the term “effective leader.” A resilient
leader is not necessarily a highly effective
leader and a leader may be effective under
so-called normal conditions, but not be
highly resilient under adverse conditions.
16

Waterloo Community Adminstrators
Survey Summary
June 2011
17

Personal Efficacy
confidence and competence to lead in times of
adversity
Personal Well Being
emotional, spiritual and physical dimensions of our
health
Adaptability
ability to make mid-course adjustments in light of
changing circumstances
18

Having top-notch educational programs with
fewer personnel and resources
Making sure ALL students are successful
Encouraging increased academic rigor
Promoting positive morale during difficult
times
19

Reflection on the Journey
Stepping Stones
20

Core Values
21

I Value:
Therefore I will:
•……
•……
Personal Values Hierarchy
Core
Values
Educational
Values
Program
Values
Core Values Development:
22

Alignment
Taught Say
Written Tested Believe Do
Curriculum Alignment Relational Alignment
Figure A Figure B
23

Example: The Vision of Learning
I value: Creating schools that have a collective relentlessness
about educating all students to a high level of achievement.
Therefore I will:
• Create school environments where all students demonstrate the
knowledge and skills necessary to ensure their competence in
the economic, social, political, and intellectual life of their
communities.
• Create school environments that enable students to
demonstrate their knowledge and skills through a variety of
assessments.
• Build collective efficacy in our staff that their actions make a
difference for all of their students.
24

Lunch
25

Resilience Level
High
Low
normal
conditions
adversity strikes
Time
growth (Level II
resilience)
stability (Level I
resilience)
survival level
dysfunctional level
26

The major goals of this project were to:
•Develop a valid, reliable instrument to measure
key indicators of educational leaders’
resilience.
•Develop professional development experiences
to support leaders in strengthening their
leadership resilience.
27

First valid, reliable instrument
that measures the resilience
strengths of leaders.
28

You took the Survey and
Got Your Individualized Profile
The web address to access the instrument
online:
http://www.theresilientleader.com
29

Were there any surprises in your profile?
Low/High?
Which are your strongest or most developed?
Which areas need to be strengthened or
further developed?
30

Thinking Skills
Understanding reality Optimism about the future
Capacity Skills
Values Efficacy Support Well-being
Action Skills
Courage Responsibility Perseverance Adaptability
31

Reflective Questions for Resilience Thinking Skills
How can I:
Effectively deal with the very real presence of ambiguity and
complexity inherent in organizational life?
Accept the reality that adversity is both inevitable and generally
unexpected?
Work positively within the unavoidable constraints imposed by the
reality of the adverse circumstances?
Find ways to make a positive influence in making good things
happen in a bad situation?
Focus my energy on the opportunities, not the obstacles, found in
the midst of adversity?
Shift my thinking from ‘if only’ to ‘how can I’ thinking when faced
with tough times?
34

Reflective Questions for Resilience Capacity
Building Skills
How Can I:
Extend my leadership ability to privately clarify and publicly
articulate my core values in the face of a storm?
Consistently align my leadership actions with what matters most
to me among competing values?
Regularly gather feedback about the alignment to make sure I am
walking my talk when the going gets rough?
Compensate for any relative weaknesses I have in an area by
turning to others who have strength in this area?
35

Reflective Questions for Resilience Capacity
Building Skills (Cont’d)
How Can I:
Maintain a genuinely confident presence as leader when adversity
strikes?
Build on my experiences with adversity to gain greater resilience
capacity when adversity happens again?
Better understand my emotions during adversity and how those
emotions affect my leadership performance?
Find healthy ways to channel my physical energy as a stress
reliever?
Apply personal introspection and a sense of spirituality to steady
myself during adversity?
36

Reflective Questions for Resilience Capacity
Building Skills (Cont’d)
How Can I:
Protect the necessary time and space to replenish my capacity to
lead an emotionally, physically, and spiritually rich life?
Build the resources of a strong support base to help me through
the tough times.
Recognize and then act on the need to seek constructive advice
when adversity strikes?
Nurture and sustain trusting relationships with those who can be
supportive in difficult situations.
37

Reflective Questions for Resilience Action Skills
How Can I:
‣ Adjust my expectations about the future based on what I have
learned about present adversity?
‣ Nimbly change my strategies as conditions change?
‣ Put leadership mistakes in perspective and move beyond them?
‣ Find the strength to relentlessly refuse to give up, unless it’s
absolutely clear that all realistic strategies have been exhausted?
38

Reflective Questions for Resilience Action Skills
(Cont’d)
How Can I:
‣ Stay focused on what matters most among competing
demands and distractions until success is attained?
‣ Build on what I learned from having overcome adversity so I
will become even more persevering the next time it
happens?
‣ Take appropriate action under stress, even when some
things about the situation are ambiguous or confusing?
‣ Make principled decisions when faced with tremendous
pressure by outside forces?
39

Reflective Questions for Resilience Action Skills
(Cont’d)
How Can I:
‣ Know when to take needed leadership actions on unexpected
threats before they escalate out of control?
‣ Understand and accept that my leadership decisions have a longterm
impact on the organizational culture as well as on me?
‣ Better accept responsibility (in instances where I contributed to the
adversity) for making personal adjustments to correct the mistakes
made this time?
‣ Take personal responsibility for making tough decisions that may
negatively affect some individuals or groups?
40

Resilient Leaders:
Try to offset any relative leadership weakness
they have in an area by turning to others who
have strength in that area.
Remain confident that they can learn from
their adversity to help them be stronger in
the future.
41

Resilient Leaders (cont’d):
Maintain a confident presence as a leader in
the midst of adversity
Take a deliberate, step-by-step approach to
overcome adversity
Demonstrate the essential knowledge and to
lead in tough times.
42

Think about this past year when the district
faced a crisis or a dilemma bubbled up that
created stress and pressure. How did you
handle the situation?
43

How Leaders Sustain and Strengthen Personal
Efficacy
1. Consider some ways that you can increase your
sense of efficacy (the belief of your own
capability)
2. How can setting short-term, specific, attainable
goals help you to increase your sense of success?
3. Think of some “small wins” that you have
achieved recently that you may not have
previously claimed for yourself.
4. How can you recover more quickly from setbacks?
44

5. How can you reduce your defensiveness and
stay open to new information, even when it is
negative?
6. What strategies can you think of to reduce
your anxiety during moments of stress in
order to enhance your competence?
7. How can you better use your network of
personal and professional relationships to
enhance your sense of efficacy.
45

Stephen Covey – What Matters
46

How do you maintain a work / life balance
throughout the year?
How do you relax?
Who is the person that can help you?
What is your personal plan?
47

Keeping yourself whole in this work is the key
to sustainability
Brainstorm 2 minute de-stressors
Visit a classroom
Stretch
Walk
Soft music
Visual picture
Call your mentor
48

Standards For Healthy Living
49

What are you going to do
this year to take care of
yourself and maintain a
work / life balance?
50

Video
“What’s Right With The World”
51

Go the Distance
Build your strength to tackle the
leadership challenges ahead!

“Become a Resilient Front Runner ”

Presenter
Diane E. Reed, Ed.D.
Former Superintendent at Honeoye Falls-Lima
School District in Upstate New York for 14 years.
Presently Associate Professor and Co-Chair of
Graduate Educational Leadership Department,
St. John Fisher College, Rochester, NY
Website: http://soe.sjfc.edu
E-mail: dreed@sjfc.edu

Definition of Resilience
Reflects a pattern of how individuals view
their current reality and how they assess
probability of influencing the future.

Warren Bennis
American Psychologist Journal
January 2007, pg. 5
“I believe adaptive capacity or resilience is
the single most important quality in a
leader, or in anyone else for that matter,
who hopes to lead a healthy, meaningful
life.”

Definition of a Resilient Leader
A resilient leader demonstrates the ability
to recover, learn from, and grow stronger
when confronted by adversity within the
organizational context.

Assumptions About Leadership
Resilience
• Resilience is a long-term, not a short-term,
construct. A person’s resilience reflects an
overall orientation or approach to how one
responds to adversity.
• Leadership resilience refers to one’s
resilience within the particular context of
one’s leadership role.

Assumptions About Leadership
Resilience Cont’d
The term “resilient leader” is not
synonymous with the term “effective
leader.” A resilient leader is not
necessarily a highly effective leader and a
leader may be effective under so-called
normal conditions, but not be highly
resilient under adverse conditions.

The Resilience Cycle
High
Resilience Level
normal
conditions
adversity
strikes
Low Time
survival level
growth (Level II
resilience)
stability (Level
I resilience)
dysfunctional level

Leader Resilience Profile
The major goals of this project were to:
• Develop a valid, reliable instrument to
measure key indicators of educational
leaders’ resilience.
• Develop professional development
experiences to support leaders in
strengthening their leadership resilience.

Leader Resilience Profile
Take the Survey and
Get Your Individualized Profile
The web address to access the instrument
online:
http://www.theresilientleader.com

Leadership Resilience Profile
Results – Strengths Analysis
1. Were there any surprises in your profile?
Low/High?
2. Which are your strongest or most
developed?
3. Which areas need to be strengthened or
further developed?

Leadership Resilience Profile
Results – Strengths Analysis
Develop
a
Personal Development Plan

Book Title: Resilient Leadership for
Turbulent Times
•Book provides leaders with concrete, ‘how to’
strategies for strengthening their leadership
skills in the face of adversity.
•Addresses specific needs and skills required to
help leaders be successful in tough times.
•Includes first-hand accounts of how leaders
apply the concepts in real world work.

Developing Professional Growth Opportunities
to Strengthen Leaders’ Resilience
Thinking Skills
Understanding reality Optimism about the future
Capacity Skills
Values Efficacy Support Well-being
Action Skills
Courage Responsibility Perseverance Adaptability

Strength: Personal Efficacy
Chapter 4 – pages 57-68
Resilient Leaders:
• Try to offset any relative leadership
weakness they have in an area by turning
to others who have strength in that area.
• Remain confident that they can learn from
their adversity to help them be stronger in
the future.

Strength:
Personal Efficacy
Resilient Leaders (cont’d):
• Maintain a confident presence as a leader
in the midst of adversity
• Take a deliberate, step-by-step approach
to overcome adversity
• Demonstrate the essential knowledge and
to lead in tough times.

Reflective Table Discussion
Activity
Think about this past year as a Board of
Education member when the district faced
a crisis or dilemma bubbled up that
created stress and pressure. How did you
handle the situation?

Discuss the following and report out
commonalities to the total group
How Leaders Sustain and Strengthen Personal
Efficacy
1. Consider some ways that you can increase your sense
of efficacy (the belief of your own capability)
2. How can setting short-term, specific, attainable goals
help you to increase your sense of success?
3. Think of some “small wins” that you have achieved
recently that you may not have previously claimed for
yourself.
4. How can you recover more quickly from setbacks?

How Leaders Sustain and Strengthen
Personal Efficacy (Cont’d)
5. How can you reduce your defensiveness and stay
open to new information, even when it is negative?
6. What strategies can you think of to reduce your
anxiety during moments of stress in order to
enhance your competence?
7. How can you better use your network of personal
and professional relationships to enhance your
sense of efficacy.

Next Steps
• Ask your superintendent and Board of
Education to take the Leadership
Resilience Profile
• Of the nine strengths, as a Board of
Education Member focus on
Efficacy (Chapter 4)
Perseverance (Chapter 7)

Questions / Answers

PASA & Westmoreland IU 7
Superintendents’ Annual Workshop
Resilient Leadership in a Time of Challenge
Seven Springs Mountain Resort
September 8-10, 2010
Facilitator – Dr. Diane Reed
Building People And Organizations
Suite 300 Bldg 200 1250 Pittsford-Victor Rd. *Pittsford, NY 14534
Phone: (585) 264 – 0886 Fax: (585) 264 – 9029
plc200@plcassociates.com www.plcassociates.com

Warren Bennis
American Psychologist Journal
January 2007 pg. 5
“I believe adaptive capacity or resilience is the single
most important quality in a leader, or in anyone else
for that matter, who hopes to lead a healthy,
meaningful life.”
2

Reflects a pattern of how individuals view their
current reality and how they assess probability of
influencing the future.
3

A resilient leader demonstrates the ability to
recover, learn from, and grow stronger when
confronted by adversity within the organizational
context.
4

Resilience is a long-term, not a short-term,
construct. A person’s resilience reflects an overall
orientation or approach to how one responds to
adversity.
Leadership resilience refers to one’s resilience
within the particular context of one’s leadership
role.
5

The term “resilient leader” is not synonymous with
the term “effective leader.” A resilient leader is not
necessarily a highly effective leader and a leader
may be effective under so-called normal conditions,
but not be highly resilient under adverse conditions.
6

Resilience Level
High
Low
normal
conditions
adversity strikes
Time
growth (Level II
resilience)
stability (Level I
resilience)
survival level
dysfunctional level
7

The major goals of this project were to:
Develop a valid, reliable instrument to measure
key indicators of educational leaders’ resilience.
Develop professional development experiences to
support leaders in strengthening their leadership
resilience.
8

First valid, reliable instrument
that measures the resilience
strengths of leaders.
9

You took the Survey and
Got Your Individualized Profile
The web address to access the instrument online:
http://www.theresilientleader.com
10

Purpose:
The purpose of the Leadership Resilience Profile® (LRP) is
to provide you an individualized profile of your resilience
strengths. It will take you less than 30 minutes to complete
the LRP. After you respond to the items and
click submit, you will receive a profile of your resilience
strength score in twelve categories. Note, you need to read
and respond carefully to each item so that you can receive
an accurate LRP Profile.
As you read each pair of statements below, reflect on your
own leadership behavior in the face of adversity. All of the
items contain statements that most leaders would find
desirable, but we want you to answer only in terms of what
your leadership behavior is actually like.
11

Instructions:
For each of the seventy-three items, click on the
number that best describes where your leadership
behavior fits on the continuum from being like the
statement on the left to being like the statement on
the right. “1” means your leadership behavior in
the face of adversity is strongly reflected by the
statement on the left. “6” means your leadership
behavior is strongly reflected by the statement on
the right. Marking numbers 2, 3, 4, or 5 reflects
various positions in between.
12

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Low Moderately Low Moderate Moderately High Very High
Thinking Skills
Understanding Reality
Envisioning the Future
Resilience Strength Score Continuum
Strength Categories
Capacity Skills
Personal Values
Personal Efficacy
Personal Support Base
Emotional Well-Being
Spiritual Well-Being
Physical Well-Being
Action Skills
Perseverance
Adaptability
Courageous Decision Making
Personal Responsibility
13

Strengths Analysis
14

1. Were there any surprises in your profile?
Low/High?
2. Which are your strongest or most developed?
3. Which areas need to be strengthened or further
developed?
15

PASA & Westmoreland IU 7
Superintendents’ Annual Workshop
Survey Summary
Fall 2010
Important Areas For Discussion
17

Personal Efficacy
◦ Confidence and competence to lead in times of adversity
Courage
◦ Your ability to act on the courage of your convictions in a
crisis
Optimism
◦ How you think about what is going on now, and how you
think about the future
18

Moving forward to meet challenges of providing a
21 st century education to students (Getting
teachers to change)
Improving student achievement with limited
resources
Budget and finance issues
Board relations and micro-management
19

Online comments
20

Authors
Dr. Diane Reed
Dr. Jerry Patterson
Dr. George Goens
Published: Rowman and Littlefield Education,
Lanham, MD. 2009
21

•Book provides leaders with concrete, ‘how to’
strategies for strengthening their leadership skills in
the face of adversity.
•Addresses specific needs and skills required to help
leaders be successful in tough times.
•Includes first-hand accounts of how leaders apply
the concepts in real world work.
22

Thinking Skills
Understanding reality Optimism about the future
Capacity Skills
Values Efficacy Support Well-being
Action Skills
Courage Responsibility Perseverance Adaptability
25

How can I:
Effectively deal with the very real presence of ambiguity and complexity inherent
in organizational life?
Accept the reality that adversity is both inevitable and generally unexpected?
Work positively within the unavoidable constraints imposed by the reality of the
adverse circumstances?
Find ways to make a positive influence in making good things happen in a bad
situation?
Focus my energy on the opportunities, not the obstacles, found in the midst of
adversity?
Shift my thinking from ‘if only’ to ‘how can I’ thinking when faced with tough
times?
28

How Can I:
Extend my leadership ability to privately clarify and publicly
articulate my core values in the face of a storm?
Consistently align my leadership actions with what matters
most to me among competing values?
Regularly gather feedback about the alignment to make
sure I am walking my talk when the going gets rough?
Compensate for any relative weaknesses I have in an area
by turning to others who have strength in this area?
29

How Can I:
Maintain a genuinely confident presence as leader when adversity
strikes?
Build on my experiences with adversity to gain greater resilience
capacity when adversity happens again?
Better understand my emotions during adversity and how those
emotions affect my leadership performance?
Find healthy ways to channel my physical energy as a stress reliever?
Apply personal introspection and a sense of spirituality to steady myself
during adversity?
30

How Can I:
Protect the necessary time and space to replenish my capacity to
lead an emotionally, physically, and spiritually rich life?
Build the resources of a strong support base to help me through the
tough times.
Recognize and then act on the need to seek constructive advice
when adversity strikes?
Nurture and sustain trusting relationships with those who can be
supportive in difficult situations.
31

How Can I:
Adjust my expectations about the future based on
what I have learned about present adversity?
Nimbly change my strategies as conditions change?
Put leadership mistakes in perspective and move
beyond them?
Find the strength to relentlessly refuse to give up,
unless it’s absolutely clear that all realistic strategies
have been exhausted?
32

How Can I:
Stay focused on what matters most among competing
demands and distractions until success is attained?
Build on what I learned from having overcome adversity so
I will become even more persevering the next time it
happens?
Take appropriate action under stress, even when some
things about the situation are ambiguous or confusing?
Make principled decisions when faced with tremendous
pressure by outside forces?
33

How Can I:
Know when to take needed leadership actions on
unexpected threats before they escalate out of control?
Understand and accept that my leadership decisions have
a long-term impact on the organizational culture as well as
on me?
Better accept responsibility (in instances where I
contributed to the adversity) for making personal
adjustments to correct the mistakes made this time?
Take personal responsibility for making tough decisions
that may negatively affect some individuals or groups?
34

Chapter Six
Resilience: Courage, Perseverance, and Speaking Out
September 4 1
I have learned that leadership for social justice is all about resilience,
about pressing on in the face of obstacles, about never feeling powerless,
and remaining ever aware of the meaning behind the struggle.
--Joanne Chesley, Overcoming Injustice: A Tradition of Resilience
Courage and determined perseverance are inherent in social justice leadership, which by
its nature always remains unfinished. Those who wish to shape a more just future by challenging
and changing the status quo must speak out and be resilient. Women leaders who trouble the
bureaucracy in the name of social justice invite opposition (Blackmore 1999, 2002). Clearly, for
women resilience is required for social justice leadership. Many definitions have been advanced,
but generally resilience can be defined as the ability to overcome challenges, turn them into
opportunity, and be transformed by the experience.
Resilience calls on intellectual, psychological, and spiritual qualities. Researchers
suggest that resilience can be learned (Richardson 2002). According to Coutu (2002), “More
than education, more than experience, more than training, a person’s level of resilience will
determine who succeeds and who fails” (3). She describes resilience as the capacity for
meaning-making, a “way resilient people build bridges from present-day hardships to a fuller,
better constructed future” (4). The meaning of the quest is why leaders for social justice remain
resilient in the face of the distance between the present and the future they envision.
In the words of Bateson (1989), “Because we are engaged in a day-by-day process of self
invention – not discovery, for what we search for does not exist until we find it – both the past
and the future are raw material, shaped and reshaped by each individual” (28). As illustrated by
the narratives of women featured in this chapter, resilience is something we can find and resilient

September 4 2
is something we can become as we live into the personal and professional transformations of our
lives. Kleinerman (2010) believes that “To truly know your identity, you must first know your
voice” (18). To transform opportunities for others to lead and learn through social justice
leadership may mean we first transform ourselves, find our own voices. In this chapter we focus
on three qualities of resilience that recurred in the WLE narratives of intertwined personal and
professional journeys. These qualities associated with resilience are courage, perseverance, and
speaking out. Although these and other qualities, beliefs, and behaviors that comprise resilience
have been identified from a variety of perspectives, no formula for resilience exists.
Resilience – The Stories
Becoming energized instead of overcome by the immense challenges of social justice
leadership demonstrates resilience. For many leaders the qualities undergirding their resilience
developed with the support of family and mentors over time in response to recurring adversities.
A few seem to have been born with perseverance and the courage to speak out. Although each
life story in this chapter illustrates multiple aspects of resilience, one story will be featured for
each of the qualities. The three featured leaders are: (1) Courage – Diane Reed, Associate
Professor and Co-Director of the Graduate Education Leadership Department at St. John Fisher
College located in Rochester, New York; (2) Perseverance – Panpim Cheaupalakit, Senior
Lecturer at the Graduate School, Srinakharinwirot University in Bangkok, Thailand; and (3)
Speaking Out – Joyce Wilson-Tagoe, a Lecturer in the Centre for Teacher Development and
Action Research in the Institute for Educational Development and Extension at the University of
Education in Winneba, Ghana.
Courage
Early etymology of the English word courage reveals French, Italian, Spanish, and Latin

September 4 3
words that all essentially mean “heart, which remains a common metaphor for inner strength”
(Online Etymology Dictionary). In Middle English courage was “used broadly for ‘what is in
one’s mind or thoughts’.” Once associated with mind, disposition, and spirit, today courage is
most often associated with bravery and actions. Writers of seven narratives used the word
courage. For example, Angeliki Lazaridou acknowledged that the support of her parents gave me
“the courage to persevere and overcome” the challenges faced in her educational journey.
Speaking of her first higher education administrative position, Margaret Grogan wrote that with a
colleague providing encouragement she “found courage to accept the role of program
coordinator at UVA (University of Virginia).” Helen Sobehart’s use of the word refers to the
difficulty of expressing “innermost feelings,” an early definition associated with courage as
heart. She reflected, “While I had the courage to use the power that I had professionally, I did
not give voice to my inner self that was struggling with what success meant personally.” Actions
of courage sometimes come from those discussions we have with our inner selves. Courage is
manifested in the world, but comes from the heart.
Courage is required when adversity and disruptions, both planned and unplanned, require
resilience to survive. “Disruptions mean that an individual’s intact world paradigm is changed
and may result in perceived negative or positive outcomes” (Richardson 2002, 311). Examples
of disruptions expected to result in positive outcomes – such as a new job, getting married, or
going to school – sometimes have unintended consequences in our lives. Examples of
disruptions less positive include losing a job, family difficulties, divorce, or illness to name only
a few possibilities. These are often in retrospect labeled turning points. Whatever their cause or
label, facing the adversity of an experience that dissolves a comfortable paradigm calls for
courage. As defined by a participant in a study by Baldwin, Maldondo, Lacey, and Efinger

September 4 4
(2004), resiliency is “the ability to accept adversity as part of life, and to step through it and
beyond it with courage and determination and trust” (19).
Major life turning points requiring courage to step through and beyond were described in
16 of the WLE narratives. Many of these were times of self-searching, looking for the way
forward, heard in these words from Rachel McNae, New Zealand: “Recently I have had to
recreate myself, re-identify with what makes me who I am. I am still not sure. I have been
shown that I can have almost anything that I can aspire to in a career, with a family.
Opportunities abound. I have been thinking recently whether having it all is actually all that it is
cracked up to be.” Ten of the stories included descriptions of the process of reintegrating after
confronting challenging personal situations, such as divorce. For example, Linda Lyman, United
States, grappled with unintended consequences of seeking a doctoral degree. “When I first
enrolled in the doctoral program in 1987 my thought was to finish it, return to North Platte,
resume my former life, and become a principal. With my marriage over, that pathway no longer
existed. The road led on but I did not know where.”
Diane Reed
Diane Reed titled her narrative “A Story for my Daughter Ashley,” prefacing it with a
reflective quotation about life’s journey from a book of meditations that included this line: “It is
in the end – in the bittersweet of looking back – that you can see the true beauty of the journey”
(Bethany House 2005, 242). In her 39 years of experience as an educator Diane served as an
elementary teacher and secondary English teacher, elementary school principal, assistant
superintendent, and superintendent. From 2003 – 2010 she was a member of the Governing
Board of the American Association of School Administrators (AASA). As a member of that
board she traveled extensively internationally. She worked in schools and met with various

September 4 5
ministers of education during these travels that took her to eight countries: Peru, Italy, Ireland,
Argentina, China, Thailand, Australia, and New Zealand. She emphasized, “I am deeply
committed to supporting education for children throughout the world, because education follows
birth as the greatest gift anyone can receive.” Finally fulfilling a lifetime dream of teaching at the
college level, since 2005 Diane has been an Associate Professor and Co-Director of the Graduate
Education Leadership Department at St. John Fisher College located in Rochester, New York,
USA.
Diane’s narrative begins with the circumstances surrounding the marriage of her parents
and her birth. Her father’s family was from Muncie, Indiana. Her mother was the youngest
daughter of first generation immigrants from Germany who came to New York City to start a
new life. Her grandfather was a waiter at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel in New York City. Her
parents met there and her mother was 18 when she married. Her father was serving in the Navy
during World War II, so her mother moved to Indiana to live with her father’s parents and go to
college. Diane wrote, “When my mother found out she was pregnant she was most upset
because all she wanted to do was finish college and graduate with a B.A. degree. She left and
moved back to New York with her parents.” Diane was born in New York City on December 6,
1946.
Challenges surrounded Diane from the time of her birth through her childhood. Her
father found out he had a daughter through a communication from the Red Cross when Diane
was 9 months old. Her parents divorced and a difficult custody battle lasted for many years.
Basically Diane lived with her mother and her parents for the school year and with her father and
his parents for the summer months. She wrote, “I always had much family support and was
loved.” Her father remarried and had three sons. Her mother did not remarry until after her

September 4 6
father died. Diane wrote, “He committed suicide. I was very close to him and was devastated.”
She was 11 years old when she lived through this major untimely loss.
Although each began well, Diane’s three marriages to educators added to her experiences
of adversity. In each case differences in values took Diane and her marriage partners on
different paths. When she was in college Diane married her high school boyfriend. After they
put themselves through college, Diane began teaching middle school English when she was 20
years old. During her 11 years of teaching she earned a master’s degree in reading, then went
back to school to earn administrative certification required to be a district reading coordinator.
Her husband, on the other hand, started teaching but did not like it. She wrote, “He then became
a buyer of men’s clothing for a department store and started traveling. We grew apart and did
not share the same values so we divorced when we were in our twenties.”
Diane remarried at 29 and became an elementary principal when she was 32, serving in
that position for 9 years. She wrote, “My second husband had a large, very close family and I
loved being part of them.” During this time she and her husband tried to have children,
eventually adopting “a newborn healthy boy.” As a busy elementary principal she described
herself as “a driven person and a workaholic” who struggled with balancing her career and
family. “I loved being a mother, yet wanted to continue my education and earn a doctorate in
curriculum as I always knew I wanted to eventually teach full-time at the college level. While I
was a successful administrator I never really wanted to be one. My real passion has always been
teaching.”
Adding doctoral study to raising a child and being a principal increased her stress.
Balancing a career and family became increasingly difficult after Diane finished her doctorate
and became an assistant superintendent in a new district in upstate New York. When she was 42,

September 4 7
she and her husband adopted a second child – “a beautiful newborn baby girl.” She described
her husband as being “about image and making lots of money.” Describing their life she wrote,
“Once again our values were different and we grew apart. My core values are family,
spirituality, and education. People and relationships are a top priority. Money has never
mattered to me and with all the areas I was juggling I was just trying to survive and keep it all
together and be successful.” Meanwhile, “my husband wanted little to do with family
responsibilities as he was struggling to make his fame and fortune.” Diane developed what she
called a “super woman” routine, “doing night baby feedings while developing curriculum
management systems and proving myself in a man’s world.”
Diane was offered the superintendent’s position after five years in the district. Initially
reluctant, she decided to apply when asked by a few of the board members. She was in the top
six of over 100 applicants. Living outside the district, she was asked about residency in the final
interview. “I told them it had not been a requirement when I applied for the assistant
superintendent job and the answer I gave them was I was not going to move. I only lived thirty
minutes from the district.” She got the call with the job offer at midnight and the invitation to
start contract negotiations the next day. She wrote, “My husband was less than happy. It really
was the final straw in our relationship.”
Assuming the new position, Diane quickly understood that “I did not know anything
about being a superintendent.” One neighboring female superintendent called the first morning
and gave her advice on negotiating her contract. “She saved my life on a number of occasions.
She was a pro at negotiating in a man’s world,” Diane wrote. In the beginning she relied on her
exceptional administrative assistant to help her handle tasks of both her old and new positions.
The process of hiring a new assistant superintendent took six months. In Diane’s first year as

September 4 8
superintendent the budget was defeated and all her contracts were up for negotiations. “It took
two and one-half years to settle the teacher contract. We only survived because of the
relationships I had built as assistant superintendent with the Union and staff.” With a focus on
student achievement and teaching and learning, she built a successful administrative team
through emphasizing team building and resiliency.
Diane’s second marriage ended in divorce as her successful superintendent career
unfolded. She faced it courageously, ending up declaring financial bankruptcy, while ‘he went
on to build a highly lucrative business.” Her first marriage lasted seven years and the second
lasted twenty years. The third time she married a successful superintendent for whom she had
worked. He took a new superintendent position in downstate New York. “He lost that job and
went through a period of depression” before finding another position, she wrote. Then for seven
years they had a commuter marriage until he retired as a superintendent, took an administrative
position with a local college, left Diane, and filed for divorce. Speaking for herself and other
women who have faced divorce she wrote, “Divorces are costly financially, costly emotionally,
and costly for the children. Many have paid a high price for professional successes.” Summing
up her experiences with marriage, Diane wrote, “I have chosen to marry traditional men who
want strong women until they marry them.”
Mentoring and networking were at the heart of Diane’s success in the superintendency as
she joined local, state, and national leadership organizations, achieving leadership roles at all
levels. For six years she was on the Executive Committee of the New York State Council of
School Superintendents (NYSCOSS), where she held the offices of Treasurer, Vice-President
and President-Elect. For four years she was Co-Chair of the New York State Association of
Women in Administration (NYSAWA). During this time she became most aware that “women

September 4 9
and minorities need a champion.” It was because of her experience in this organization that
Diane began to focus on social justice. “Social justice became a passion of mine and led me to
an ongoing annual national conference on women in educational leadership at the University of
Nebraska-Lincoln, which led me to WLE and Helen Sobehart.”
Diane has conducted workshops and presentations for thousands of educators and other
leaders on leadership development, personal and organizational resilience, and strategic planning
to get high student achievement results. A professional contact through AASA with Dr. Jerry
Patterson led Diane to the study of resiliency. A retired superintendent and professor at the
University of Alabama at Birmingham, for over ten years Dr. Patterson worked with her district
to facilitate the yearly administrative summer training programs on his research specialty –
resiliency. Given her own multiple experiences of adversity, these programs had a profound
influence on Diane and changed her life both personally and professionally. “He coached me
through many difficult situations that I encountered with the Board of Education throughout my
fourteen years as superintendent.” When she was offered a full time college position teaching he
helped her to “let go of the superintendency as I struggled to reinvent myself professionally.”
She credited Dr. Patterson with mentoring her through the transition to being an academic,
teaching her how to write and publish, as well as co-authoring publications centered on
resiliency and leadership (e.g., Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2008; Patterson, Goens, and Reed
2009; Reed and Patterson, 2007).
Looking back on her life Diane feels “blessed in so very many ways.” She has “two
wonderful and successful children,” her health, and a meaningful professional career. She wrote,
“I am at the stage in my life where mentoring future educational leaders, particularly women, is a
high priority.” Diane wrote proudly about her daughter as she ended the narrative with hopes

for the future success of all women leaders.
Insights
Ashley is definitely a feminist who will find her passion and I am confident will
September 4 10
champion women’s leadership in a global 21 st century world. She is a fearless woman
and hopefully will continue the work of her mother and WLE and women throughout the
world to promote education for all and support female leaders as they continue the
progress made by our generation. There are many miles to go before we get there and we
need both males and females to advance this most critical cause of educating and
supporting all women in every country of the world.
Diane wrote about the adversities she experienced in a matter-of-fact tone conveying
realistic optimism, a characteristic of resilience (Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2009). The endings
of each of her marriages could have crushed her spirit. Instead, she took “partial responsibility”
for the marriage failures and sought counseling. She did not dissolve, but persisted in a process
of reintegration, maintaining her priorities. Each time a marriage ended, she demonstrated the
resilient reintegration that “results in growth, knowledge, self-understanding, and increased
strength of resilient qualities” (Richardson 2002, 310). Realistic optimism and strong values led
her in the tasks of courageous decision-making. She moved forward personally and
professionally. She lived courageously, and remained guided by her core heart values: “family,
spirituality, and education.”
Diane believes “role models and networking continue to be the key” to inspiring both
individual growth and transformation of society. She confronted a variety of challenges and
crises in her 14 years as a superintendent. The reality of transformation through resilience that
she studied and wrote about was something she lived as a superintendent: “Resilient

September 4 11
superintendents possess the ability to recover, learn and grow stronger when confronted by
chronic or crisis adversity” (Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2008, 28). A quality that supported her
during both the personal and professional experiences with adversity was her faith. She wrote,
“To this day I am a deeply spiritual person and have a deep faith in God. This has and continues
to guide me through my successes and struggles.”
Leadership in AASA transformed Diane’s view of the world, broadening her horizon to
include a vision of what education should be for children all around the world. She calls
“fanning the flame for social justice” the number one priority in her life professionally at this
point. Her story offers insights into how resilience is developed and can lead to advocacy for
social justice causes. In the end, actions born of resiliency are what matter. A book she co-
authored offers this insight: “But if the leader does not act on the courage of convictions,
especially during difficult times, then everything else is just talk” (Patterson, Goens, and Reed,
2009, 10-11). Diane continues to live the courage of her convictions.
Perseverance
Perseverance is considered an action skill of resilient leadership by scholars and former
practitioners Patterson, Goens, and Reed (2009). Challenging the status quo requires strength in
the form of perseverance, which they define as the ability to “pursue a course of action,
consistent with their core values about what matters most, and without regard for
discouragement, barriers, or previous failure – unless it is absolutely clear all realistic strategies
have been exhausted” (106). In a study of resilient women administrators Christmann and
McClellan (2007) asked the seven participants to identify components of their own resiliency
and engaged them in a process of rank ordering all responses from the group. The quality of
perseverance was ranked second overall. Perseverance functions as an internal resilience

September 4 12
sustainer, whether it is something innate or a quality instilled by family and arising from life
circumstances (Baldwin et al. 2004).
Perseverance is particularly important for women leaders in cultures and fields where
men are clearly dominant and in positions of authority, as is true in educational leadership in
both highly developed and less developed countries. The WLE narratives collectively support
the idea that perseverance can be instilled by family. Writers of 21 narratives described support
from families and 18 identified one or more mentors who inspired their strength.
Supporting family and mentors were important in developed countries as well as in
cultures that do not generally support education for girls. For example, Alice Merab Kagoda,
Uganda, told of support from both of her parents. “My parents, especially my father was a great
inspiration because of his love, encouragement, and confidence that I would go to the university.
I was his first daughter to acquire secondary education and perhaps the first in our clan, whose
men didn’t believe in girls’ education.” She wrote about her mother, “My mother had basic
education and was a trained vernacular teacher. She gave me the motherly, loving, moral and
psychological support which kept me in school.” Marianne Coleman, United Kingdom,
described both family support and professional mentors in these words:
I have also been incredibly fortunate in the people that I have met who have given me
chances to change and to develop, my parents who supported me in going to the USA and
to University, my husband who supported me in my work, particularly when I changed
careers into higher education and research, the mentors in the early stages of my
academic career, and the chance meetings which resulted in my career taking fresh
directions.
Panpim Cheaupalakit

September 4 13
Panpim Cheaupalakit was born in Tah-Sao, a town of 3,000-5,000 in Uttaradit province
in the northern part of Thailand. Hers is a story of perseverance, illuminating how resilience
arises from the interaction of internal qualities and external supporting factors. Now in her early
fifties, she lives in Bangkok where she is a Senior Lecturer in the International College for
Sustainability Studies and the Department of Educational Administration at Srinakharinwirot
University. Previously she had served in university administrative positions, including being
dean of the International College for Sustainability Studies, director of the Office of International
Relations, and Chief of Finance. She titled her narrative The Journey of Life.
“I grew up in an ordinary Thai-Chinese family where the children took care of each other
during the day as both our parents worked,” she began. Her Thai mother married her widowed
Chinese father when she was 20 and her father was 40. “My dad was handsome and relatively
wealthy and had been chosen by my mother’s parents in an arranged marriage. She was actually
involved in a relationship with another man, but at that time a young woman was not able to
choose her own husband.” When her parents married, Panpim’s father already had 6 children, the
eldest a girl who was only a year younger than Panpim’s mother. Then 7 more girls and 1 boy
were born to this Thai-Chinese family, making a total of 14 children, 10 girls and 4 boys. Panpim
considers her mother to be her first role model, describing her as “full of passion, strong, and
thoughtful.” Continuing, she wrote, “Undeniably, my early years had considerable influence on
my beliefs and aspirations and helped to make me who I am today.”
In many families, girls were not encouraged to study because in the Thai-Chinese culture
a girl would no longer belong to the family once she married and moved out to live with her
husband’s family. “Unlike other Thai-Chinese families, we were fortunate that our mother
wanted all of her kids to study as much as they could. She also encouraged and supported one of

September 4 14
her step sons who performed well in school to study further.” Panpim observed, “At that time
my mother’s passion for education was rare and even weird in some people’s eyes. Although
she was mocked, mom continued to believe that education could help her kids to be productive
members of society.”
When Panpim was between 3 and 4 years old the family house accidently burned down.
Her father had not bought insurance. The family suffered a lot from this even though he was
able to rebuild the house with the help of grandparents. To help financially, her mother moved
back to her family in Pah-Kluay to generate income through her parents’ farming business.
Except for a brother, who went to Bangkok to pursue his studies, all of the children stayed in
town with their father. She wrote, “Dad took us to see mom approximately once a month. She
worked very hard to make sure that she earned enough to fully support my brother’s study.” The
distance to where her mother lived was only about 5 kilometers, but it was on the opposite side
of the Narn River and the walk took an hour or more (P. C., June 28, 2011, e-mail message to
author). Her parents lived separately until Panpim was 12-13 years old, when some of her step
sisters married and moved out.
Panpim’s education began when she was four at a home school near her house, a place
where about 15 four to six year olds were taught in one large room in three groups separated
according to age. Panpim wrote, “I was a sociable child and I quickly became accustomed to the
school environment. I even helped the teacher take care of some new students who were upset
and crying for their mothers. I was more mature than other children, perhaps because of the way
I was raised at home.” When she was seven, Panpim entered compulsory basic education at a
grades 1-7 school within walking distance of her home. She took on a leadership role as the
head of class almost every year except when she was in first grade. At school she did better than

September 4 15
her male classmates. She was an excellent math student, but performed poorly in English. By
sixth grade she started helping friends who were not good at mathematics and geometry. They
would do homework together and her friends would buy her a meal after school. It was at this
time that she began thinking she wanted to become a teacher when she grew up. How she
moved from this childhood dream to her present university teaching position is a story of
perseverance.
“In our family, the parents never spent leisure time with their young kids,” she wrote.
Panpim began taking care of her two year old sister when she was 11. Looking back she sees
this as one of her first leadership roles.
The free time that I had previously enjoyed after school became a thing of the past when
my babysitting role began, but I didn’t really feel bad about it. It was something we were
prepared for by our culture. At that time, my older sister took care of me. While I was
babysitting our youngest sister, my older sister helped me with my homework and taught
me how to take care of the baby. All of my mom’s 7 girls had some chores to do besides
their studies.
In fact, it was only her brother who had no domestic duties. He needed to study hard to perform
well at school.
After finishing basic education Panpim entered a high school in town for girls from
grades 8-12. Panpim demonstrated her strength and ability to speak out against injustice in grade
11 when she led a group of students in a protest against an election for student president.
We were unsatisfied with campaigns which were unfairly supported by the deputy
principal for student affairs and we fought for a new election. Although we lost the
battle, we had set the standard for the next elections to come. School administrators and

teacher are supposed to dispense justice rather than take sides.
September 4 16
She wrote, “Dad didn’t like it when I got myself into trouble but mom never complained as long
as I could give her good reasons.”
When Panpim finished high school, her “academic performance was believed to be too
good to become a school teacher” so the Thai system did not allow her to enter a school of
education to become a teacher. Instead she moved to Bangkok where she entered a Business
Administration program majoring in accounting. Once again she had free meals in return for
tutoring her friends, which “convinced me that I really could become a good teacher in the
future.” When she graduated from college she decided to work as an accountant for
Srinakharinwirot University, a public university, although she could have made more money
with a company. Perseverance was a factor in her choosing a job at a university. She had not
given up the dream of becoming a teacher.
Panpim took the university accounting position so she could continue her studies there
and be qualified to become a university professor. A year later she enrolled in the master of
educational administration program. It was difficult because she didn’t have enough work
experience and she was also the youngest student. She wrote, “It was the first time I felt
completely inferior.” However, she persevered. She tutored classmates on statistics and
research methods, and in return “my senior friends welcomed me to their groups.” She learned
much through determined hard work and from her classmates. Continuing to work at the
university, she was promoted to head of the Office of Finance.
In 1994 when university campuses within Bangkok were consolidated Panpim was
moved to the main campus and transferred to the Office of International Relations where she
worked with a vice president from whom she learned how to think ‘out of the box’. Eventually

September 4 17
she was promoted to director of the Office of International Studies. Because of continuing
challenges with English, “I wasn’t comfortable with the new assignment and wanted to quit,” she
wrote. The first female university president personally asked Panpim to persevere, becoming her
second role model after her mother. The president encouraged her self confidence and hired an
English expert to facilitate running the office. Together they arranged several international
conferences. Panpim wrote, “Working closely with her I learned so much about trust and
empowerment. She opened my eyes to a lot of things.”
With her English gradually improving, Panpim was awarded a graduate assistantship to
pursue a Ph.D. at Illinois State University in the spring of 1999. She met with the president prior
to taking a study leave of absence and the woman’s words still echo and have kept her at
Srinakharinwirot although she has had better financial offers. The president said, “I wish you
well in your studies, as if you were my blood sister. Promise that you will come back and never
leave the university. Listen, someday you will become somebody important and you will make
us proud.”
Doctoral study was not difficult for her in terms of subject matter, but Panpim found the
English challenging. Characteristically, she persevered. She worked hard, taking two to three
times longer to do the reading and writing as her native English speaking friends. Through this
hard work her English improved, and once again she made use of her strength in mathematics to
succeed and help others be successful. “My numeracy skills enabled me to assist my professor
to prepare for her research methods classes. I was also popular among my close friends as I
helped them with statistics and research methods. In return they edited my pieces of writing.”
During doctoral study she was assigned to read Mary Wollstonecraft’s A Vindication of
the Rights of Women, first published in 1792. That assignment raised Panpim’s awareness of

gender equality. “I was shocked at first, but eventually came to realize that I had actually
September 4 18
experienced ‘gender inequality’ throughout my life without knowing – at home and at university.
The Thai-Chinese culture inculcated me to comply with the norms of Thai society.” She
continued,
I thought of my mom and wondered if she were me now, would she stand up and fight for
her rights. I ended up choosing gender and leadership for my dissertation. Through my
research, I learned so much about gender issues, oppression, and barriers . . . I felt like I
had awakened from a good dream and faced an unknown, unjust world. I didn’t know
yet what to do about this.
A classmate told her, “Panpim, when you go back home, your folks will notice that you
aren’t the same person they knew.” Panpim agreed, “This class changed us a lot.” Having
earned a Ph.D., Panpim returned home in 2002 to her post as Director of International Relations.
She also became part of the team establishing a new International College for Sustainability
Studies, where she later became interim dean. She wrote, “I did not forget to add gender issues
into the course curricula in the new program.”
In 2008 Panpim decided it was time to follow her childhood dream of becoming a
teacher, so she entered the teaching ranks at her university after 25 years in higher education
administration. Now she has time to conduct research and do the social justice work that she has
always wanted to do, including research on women leaders in education in Thailand. She has
researched, spoken and written about other social justice topics, such as sustainability studies and
eco-tourism in the Western Forest Complex in Thailand. She is also working with her colleagues
on a research grant on domestic violence, including violence affecting female prisoners. She
wrote, “I fully hope that our research will have an impact on waking up women as well as

idging the gender gap.” In closing her narrative Panpim wrote,
Insights
September 4 19
I don’t know which experiences have most influenced my ideology. What I know is that
experiences I gained throughout my life have still reverberated back and forth in my
heart, at different times, and during different experiences. For one, my mother’s
experience of married life encouraged me to stay single. Definitely, I am the sum total of
all my past experiences.”
Panpim’s leadership story is a journey of perseverance and hard work. Her narrative
illustrated internal qualities and external factors that contribute to resilience, suggesting that
resilience in her case was perhaps both innate and learned. Perseverance was definitely instilled
by her family. Panpim’s leadership qualities and maturity already were showing by age four
when she first went to school. Her home responsibilities developed internal qualities such as
self-efficacy, determination, and dreams. Her strong mother valued and supported her
educational journey. Panpim has survived and grown through disruptions, such as the
approximately nine years in which her mother was away, and when she was blocked from
studying to be a teacher, and when English continued to challenge her as she continued her
education all the way to a doctorate. She reports being changed by the knowledge of how she
had experienced gender inequality throughout her life, unknowingly, as she complied with the
norms of Thai society.
Panpim’s perseverance and administrative career in academia are unusual for a woman in
Thai culture, where male domination of top leadership roles is the norm at universities and
elsewhere. In her dissertation examining the glass ceiling in Thai culture, she used a Thai saying
to illustrate how the gender dynamic works: “Men as those who lead are like the forelegs of an

September 4 20
elephant, while women, as those who follow, are the hind legs.” She continued, “Most Thai
people live in a Thai-Chinese culture in which men are head of the household and women are
placed in a lower status. Men focus on career success, knowledge seeking, and freedom,
whereas women emphasize love, family, and are dependent on their husbands” (Cheaupalakit
2002, 72). Although still widely believed to be inferior to men, Thai women are seeking equal
status so this is changing. Panpim (2002) reported in her dissertation as a sign of progress that
“today women administrators no longer consider themselves abnormal” (75). Nevertheless,
career advancement for women has been and continues to be blocked by cultural barriers.
Today some women are choosing to reject administrative roles because of difficulty in
creating a balance of career and family responsibilities and priorities. Having chosen to remain
single, Panpim’s motivation is different. In shifting her position from administration to teaching,
Panpim is actualizing a childhood dream of becoming a teacher. In some cultures moving from
administration to teaching would be considered strange. Panpim (Cheaupalakit 2009) explained,
however, that “Thai culture inculcates women to believe that they can be successful without
having to be in administration” (30-31). In making the choice to teach she is transforming her
life to be in greater harmony with her values and desire to contribute to social justice outcomes
for women in her country.
Speaking Out
In connection with women’s development, Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule
(1986) wrote that “women repeatedly use the metaphor of voice to depict their intellectual and
ethical development; and that the development of a sense of voice, mind and self were intricately
intertwined” (18). Kleinerman (2010) understood that “without question, women in every age

September 4 21
have fought for the right to be heard, to participate in the leadership of their societies, to have
voice both metaphorically and literally” (2).
Speaking of the institutions of higher education Chan (2010) wrote, “Voice is constructed
in terms of self-expression, talking back, speaking out, and breaking silence . . .Voice highlights
the issue of speaking for oneself and the ability to declare that there are injustices and problems
within the institution” (2). She continued, “The concept of coming to voice can be used to
acknowledge that many women and minority groups have been silenced by the power of
institutional discourses” (2). Ultimately leadership for social justice requires us to consider
larger social issues and the power of institutions in our countries as we work to reduce inequity
of opportunity for girls to be educated and women to lead.
Across many cultures, speaking out by women has historically been associated with
bringing shame to one’s families. Jamieson (1995) identified silence/shame as one of the double
binds faced by women who wanted a life in the public sphere. A double bind with its two
alternatives sets up a limited reality with “one or both penalizing the person being offered them.
In the history of humans, such choices have been constructed to deny women access to power
and, where individuals manage to slip past their constraints, to undermine their exercise of
whatever power they achieve” (13-14). Jamieson gave examples from history of how women
who have risked speaking in public have been characterized or labeled as whores, as heresiarchs,
as witches, and as hysterics. In the United States, “even after women were granted access to
higher education, their right to present their own ideas in public was denied” (83).
Risks of speaking out still include types of retaliation by those in power. Helen Sobehart
was aware of that she was taking a risk when she spoke to a Sister who was the administrator of

September 4 22
her Catholic high school. The Sister suggested she give up some of her extracurricular activities
so she could maintain her first in the class status, from which she had slipped. She wrote,
I still remember my heart pounding rapidly as I contemplated what to say. . . I had been
raised to be respectful of, and even compliant to, adults, especially religious figures. A
little voice in me said, “Say yes, it’s the right thing to do.” However, my real voice said,
“If being involved with helping others comes at the expense of my being first in the class,
so be it. My GPA is something of which my parents and school can be proud, but my
real strength is in helping others.”
The Sister pronounced her disappointment and asked Helen to leave.
The importance of speaking out is embedded in all 23 narratives in descriptions of the
growth of feminist perspectives and awareness of gender inequalities. For many, these new
perspectives typically reflected both educational and intellectual passages. Narratives of nine
women referred to voice or speaking out. For example, Sister Hellen Bandiho said that through
her doctoral study she “was able to find her own voice on issues.” Not wanting to fulfill a
secretarial role, Charol Shakeshaft discovered as a female graduate student wanting to work with
a professor as the male graduate students did, that no professor would work with her. She wrote,
“I learned that speaking out against inequality would result in isolation. “ Women educational
leaders around the world take risks through speaking out to challenge the status quo and to
protect their rights. Speaking out is an action central to descriptions of social justice leadership
included in the narratives.
Joyce Wilson-Tagoe
A woman who understood speaking out at an early age is Joyce Wilson-Tagoe from
Winneba, Ghana. Her story illustrates multiple risks by an outspoken woman who has

tenaciously pursued the right to be who she is and achieve her goals. Her story illustrates
September 4 23
courage and perseverance, as well as speaking out. Joyce is actively involved with teacher
education, student and community activities. A full time Lecturer at The University of
Education, Winneba, she belongs to the University Teachers Association of Ghana. She has
facilitated collaboration workshops on school leadership and teaching English in secondary
schools between the Ghana National Association of Teachers and other teacher organizations
since 1996. “Her interest in gender issues was aroused when she started tertiary education and
realized the unfair differences that existed between males and females within the job sector and
the huge conflicting economic and domestic roles that women twirl in. She has always tried to
look at the role gender plays in all the activities” (WLE Conference Program 2009, 32).
Joyce titled her story Decades of My Life because every ten years she found herself going
through a change. Both of her parents were teachers and she grew up with three sisters and one
foster brother. When she was born as the third child and second daughter of her parents, she was
christened Joyce because her mother “read a story and liked what the character Joyce was – a
strong character.” The name seems to have been prophetic. She comes from Atorkor, a small
coastal town in the southern part of Ghana in the Volta region. Joyce is from a royal family, the
granddaughter of a chief of Keta, the administrative headquarters of the Trans Volta Togoland,
and the great granddaughter of the first prominent ruler of Atorkor, which was a former trading
post during the trans-Atlantic slave trade.
“My childhood was full of adventure,” she wrote, “and I remember they were years when
I freely spoke my mind without inhibition. There were arguments with my dad about stories I
read and what I thought about the characters.” She began reading at the age of three, starting
school at the age of six. Her teacher parents were frequently transferred to other towns or

September 4 24
regions of the country. By age ten she had moved several times to six of the nine regions then
existing in Ghana. She enjoyed the traveling and meeting new people so much she once wanted
to be a journalist. She learned to speak several languages and dialects. During a period of being
home schooled along with her siblings, her parents allowed Joyce to read a lot of fiction and
gave her the opportunity to try her hand at anything, including “cooking very sumptuous dishes,
singing solos and acting in school dramas.” She wrote, “Those early years of my life maybe
introduced me to what I would now call some qualities of leadership.”
Along with this freedom to explore her interests, however, she lived with a father who
was a very strict headmaster of the school he administered and carried that strictness into his
home. Joyce explained, “My mother had to always agree with whatever decision he took, but he
found himself saddled with a daughter who had a mind of her own. At an early age I found
myself not conforming to rules and was fond of asking why I should be compelled to do as
others say when I needed answers to why I should do such things anyway.” Joyce’s mother, who
preferred not to rock the boat, called her headstrong. She was always more like her paternal
grandmother who was very outspoken and resilient in the face of troubles. Writing about her
grandmother, Joyce said, “I understand that she hated injustice and would fight tooth and nail to
see justice accorded where it was due, and she would beat her chest to show the men that they
have no business toying with her or she will teach them a lesson or two.” Everyone in the family
recognized that Joyce took after this grandmother who had died when Joyce was just two.
The decade of her adolescence began with a major military coup led by a native of her
town, to remove Dr. Kwame Nkrumah as the president of Ghana. She wrote, “The 24 th of
February, 1966, was just like any other ordinary day. We went to school very early and as usual
my class joined the middle school for morning assembly. Then the news about the coup flashed!

September 4 25
The first coup in Ghana! It was led by a native of our town! What was going to happen to us?”
People were killed and the whole community “was jubilating over the overthrow of a so-called
dictator of Ghana.”
Against a backdrop of communal celebration, eleven-year-old Joyce loudly asked an
impertinent ‘why’ question about the violence. She reports that her mother nearly died of a heart
attack hearing her speak out openly and the family decided it was “time to make me learn from
my experiences.” Her father said to her mother, “She must go with me on my transfer.” And so
the family was separated for several years with her mother and two younger sisters staying in her
home town while she went many miles away with her father to Saltpond where he joined the
Ministry of Education’s Curricula and Courses Division.
During this time with her strict father she learned patience and how to talk through a
problem and find solutions to it. She learned about life’s injustices when she was not well-
accepted at a girls-only Catholic middle school. She spent much time with books brought by the
mobile library service of the Ghana Library Board. Entering secondary school at 13, she honed
her leadership qualities, did well in final examinations, and could have continued to college but
got married instead and “had a beautiful baby girl” when she was 20. Her father was unhappy
about her decision to be a housewife, believing that she would make a fine lawyer since she
excelled at speaking out.
When her husband went to the United States to attend college Joyce moved back with her
parents. Her mother retired from teaching prematurely to look after the baby so Joyce could go
back to school to study to become a teacher. However, her husband was not happy about the
idea of a working wife. She wrote,
We never seemed to agree on anything and he kept deriding my ‘clowning’ in front of

September 4 26
children in the name of teaching. I found out too late that he [my husband] had no respect
for women who want to stand for their rights as sensible, thinking beings. I was so
disappointed at his disrespect and abusive ways that it took me five long years to realize
that I am a strong women who can achieve anything I want if only I persevere and work
hard at it.
In the teaching college she served as head girl, and the male teachers who ridiculed the girl
students provided Joyce with an incentive to work harder. In the end, “she was the only girl
alongside nine boys who had outright passes” in the courses.
Joyce’s first teaching job was at an Army Base School with wonderful facilities. The
classes were small and the parents were willing to help. She put in long hours and was happy
even though exhausted. Then a new Station Officer arrived who required everybody to take
instructions about how to teach whether they believed in his methods or not. She could not stand
the interference and speaking out clearly voiced her disagreement one day in front of the
Commanding Officer. The result was an inter-departmental transfer to a poorly equipped Army
school, so Joyce decided to seek further education to be able to teach in a secondary school. A
hundred and twenty people took the entrance exam and only 25 people were admitted. She
wrote, “By God’s grace I did very well and was one of three women who got admitted.” At this
time she decided to get a divorce. It was time to speak out against her husband’s disrespect. She
called the divorce “messy and traumatic,” but she resiliently carried on and studied hard to
achieve her goals.
After graduation she was appointed to Adisadel College, one of the best boys’ secondary
schools in Ghana, to teach English Language and Literature. In addition to teaching, she served
in a variety of leadership roles including being assistant housemistress. She coordinated

September 4 27
educational trips for the boys and organized voluntary work in the community for them. The
headmaster of the school was wonderful and she was mentored by her department chair. She fell
in love and married one of her coworkers. He has been a source of encouragement and joy for
her, often telling her she can do anything. With his encouragement she decided to get a degree in
teaching, entering the university at the age of 39.
Back in school again she faced challenges. She juggled the study, a sick parent, looking
after her home, and teaching part-time in an Anglican seminary. Working with the wives of the
student priests, she helped set up fundraising activities to help the poor in the north of the
country. After this experience she wrote, “I realized that women need to be emancipated from
some of the traditional roles that have been foisted on us by the men folk.” When she graduated
she returned to Adisadel College to teach and began a period of activism. She started a study
group for teachers on the staff and introduced them to the labour laws operating in the country.
She joined the Ghana National Teachers Association and became a member of a group of 11
other teachers who went around the country to teach school leadership courses to secondary
teachers. She continued to do community service, talking at seminars for the youth on
HIV/AIDS and voluntary work on sanitation in the school and the village in which the school
was located. Her ability to speak out served her well in these social justice leadership pursuits.
In 1999, after ten years of marriage, her husband retired as assistant headmaster of the
school and she planned to go back to school to take a second degree in educational
administration so she could join the Ministry of Education. Discovering that he had an incurable
eye disease that would lead to blindness, she was going to put her quest for more education on
hold. He insisted instead that she give it a try and he studied Braille.
The next decade of her life was about “charting a new course,” Joyce wrote. Beginning

September 4 28
study for her masters at University of Cape Coast, she had to take in her mother, after losing her
beloved dad, “who had been my mainstay through thick and thin.” Her continuing work with
students in the seminary taught her about fortitude and perseverance. Gathering data for her
thesis, she was employed by the university to teach communication skills to first-year
undergraduates. She was hoping to finish her thesis in record time so she could teach at the
university, but then in 2003 her internal assessor for the thesis created obstacles. She has never
learned why. He rejected parts of her thesis which she quickly rewrote and submitted. Then the
thesis got lost for two years and could not be found anywhere.
She spent some time away in England with a cousin to decide what to do next; then she
came home in April 2004 and took a job as a Research Assistant at University of Education,
Winneba. She spoke out forcefully, explaining, “The thesis vanished for two years and then re-
surfaced after I threatened to take the university to court.” With the thesis again in hand, she
related her ordeal to the Vice-Chancellor who had been one of her lecturers when she was an
undergraduate. He took up the case and got the head of the department to appoint a new internal
assessor to look at her thesis. Her work was finally submitted to the Graduate Exam Board, but
the submission did not meet the deadline so she had to wait an additional year, receiving the
degree finally in 2007. In 2008 she was invited to interview for the position of Research Fellow
at the University of Education, Winneba. She was confirmed as a full time Lecturer in March
2010.
Joyce ended her narrative with these words, “Our journeys take us through so many paths
but our resilience, determination, hope and fortitude see us traverse these paths without thinking
of shirking our responsibilities. We hold out in the darkness and God lights up the path and we
see our way through the tunnel.” Today Joyce’s research is concerned with the

September 4 29
underrepresentation of women in academia. She is still facilitating leadership development with
teachers, especially females in the secondary system. She plans to begin a Ph.D. in Leadership
and Management in September 2011. Her Ph.D. thesis will be on mentoring female faculty to
enhance and improve scholarship in the public universities. Joyce came to the WLE conference
in 2009 in Germany after discovering the WLE organization online. Inquiring about attending,
she was invited to participate and present her research. Her paper was titled Women in
Leadership and Management in Higher Education in Ghana: Meandering the Curves.
Insights
Joyce is a woman who has meandered many curves – asking questions and speaking out
when dealt or dealing with injustices. Her ability to speak out was nurtured by her family. As a
young girl, an impetuous Joyce spent time with her father learning how to handle conflict and
speak out effectively. She spoke out and chose not to remain with an abusive husband and his
disrespect. She spoke out when a supervisor insisted that everyone teach his way. In workshops
across the country she introduced teachers to labor laws and concepts of school leadership,
teaching them how to speak out. She spoke out against the injustice of a male internal assessor’s
loss of her master’s thesis by threatening a lawsuit and enlisting the help of a mentor to complete
the degree. Joyce’s innate comfort with speaking out protected her in a variety of situations.
Her strong voice was important in her resilient transformation and reintegration from the first
marriage and other adversities. Speaking out, she has persevered courageously to actualize her
dreams.
Women in Ghana have a long cultural history of speaking up and participating in decision
making and leadership. Whereas speaking out seems at first a heritage from Joyce’s family
through her royalty and outspoken paternal grandmother, speaking out by women seems to have

September 4 30
a larger cultural context as a result of the important traditional roles of queenmothers in Ghana.
The traditional institutions featured “parallel structures of male and female representatives
existing in each family, and headed by the royal family with the chief and the queenmother”
(Müller 2010, 333). “In the history of Ghana, women’s organizations played an important
political role during the struggle against British colonialization at the beginning of the 19 th
century and up to 1957, the year of Ghana’s independence. Collective military actions were
organized by female heads of towns or villages called queenmothers” (333).
At this time these traditional structures of power for women are regaining local political
relevance. Today the queenmothers (female heads of towns or villages) and subqueenmothers
(female heads of families) have organized to participate in economic development initiatives and
decisionmaking. “Subqueenmothers are, in comparison to subchiefs, a new phenomenon, as the
first woman was elected in 1985. . . . Subqueenmothers are now trying to extend their spaces
beyond the family context” (334), according to Müller’s research.
The existence of the queenmothers provides additional insight into Joyce’s strong voice
for social justice. In response to a question about whether she had been influenced by the
queenmother phenomenon, Joyce acknowledged having queenmothers as a very important part
of the history of Ghana. She wrote,
They play a significant role in the enstoolment of the chiefs and kings. Without them no
chief or king will be enstooled. . . . They lost their voice for some time when western
education or schooling was introduced but with the new crop of educated Queenmothers
fighting for inclusion in the house of chiefs their voices are now going beyond the
palaces and into the public domain. I believe if I had stayed long in my hometown
I might possibly be a Queenmother because the members of my extended family keep

asking me to come home. (J. W. T., June 4, 2011, email message to author)
Resilience – Selected Scholarship
Two scholarly frameworks, Patterson, Goens, and Reed (2009) from the field of
September 4 31
education, and Richardson (2002) from psychology, provide additional insights into resilience
described in the chapter stories. Two main concepts from the work of Patterson, Goens, and
Reed (2009) particularly apply – phases of resilience and resiliency skills. They explained five
phases of a resilience cycle. The first phase begins when adversity strikes and interrupts normal
conditions. Typically a deteriorating phase comes second, and for some people unable to claim
resiliency the path leads ultimately to dysfunction. However, another choice is the cycle of
survival that leads to stability. Growth begins with a third or adapting phase, moves to a fourth
or recovering phase, and finally culminates in a fifth growing phase (5). These phases serve as a
backdrop against which the authors unfolded strengths found in resilient leaders, viewed in three
broad categories of skills and qualities: resilience thinking skills, resilience capacity skills, and
resilience action skills.
Each category of skills is displayed in the stories shared in this chapter. Resilience
thinking skills include two dimensions (Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2009). The first is taking a
clear eyed look at a present reality or adversity to understand it accurately; the second is to
interpret future possibilities optimistically in spite of what may be a negative situation.
“Resilient leaders demonstrate an optimistic view about what’s possible” (9). For example,
Panpim displayed resilience thinking skills in continuing her education in spite of challenges
with English. She stayed positive, had a clear-eyed view of the reality of her talents, and was
able to use her mathematical skills to compensate for her issues with English. She envisioned a
future as a teacher that she eventually actualized.

September 4 32
Patterson, Goens, and Reed (2002) characterized what they called resilience capacity
building skills as able to become stronger over time. They identified four basic resilience
capacity building or fuel sources: “personal values, personal efficacy, personal well-being, and
personal support base” (9). Diane demonstrated the resilience capacity building skills of a value-
driven leader. She emphasized the importance of her core values clearly throughout her
narrative. She made decisions and lived by her educational and ethical values. Her personal
efficacy was maintained in part by her spiritual well-being. Her strong confidence was also
supported by the lived experiences gained in “leadership competence in serving others” (10).
Resilience action skills were defined as perseverance, adaptability, courage, and taking
personal responsibility (Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2002). Joyce’s narrative develops a clear
portrait in words of resilience action skills. She was adaptable to new situations, and persevered
toward her goals, taking personal responsibility for making her desired future happen. Over and
over again her story illustrated acting on “the courage of convictions” (11) through speaking out.
In terms of social justice leadership, speaking out is an action, an essential skill that can motivate
others to action. Joyce possesses a clear voice and is not afraid to use it. These skill sets of
resiliency have broad applicability within and outside of the field of education.
A second important scholarly framework was developed by Richardson (2002). His
metatheory of resiliency provides a ‘big picture’ historical frame from which to understand what
has been written about resiliency and its significance in human lives. He conceived of it not as a
problem-oriented theory, but rather as “something that provides a needed paradigm to
incorporate postmodern thinking” (307). He elaborated, “Resilience metatheory embraces
semantic variance and validates the unique academic paradigms whether that force is called chi,
collective unconscious, energy, oscillations, motivational force, neuropeptides, spirit, human

essence, or resilience” (317).
September 4 33
Richardson’s described three waves of resiliency inquiry existing in the literature. The
first wave of research identified resilient “qualities, assets, and protective factors that help people
grow through adversity” (308). Lists of multiple personal resilience qualities were the chief
outcome of this wave of inquiry. Examples are the qualities of courage, perseverance, and
speaking out that framed this chapter. Whether qualities of resilience are innate or learned is a
debate that continues. Many of the earlier studies of resilience focused on high risk children and
youth, including their lives over time, in efforts to understand how they were able to overcome
adversity experienced in childhood and youth. The question was “What characteristics mark
people who will thrive in the face of risk factors or adversity as opposed to those who succumb
to destructive behaviors?” (308). These studies have been important to educators, and resulted in
a movement toward professional development programs focused on developing resilience in
teachers, as well as curriculum created to support resilience in young people (Henderson and
Milstein 2002; Milstein and Henry 2008).
Richardson (2002) explained that the second wave of inquiry focused on discovering how
people developed these resilient qualities through the process of coping with adversities. The
question was “How are resilient qualities acquired” (310)? Richardson presented an illustrative
model of the process that begins with a negative disruption to biopsychospiritual homeostasis,
followed by choices “between resilient reintegration, reintegration back to the comfort zone, or
reintegration with loss” (308). His resiliency process model is similar to the phase model
described by Patterson, Goens, and Reed (2009). Each model encourages viewing resilience as a
path that can be chosen and suggests strategies.
The third wave explored innate resilience to help persons “discover and apply the force

September 4 34
that drives a person toward self-actualization and to resiliently reintegrate from disruptions”
(308). The question explored by the third wave included “What and where is the energy source
or motivation to reintegrate resiliently” (313? With the third wave of research, the source of this
energy to grow began to be viewed as “a spiritual source or innate resilience” (309). According
to Richardson, “There is a force within everyone that drives them to seek self-actualization,
altruism, wisdom, and harmony with a spiritual source of strength” (309).
Richardson (2002) advanced two postulates in support of this “force within everyone”
concept. The first was that “a source for actuating resilience comes from one’s ecosystem”
(314). For example, he argued; “The more that physicists seem to learn, the more they allude to
a driving force that controls the universe. . . . From physics, we learn that it is quanta that is the
energy required for resilient reintegration” (314). He compared that with the view from Eastern
medicine or Taoism, that “all things connect with a flow of energy termed chi” (314). This
energy circulates within and around individuals and can create patterns of flow that provide
strength. Many subjects of resiliency inquiry reported belief in God or a creative force as their
source of strength. Richardson summarized his ideas regarding ecological sources: “The energy
or force that drives a person from survival to self-actualization may be called quanta, chi, spirit,
God, or resilience” (315). The second postulate is that “resilience is a capacity in every soul”
(315). He defined his use of the word soul as follows: “In resilience theory, soul refers to the
whole integrated being of an individual with one’s transpersonal nature or human spirit as the
primary guiding force of the system” (315). Supporting his second postulate are citations of
scholars of quantum mechanics, the new physics, and psychoneuroimmunology.
We have presented Richardson’s metatheory in some detail because it underscores that
our stories have many layers of meaning, whatever our cultures, experiences, and languages. We

September 4 35
are born with or can develop the personal qualities of resilience that support our growth in the
face of adversity. Becoming resilient is a process with predictable stages that can be studied.
Resilience supporting the growth of life can take many forms and is a capacity each person can
develop. Resilience is as mysterious as the essence of human personality, arising from the depths
of ultimate reality whatever name that is given.
Concluding Thoughts
Coutu (2002) addressed how resilience works, stating with some irony that “Resilience is
something you realize you have after the fact” (3). She reported that “an increasing body of
empirical evidence shows that resilience . . . can be learned” (3), and confessed that all the
theories she has reviewed in her own research just make common sense. Continuing, she
asserted,
But I also observed that almost all the theories overlap in three ways. Resilient people,
they posit, possess three characteristics: a staunch acceptance of reality; a deep belief,
often buttressed by strongly held values, that life is meaningful; and an uncanny ability
to improvise. You can bounce back from hardship with just one or two of these qualities,
but you will only be truly resilient with all three. (3)
By including the ability to improvise, Coutu echoes the metaphor that Bateson (1989) developed
about women’s lives as improvisations. Bateson wrote, “The compositions we create in these
times of change are filled with interlocking messages of our commitments and decisions. Each
one is a message of possibility” (241). We believe the life experiences of each of the women in
this book offer a message of possibility. The three women featured in this chapter – Diane Reed,
Panpim Cheaupalakit, and Joyce Wilson-Tagoe – represent quintessential survivors whose lives
and leadership for social justice display all three of Coutu’s characteristics of resilience.

September 4 36
Gilligan (1982) argued that women speak in a different voice, a voice grounded in a
preference for decisions based on values associated with social justice. A thought we take away
from this chapter is that “Resilience is not an all-or-nothing, fixed characteristic. Resilience is a
relative concept” (Patterson, Goens, and Reed 2009, 4). It will manifest differently in different
lives and in different cultures. It will manifest with different strengths in different people. We
believe that resilience is a necessary ingredient of social justice leadership. Courage and
perseverance work together for good when we speak out as advocates for social justice.

References
September 4 37
Baldwin, Julia, Nancy Maldondo, Candace Lacey, and Joan Efinger. (2004). Resilient women
leaders: A qualitative investigation. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA, April 12-16. ED500841
Bateson, Mary Catherine. 1989. Composing a Life. New York: Grove Press.
Belenky, Mary, and Blythe Clinchy, Nancy Goldberger, and Jill Tarule. 1986. Women’s ways
of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York: Basic Books, Inc.
Blackmore, Jill. 1999. Troubling women; Feminism, leadership, and educational change.
Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.
Blackmore, Jill. 2002. Troubling women: The upsides and downsides of leadership and the new
managerialism. In Women and school leadership: International perspectives, Cecilia
Reynolds, 49-70. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Chan, Adrienne. 2010. Women at the boundaries. Forum on Public Policy Online 2010. No. 2:
http://forumonpublicpolicy.com/spring2010.vol2010/womencareers2010.html (Accessed
August 18, 2011)
Cheaupalakit, Panpim. 2002. The leadership styles of male and female higher education
administrators in Thailand. PhD diss., Illinois State University. In ProQuest Dissertations
and Theses,
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=764848691&sid=1&Fmt=2&clientid=43838&RQT
=309& VName-PQD (accessed July 10, 2011).
Cheaupalakit, Panpim. 2009. Women in educational leadership in Thailand. Paper presented at
the second conference of Women Leading Education across the Continents, Augsburg,
Germany, September 16-18. Unpublished manuscript.

September 4 38
Chesley, Joanne. 2005. Overcoming injustice: A tradition of resilience. Advancing Women in
Leadership Online Journal 18.
http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/social_justice1/Chesley.html (accessed July 15,
2011)
Christman, Dana and Rhonda McClellan. 2008. “Living on barbed wire”: Resilient women
administrators in educational leadership programs. Educational Administration Quarterly
44, no. 1 (December): 3-29. Doi:10.1177/0013161X07309744 (accessed July 10, 2011)
Coutu, Diane. 2002. HBR at large: How resilience works. Harvard Business Review 80, no. 5:
46-49. (accessed August 16, 2011)
Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Henderson, Nan and Mike Milstein. 2002. Resiliency in schools: Making it happen for students
and educators. Updated edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
Jamieson, Kathleen Hall. 1995. Beyond the double bind: Women and leadership. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Kleinerman, Kay. 2010. Singing for leadership: Fostering the development of female leaders
through voice. Advancing Women in Leadership Journal 30, no. 4:
http://www.advancingwomen.com/awl/2010/KayKleinerman.pdf (accessed August 18,
2011)
Milstein, Mike and Doris Annie Henry. 2008. Leadership for resilient schools and communities.
Second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA. Corwin Press.
Müller, Christine. 2003. Knowledge between globalization and localization: The dynamics of
female spaces in Ghana. Current Sociology 5, 3/4: 329-346. www.sagepublications.com

[0011- 3921(200305/07)51:3/4;329-346;032652] (accessed July 10, 2011)
September 4 39
Online Entymology Dictionary. www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=courage (accessed
August 31, 2011)
Patterson, Jerry, George Goens, and Diane Reed. 2008. Joy & resilience: Strange bedfellows.
School Administrator 65, no. 11: 28-29.
http://www.aasa.org/schooladministratorarticle.aspx?id=3828 (accessed July 10, 2011)
Patterson, Jerry, George Goens, and Diane Reed. 2009. Resilient leadership for turbulent times:
A guide to thriving in the face of adversity. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield
Education.
Reed, Diane and Jerry Patterson. 2007. Voices of resilience from successful female
superintendents. Journal of Women in Educational Leadership 5, no. 2: 89-100
Richardson, Glenn. 2002. The metatheory of resilience and resiliency. Journal of Clinical
Psychology 58, no. 3: 307-321. doi: 10.1002/jclp.10020 (accessed July 12, 2011)

Ricca, Barney
Publications
Ricca, B. (2011). On self-re and research (Guest editorial). Complicity 8(1) 1-4.
Edmonton, Alberta, Canada: University of Alberta. Available at
http://ejournals.library.ualberta.ca/index.php/complicity/article/view/10019/7801

GUEST EDITORIAL
On Self-Revelation and Research
BERNARD RICCA
St. John Fisher College, (USA)
Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education
Volume 8 (2011), Number 1 • pp. 1-4
You never finish research; you merely abandon it.
- Gabriel Weinreich (personal communication)
The readers of Complicity will be, for the most part, well versed in the way the research
game is played, and will, probably better than me, know how to work through academic
writings. Accordingly, I would like to provide a different lens through which to interact
with the texts of this Special Issue.
The Feature Article, (Re)Imagining teacher preparation for conjoint democratic inquiry in
complex classroom ecologies, began as a symposium at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association and was re-crafted into a single article for
presentation here. On the program were papers by the authors of the Feature Article and
responses by Bill Doll and Sherrie Reynolds. However, to say “began” is actually incorrect
in a larger sense, although it is correct according to the rules of academic writing. The
“beginning” can be traced back through the submission process, to some prior
conversations in which the authors took part, and to at least their own primary school
experiences, some of which are recounted in the Feature Article. However, even that would
not take us to the “beginning”. Although it would probably be safe to say that it takes us to
the point where the authors first encountered the story, the story would have to be traced
back through the people and cultures that created the schooling that were encountered by
the authors, and, well, I think we can agree that the “beginning” is difficult. In fact, I think
that perhaps not only do we never finish research, we never begin it either.
As complexivists, we know both the difficulties and pitfalls of attempting to
disentangle an entity from its past and its connections; that we never begin research may
come as no surprise to the readers of Complicity. However, this means that we only present a
finite amount here (limited by the time and space available to those who converse) and we
may miss the infinity. This is the nature of the research game. However, in a very real sense,

On Self-Revelation and Research
the apocryphal stories of “primitive” peoples who believe that if-you-take-my-picture-yousteal-my-soul
may be an important caution to us: The snapshots presented here can be read
without the person of the author attached. This is the nature of the research game, and (to
steal from Bill Doll who I believe was taking from Whitehead), while I’m not opposed to
good research, I am afraid of it.
I bring all this up because putting something down in text has permanence to it that
only makes sense when combined with the flux that lead to it. In fact, I think that the
permanence is already connected with the flux (Whitehead, 1979); it is the nature of the
academic game that causes us to pretend the inseparable are separated. And so, we need a
different lens through which to speak with and listen to our conversation 1 .
Martin Buber (1966) begins his work The Way of Man with a story that revolves around
the Biblical question “Where are you?” The question, as Buber saw it, was asked not because
God was lacking in knowledge. Instead of asking for a location, the question says “Where
are you in your world? So many years and days of those allotted to you have passed, and
how far have you gotten in your world?” (Buber, 1966, p. 10). In other words, God was
asking for self-revelation, an account of where Adam had gotten to so far. This – selfrevelation
– is, I believe, an important lens through which to converse, and it is that lens that
I offer to those who would participate in the conversation here.
The Feature Article deals extensively with self-revelation. The authors reveal
themselves, as they were as students and as they are now. While the piece can be seen
merely as making an academic case for change in teacher preparation, I would encourage
the reader to examine it in a different manner: The authors have also revealed how far they
have travelled in their allotted years. Further, it shows some of the ways in which their selfrevelation
has been and is used by others. Sadly, self-revelation is not always treated
respectfully in our schools. Additionally, while the responses to the Feature Article can be
read as academic pieces, those authors also undertake self-revelation prompted by the selfrevelation
of the lead authors. I also hope that readers will recognize that their own
responses can be read as acts of self-revelation. (I also hope that readers will recognize my
own self-revelation in my choice of how to frame this Special Issue. 2 What is written here
probably says as much about this author as it does about the other authors.)
I would like to note the personal nature of such self-revelation here. This issue is not
attempting to be “correct” or “true” in some objective manner. (It is, however, good that the
authors all recognize their relationships to the larger community of researchers and so are
not merely engaging in the sort of self-exhibition that has been popular on American
television shows.) We can read even the critiques of the Feature Article as self-revelatory;
each author reveals something personal about her- or him-self, and to fail to recognize that
is to fail to recognize the importance of the writings (and the writers). It is our failure to
1 As Weinreich and I are both acousticians, I feel qualified to remind/inform the reader that there are
such things as acoustic lenses even though it is common to think only of the optical type. One might
be familiar with the “whispering room” which is a popular exhibit in many science museums. In
these rooms, the shape of the room enables two people to converse by whispering, even though they
are separated by a great distance. This is an acoustic mirror, akin to an acoustic lens.
2 As befits a journal that deals with complexity, this sort of recursive happening is appealing.
2

BERNARD RICCA
recognize the personal in all self-revelations – whether those self-revelations be writings in
an academic journal or our behaviors as students in elementary schools – that I believe
Seltzer-Kelly et al. are calling to our attention.
Deborah Osberg (2009), in the first Special Issue of Complicity quoted David Weinberger
(2005) who wrote:
Knowledge is not the body of beliefs that needs no further discussion. Knowledge is the
never ending conversation. And much of that conversation is precisely about what we can
disagree about and still share a world.
Notice that Weinberger talks about the participants, not the writings, “shar[ing] a
world”. I believe that looking through a lens of self-revelation allows us to recognize the
other (and our selves!) and participate in the conversation.
Although there are many places where I believe the lens of self-revelation are important
in this issue, I will bring to your attention only two. First, in the self-revelations of Shannon
and Serina in the Feature Article we have an account of what happens when the selfrevelation
of a story is mistaken for the whole story history. When students’ stories are
divorced from relationships, educators can mistake a snapshot for the whole, thereby
labeling students and, ultimately, dismissing them. The self-revelation that children give to
us almost every day often is used against them.
As a second example, Gershon has much to say about the use of ethnography in the
Feature Article. None of the eight (Eight?! What were we thinking?) reviewers said anything
about these points within ethnography. Hence, we can approach the pieces academically
and ask if the Feature Article represents “reality” (or perhaps “mis-represents” it if it fails to
match Gershon’s flavor of ethnography?). We can approach Gershon’s piece with the same
academic lens. However, we can also look through the lens of self-revelation, and hear the
stories of Seltzer-Kelly et al. and of Gershon as answers to Buber’s “Where are you?” I think
that only the lens of self-revelation allows us to hear both the permanence and the flux.
It is not, co-incidentally, only the infinite past that is missing in the accounts here; we
are also missing the future of the accounts put forth. As the future is “real, but not actual”
(Whitehead, 1979, p. 214) we must therefore recognize the limited nature of all that we say.
Further, the so-called “butterfly effect” reminds us that it is difficult to tell the trivial from
the important, as the “size” of causes may not match the “size” of their effect, and so we do
not know what is “really going on” in these writings. “We never finish research, we merely
abandon it.” 3
Hence, the danger for all of us is that we might accept the permanence of what is
written without keeping the (unstated) flux also in the foreground, and thereby fail to hear
the writers as we read the writings. I hope that we all will hear the writers.
3 Len Waks made an interesting statement to me while I was in the midst of this. It was in the body of
the e-mail: “If I had more time I'd fuss with it more, but I doubt this would actually improve it”
(Waks, personal communication). Abandoning research might not be entirely bad.
3

On Self-Revelation and Research
References
Buber, M. (1966). The way of man: According to the teaching of Hasidism. Seacaucus, NJ: Citadel Press.
Osberg, D. (2009). “Enlarging the space of the possible” around what it means to educate and be educated.
Complicity, 6 (1), i-x.
Weinberger, D (2005). Knowledge as conversation. http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2005/08/22/knowledgeas-conversation/
(Retrieved 22 February 2011).
Whitehead, A. (1979). Process and reality (corrected edition). New York, NY: Free Press.
© Copyright 2011. The author, Bernard Ricca, assigns to the University of Alberta and other educational and non-profit institutions a nonexclusive
license to use this document for personal use and in courses of instruction provided that the article is used in full and this
copyright statement is reproduced. The author also grants a non-exclusive license to the University of Alberta to publish this document in
full on the World Wide Web, and for the document to be published on mirrors on the World Wide Web. Any other usage is prohibited
without the express permission of the authors.
4

Rostetter, Dave
Presentations
Kelly, D.Y., Rostetter, D., and Schultz, S. (December 9-11, 2010). "Least restrictive
environment: The unfulfilled promise of integration." 35th Annual TASH Conference.
Denver, CO.
Arndt, K., Gladstone-Brown, W., Rostetter, D., and Schultz, S. (October 21, 2010). "What's in a
name? The creation and evolution of an inclusive education department." New York State
Association of Teacher Educators.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Schlosser, Linda
Presentations
Schlosser, L. (November 2010). "Vertical teams: Middle school-high school collaboration."
National Middle School Association Annual Conference. Baltimore, MD.
Schlosser, L. (October 2010). "Transition from middle school: How fares the 9th grade?" New
York State Middle School Association Annual Conference. Rochester, NY.
Arndt, K. and Schlosser, L. (September 2010). "Conducting group projects." 2010 Fall
Convocation and Faculty Development Day. St. John Fisher College. Rochester, NY.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Schultz, Susan
Publications
Schultz, S. M., Jacobs, G. E. and Schultz, J. M. (2010). Facebook and the social skills
development of individuals with High Functioning Autism/ Asperger’s Disorder.
Manuscript submitted for publiation.
Schultz, S. M. (2010). An Elephant on a Trampoline! Language Development and Humor.
Manuscript accepted for publication with revisions.
Schultz, S. M. (in press). Twice-exceptional students enrolled in Advanced Placement classes.
Manuscript accepted for publication in Gifted Child Quarterly.
Haggerty, M. E. & Schultz, S. M. (2010). A principal's lessons learned. Implications for school
leadership. Duets and Dialogs. Midwest Region New York Higher Education Task Force
on Quality Inclusive Schooling.
Schultz, S. M. (2010). School of Education, NCATE Assessment Report- Dual Initial
Certification Programs (M.S. Childhood/ Special Education and Special Education-
Adolescence).
Schultz, S. M. (2010). School of Education, NCATE Assessment Report- Professional
Certification Programs (M.S. in Special Education, 1-6 and 7-12).
Presentations
Schultz, S. (June 27, 2011). Literate Summer Institute. What does it mean to be a literate high
school student? Panel Discussion. Wayne Finger Lakes BOCES. Hobart and Smith
College.
Rapp, W. & Schultz, S. M. (2011, April 8). Neurological Disabilities. Rochester Museum and
Science Center Preschool.
Schultz, S. M., Nelson-Tuttle, C., Dane, E. & Duffy, J. (2011, Jan. 6). It’s an ability. The Howto’s
of faculty helping students go from disability to ability. Part 1:Theoretical
Constructs and Legal Implications. Petal Winter Workshop. St. John Fisher College.
Schultz, S. M., Nelson-Tuttle, C., Dane, E. &n Duffy, J. (2011, Jan. 6). It’s an ability. The Howto’s
of faculty helping students go from disability to ability. Part 2: Strategies for
teaching and lesson planning. Petal Winter Workshop. St. John Fisher College.
Rostetter, D., Schultz, S. M., , D. & Kelly, D. Y. (2010, December 9-11). Least restrictive

environment: The unfulfilled promise of integration. 35 th annual TASH Conference.
Denver, Colorado.
Steflik, A. & Schultz, S. (November 16, 2010). Learning Styles and Lesson Planning.
EnCompass- Dansville After School Program. Dansville Central School District.
Schultz, S. (2010, November 12). An elephant on a Trampoline! Language Development and
Humor. Ontario Council for Exceptional Children. Niagara Falls, Canada.
Schultz, S. M., Nelson-Tuttle, C., Dane, E. & Duffy, J., Van Cura, M. (2010, Nov. 11). It’s an
ability. The How-to’s of faculty helping students go from disability to Ability. Second
Thursday Faculty Development Meeting. St. John Fisher College.
Steflik, A., Schultz, S. M., & Gladstone-Brown, W. (2010, October 22). Raising the success rate
of foreign language learners with special needs. Paper presented at the New York State
Association of Teacher Educators (NYSATE), New York Association of Colleges for
Teacher Education (NYACTE), and Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling Joint
Conference.
Arndt, K., Gladstone-Brown, W., Rostetter, D., & Schultz, S. (October 21, 2010). What’s in a
Name? The creation and evolution of an Inclusive Education Department. Roundtable
presented at the New York State Association of Teacher Educators (NYSATE), New
York Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (NYACTE), and Task Force on
Quality Inclusive Schooling Joint Conference.
Freytag, C. E., Cianca, M., Monroe-Baillargeon, A. & Schultz, S. (October 21, 2010).
Maximizing K-12 and Community Partnerships to Share Best Inclusive Practices.
Roundtable presented at the New York State Association of Teacher Educators
(NYSATE), New York Association of Colleges for Teacher Education (NYACTE), and
Task Force on Quality Inclusive Schooling Joint Conference.
Schultz, S. M. (2010, October 8). An Elephant on a Trampoline! Children’s language
development and humor. New York State Council for Exceptional Children Annual
Convention, Verona, New York.
Steflik, A., Schultz, S. M., & Gladstone-Brown, W. (2010, October 7). Raising the success rate
of foreign language learners with special needs. New York State Council for
Exceptional Children Annual Convention, Verona, New York.
Schultz, S. M. & Schultz, J. (2010, June 11). Resolving disagreements. University of Self
Advocacy: There’s Nothing We Can’t Do Together. Self Advocacy Association of New
York State. Batavia, New York.
Schultz, S. M. (2010, April 23). Twice-exceptional students participating in Advanced

Placement or college level classes. Poster presented at National Council for Exceptional
Children. Nashville, Tennessee.
Rostetter, D. & Schultz, S. (2010, March 19). Opportunities and challenges. Navigating the
complexities of law, access, achievement, and disability in our Classrooms. Colloquia
presented at St. John Fisher College.

Reading 1: A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Introduction by: Ann Monroe-Baillargeon, Ph.D. Alfred University
Mary Haggerty and Susan Schultz in “A Principal’s Lessons Learned” provide for us professional insights
from their interactions with parents of students with special needs. It is a powerful statement to lead off
our monograph, Duets and Dialogue: Voices on Inclusive Practices in Our Schools, with a focus on the
relationship between school administrators and parents. All too often, our focus on parents comes at the
end of a long list of other priorities, curriculum, instructional practices, student needs, etc. It is exciting to
see that a focus on parents and the importance of school leadership to listen with the purpose of
understanding, developing trust, and engaging parents in the change process help to frame our
understanding of inclusive practices right from the beginning, rather than waiting to the end. Thank you
to Mary Haggerty, Susan Schultz and the parents who generously shared their insights in getting our
Duets and Dialogue monograph off to a great start!
10

A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Mary E. Haggerty and Susan M. Schultz
“Mrs. Haggerty, we have a problem!” These five words can generate concern, stress,
and outright fear in even the stoutest heart of the most effective administrator. When shared
by the parent of a student in special education, the level of concern, stress, and fear can
multiply, sometimes exponentially. When I made the decision to become an administrator, the
last thing I was worried about was my ability to work with parents of students with special
needs. Yet, after three years as a school principal, I found myself wondering why it was that
sometimes interactions with parents of students with special needs went smoothly, and why
did they sometimes go terribly awry?
To complete a course requirement, I decided to engage in a study that I hoped would
answer my question. Drawing upon many interactions with parents of students with disabilities,
I also interviewed three sets of parents (one father and two mothers) of students with
significant disabilities, (two boys and one girl) all of whom were in high school. The children of
these parents were enrolled in an urban school district, and they responded to an email request
sent out to a local parent support group. Parents were interviewed at their convenience and in
the location of their choice (two in their home, one in an office setting). Each interview took
approximately 45 minutes. I also worked with a focus group of three mothers of four
elementary students with mild disabilities (two girls, two boys). These parents represented
suburban school district experiences and were recruited from a list provided by the Director of
Pupil Personnel of the school district. They were interviewed at a McDonald’s (so their children
could play while we talked) for about one hour.
The results of that study did lead me to three important lessons that did not necessarily
answer my question, but did lead me to challenge some of my assumptions and change my
practice.
The First Lesson: Understanding
Seek first to understand, then to be understood. (Stephen Covey)
There is an expectation among professionals that parents will seek to understand the
special education process. We teach them acronyms like IEP, show them data we collected
about their children, and cite regulations and education law, in order to help parents become
effective collaborators. Fish (2008), investigating parent perceptions of the IEP process,
indicates “through persistence and becoming knowledgeable on special education law, (the
parents in his study) were able to properly assist their children in acquiring the services and IEP
implementation necessary for them to succeed” (p.13). Fish concludes that educators should
seek parental input and collaboration so we can effectively serve students with special needs.
Just as parents can become more active participants when they are knowledgeable about the
process, educators can become more effectual participants when they have an understanding
of the parents and children they work with.
11

I had hoped, and even expected, that during the course of collecting and examining the
results of the parent interviews, I would come across some pithy quote from a parent that
would provide a framework, or summary of what was the essential learning from this
undertaking. Although I did come across such a phrase, it did not come from any of the parents.
It came from the woman who was transcribing the tapes of the interviews for me. As she
returned the last of the tapes she said, “You know, they’re not answering your questions,
they’re just telling you stories.”
As I reflected on her statement, I realized that, yes indeed, they had shared many stories
about their children. In fact, they were eager to share; it was fascinating to listen to parents
who were able to recite the timelines of their children’s educational experiences with such
facility and speed that I could scarcely keep up in my field notes. Reflection on these “stories”
led me to understand that you have to listen to the story, the story is often complex, but, you
have to listen anyway, because it’s the only way parents will perceive you as truly “knowing
their children.” This lesson was reinforced when parents of students in my school brought
pictures of their children to CSE meetings, wanting those on the committees to “see” their
children as something more than just “the next case.”
The dilemma is, how does one keep the professional distance required to provide a valid
evaluation of the child’s educational needs without projecting an uncaring, unsympathetic
affect? Asking for regular feedback is one way of demonstrating sincere interest while
maintaining professional distance. Active listening, where the listener is actively seeking to
understand the speaker’s intent and emotional state, appears to be a significant and symbolic
activity that facilitates positive relationships with parents. Active listening does not require the
listener to agree with the speaker, only to seek to understand him/her and to use that
knowledge to present his/her perspective. Each of the parents interviewed referred to the need
to have those “in charge” understand their children. Because their children were not in a
position to tell their own stories, parents did so for them. Salend and Duhaney (2002)
underscore the importance of “paying attention” to what families (parents and caregivers) have
to say about their child’s experiences with special education programs/schools. In seeking
feedback they suggest that the following will facilitate the process:
Being attentive
Establishing a comfortable and supportive atmosphere that fosters the comfort
level and participation of family members
Asking open-ended, meaningful and non-intrusive questions
Seeking clarification, details, and examples to support statements.
Lesson Two: Developing Trust
I meant what I said and I said what I meant (Horton the Elephant, by Dr. Seuss)
Federal mandates like No Child Left Behind (NCLB) can require parent involvement in
the educational process, however they cannot mandate the effectiveness of involvement.
12

Collaborative relationships between parents and educators are dependent on developing trust
(Shelden, Angell, Stoner, & Roseland, 2010). Given the opportunity for, and nature of
interactions, teachers and support personnel have a likelihood of establishing trusting
relationships with parents. However, the principal’s relationship may be more complex. The
principal, in a position of power and control, must be willing to work with parents as equals.
Understanding role relationships and the innate interrelated dependencies between
parties assists the principal to create an environment of trust. The principal, faculty and parents
depend on each other. These dependencies create a sense of mutual vulnerability (Bryk &
Schneider, 2003). Shelden, et al. (2010) report that within this vulnerability exists the
“potential for betrayal or harm from another person,” necessitating trusting others. Therefore,
the principal must establish and maintain trusting relationships through his or her vision for the
school, demonstrating trustfulness in interactions with others, and mediating conflict in honest
ways (p.160). Parents of children with disabilities have increased interactions with school
principals. As a result, school principals must also examine how the trust factor relates to the
special education process, parents and their children.
For the parents I interviewed, trust meant doing what you said you would. The difficulty
was making sure that what they thought the administrator said and what the administrator
thought s/he said, were sometimes very different. Thus, misunderstandings, lack of clarification
and inaccurate assumptions can lead to what are perceived as broken promises. Because we
are the “professionals/experts,” we assume that we have it “right.” It is easy to say of a parent,
“S/he only hears what s/he wants to hear.” My question is: “Do we know what it is that parents
want to hear?”
Knowing what one expects from the IEP and being able to articulate these expectations
seems to facilitate trust and enables both parents and educators to develop an effective plan
for the student’s success. The parent of a student with Down Syndrome, who attended my
school, approached me about the inclusion program for her child. Her child’s teacher, a former
special education teacher, was expressing doubts about the child’s ability to “keep up” with the
rest of the class. The parent felt that the teacher was rejecting her child, expanding her concern
to the entire school, stating that we were not living up to our promise to include her child. The
teacher believed that the parent was holding on to unreasonable expectations for her child’s
participation in the curriculum.
We set up a meeting with the child’s teacher, aide, parents and me. During the
conversation, the teacher clarified her concerns that the child would never be able to
participate fully in the curriculum demanded at that grade level. The parent was able to clearly
articulate that her goals were not that her child demonstrate mastery of the curriculum, but
that he would be able to learn how to write his name, take turns, follow school routines, and
learn how to ask and respond to simple questions like, “How are you?” and “Do you need
help?” She went on to say that she knew that this was a year-by-year thing. If it worked this
year it might not the next and that we would all have to look at whether or not it was still
making a positive difference for her child. In turn, the teacher was able to establish reasonable
and effective learning goals. At a follow up meeting at the end of the year, the parents were
13

thrilled that all of these goals were accomplished. This couple did not need to hear “your child
is not keeping up.” They knew he would not. They needed to hear “we understand your
concerns and we will do our best to address them.” The end result was a trusting relationship
that lasted many years and became a model for including parents in the practical matters of
their child’s inclusion program.
Olivos (2009) asserts due to inherent inequalities, it is not enough to present the
concept of parity and expect parents to feel like a valued partner. Increasing fair levels of
parent involvement requires structuring schools in ways that minimize inequality. Including
parents of students with disabilities on the Shared Decision Making Team, PTA and SEPTA
leadership, and creating informal arenas for conversations are just few ways to increase the
likelihood that parents will feel that their input is valued.
Lesson Three: Changing Culture
Give me a lever long enough and I can move the world. (Archimedes)
Barth (2001) asserts, “Probably the most important, and most difficult job of the schoolbased
reformer is to change the prevailing culture of a school”(p.7). However, without this
commitment to re-culture, we run the risk of allowing what Fine and Weis (2003) refer to as a
“reproduction” of the attitudes and practices currently in place. As one of the parents in my
study put it, “When I went into this, I realized I couldn’t change my daughter. So I had to change
everyone else. It’s daunting at times, but that’s been my challenge.”
Principal leadership is the most significant factor in influencing the overall climate of the
school. Beyond words and actions, the culture of the school must reflect relational trust,
established through the principal’s vision for the school, his or her faculty and students.
Sometimes faculty may need to be “reshaped” by supporting teacher/ parent collaboration,
increasing face-to-face social interactions, building into the school culture the ability to sustain
positive parent engagement (Bryk & Schneider, 2003). Re-culturing is not an easy task, neither
is establishing an inclusion program; but one may help the other. By developing processes and
procedures that enable students with disabilities to participate with the general education
population, everyone benefits: students, teachers and parents. Developing common language
and understandings leads to less confusion and better decision making for parents, more
effective planning and goal setting for teachers, a richer curriculum embedded with more
instructional strategies, and a more responsive school environment for students.
In developing a culture that is inclusive, we create a micro-community that reflects the
elements we would like to see in our own, larger communities. This idea was driven home by a
story from one of the parents in my study, a mother of a high school student with disabilities.
At a school dance, it became clear that, although her daughter was enjoying herself immensely,
she was not “doing it the right way.” As a chaperone, her mother watched as a group of
students approached her daughter and her partner. They were clearly trying to show her how
typical teenagers dance. When it became apparent that she could not, but was glad to be a part
of the group, they backed off. The parent described it as a “clashing of cultures” but once the
others saw that “she wasn’t likely to conform, and that it didn’t impact them, they backed away
14

and it was fine and they were accepted.” The parent offered the following advice to
administrators: “You need our children with special needs more than we need you, because
your general education students need to know how to live with each other, how to interact
without that uncomfortable feeling.”
Conclusion
It’s Always Somethin’! (Roseanne Rosanadana, SNL)
For most administrators, the issue is not that there are problems; problems are a part of
the job. Problems can be solved, solutions may not be readily apparent, but given a reasonable
amount of time and talent, solutions are discovered and implemented. Typically, when parents
of students in special education say there is a problem, they are referring to a dilemma. A
dilemma is challenging because dilemmas cannot be easily solved, time and talent may reveal
unappealing choices, and administrators must often resort to managing dilemmas, trying to
build consensus while making repeated attempts to resolve them, and learning from the results
of those efforts.
Learning is a dynamic process, always changing those who pursue it. As I have been
changed by the learning gained from this endeavor, I will affect change in the buildings I serve.
As the teachers, parents and I continue to discuss special education issues, we will inevitably
see the need to change certain practices, policies and procedures. We will manage the
dilemmas. There will be “ripple effects” to be sure. As Elmore (1995) has pointed out, changes
are often connected and it is typical for one change to lead to other changes in school structure
as implementation occurs.
In his eloquently titled article, I think, therefore I am resistant to change, Duffy (2002)
points out what we know-or think we know- is our biggest roadblock to learning. His strategies
for change focus on “raising doubts” about what is believed to be true. His suggestions include:
discussing dissatisfaction, saying it’s only an experiment, turn surprises into questions,
recognizing that all dissents and warnings have some validity, believe that collaborators who
disagree are both right, remember that all problems have multidirectional causes and effects,
and understand that what you know is not optimal. Not unlike the well regarded and often
used K-W-L chart, our interactions with special education students and their parents will lead
us through cycles of ever evolving understandings and opportunities for application that
ultimately will lead to more questions and searches for answers. Fortunately for those of us
who work in schools, listening to parents’ stories and learning from them is part of what we do
every day. We can learn a great deal from Aesop.
Information about the authors: Mrs. Mary E. Haggerty is Principal of William Kaegebein
Elementary School in Grand Island, New York. Susan Schultz, Ed.D. is Assistant Professor and
Director of Special Education Graduate Services in the School of Education at St. John Fisher
College.
15

References
Barth, R. (2001). Learning By Heart. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bryk, A. S. & Schneider, B. (2003). Trust in schools: A core resource for school reform.
Educational Leadership, 60(6), 40-44.
Duffy, F. (2002). I think, therefore I am resistant to change. The Journal of Staff Development,
24, 30-36.
Elmore, R. F. (1995, August). Teaching, Learning, and School Organization: Principles of
Practice and Regularities of Schooling. Educational Administration Quarterly, 31(3) 355-
374.
Fish, W. W. (2008). The IEP meeting: Perceptions of parents of students who receive
special education services. Prevention School Failure, 53(1), 8-14. Retrieved from
http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=11&hid=4&sid=0a0751fb-6289-
4e63ab76694fd653009a@sessionmgr10&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1
zaXRl#db=ehh&AN=34772224
Olivos, E. M. (2009). Collaboration with Latino families. A critical perspective of home-
school interactions. Intervention in School and Clinic, 45(2), 109-115.
doi:10.1177/1053451209340220
Salend, S. & Duhaney, L. (2002). What do families have to say about inclusion? How to pay
attention and get results. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35, 62-66.
Shelden, D. L., Angell, M. E., Stoner, J. B., & Roseland, B. D. (2010). School principals’
influence on trust: Perspectives of mothers of children with disabilities. The
Journal of Educational Research, 103, 159-170. doi:10.1080/00220670903382921
16

A Principal’s Lessons Learned: Implications for School Leadership
Extended Learning Opportunities
1) In the introduction to the article, it is suggested that prioritizing parent participation in the
education process is not often at the top of schools’ lists. Have you found this to be true from
your perspective as pre-service teacher, teacher, or administrator? If so, why might this be
true? Is there something we can/should do about this?
2) In this essay, the authors speak about keeping a professional distance. What do you think is
meant by this and how do you make sense of this in your own practice?
3) In one interview with parents, the authors concluded that “trust meant doing what you said
you would”; however, what was said was often interpreted differently. Are there
recommendations for principals’ and/or teachers for communicating with parents in ways that
establish a mutual understanding of discussion points and anticipated follow up?
Additional resources for working with parents that you may wish to explore include:
1) NICHCY is very pleased to offer you a wealth of information on disabilities! NICHCY stands for
the National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities.
http://www.nichcy.org/Pages/Home.aspx
2) Exceptional parent magazine: http://www.eparent.com/
3) Brookes publishing: http://www.brookespublishing.com/
17

Schwartz, James
Publications
Schwartz, J. E. (2010). A new world of mathematics thinking. Teaching Children Mathematics,
17(3), 164-169
Presentations
Fraction introduction and fraction division: Contexts and inductive reasoning. 2011 Annual
Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics: Indianapolis, IN. April,
2011. A workshop designed to help elementary teachers improve their teaching of
fractions.
Schwartz, J. (April 2010). "Division problem types and remainder types - context does strange
things!" 2010 Annual Meeting of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. San
Diego, CA.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Walton, Sam
Presentations
Walton, A. and Wischnowski, M.W. (2010). "Establishing a positive board-superintendent
relationship." Kenosha Unified School District #1 Board of Education. Kenosha, WI.

There are no samples of scholarly activity available for this individual at this time.

Wischnowski, Michael
Publications
Cianca, M., Wischnowski, M. W., Hildenbrand, S., & Kelly, D. (2010). Collaboration for
inclusion: Authentic experiences in teacher preparation. Excelsior: Leadership in
Teaching and Learning, 5 (1), 19-34.
Program Evaluation Report - Wischnowski, M.W., & Blaine, B. (2010). A program evaluation of
the Section V of the New York State Athletic Association. Unpublished manuscript.
Rochester, NY.
Presentations
Wischnowski, M.W., Cianca, M., Hildenbrand, S., & Kelly, D. (2010, November). Preparing
Teacher Candidates for Parent Partnerships: An Evaluation of a Preservice Course in
Teacher Education. Roundtable session presented at the 22nd Annual Conference of the
American Evaluation Association, San Antonio, TX.
Wischnowski, M.W., Cianca, M., & Brown, C.. (2010, October). Planting the Seeds of
Partnership: Parents as Instructors in Teacher Education. Session presented at the New
York State Association of Teacher Educators, New York Association of Colleges of
Teacher Education, and Task Force on Inclusive Schooling Conference, Saratoga
Springs, NY.
Wischnowski, M.W. (2010, September) Preparing Teacher Candidates for Family Engagement.
Session presented at the On The Same Page Summit Conference, Albany NY.
Wischnowski, M.W., Cianca, M., & Brown, C.. (2010, May). Planting the Seeds of Partnership:
Parents as Instructors in Teacher Education. Session presented at the Northeast Parent
Center Assistance and Collaboration Team Conference, Portland, ME.
Wischnowski, M.W., Cianca, M., Gladstone-Brown, W., & Arrington, L. (2010, April). Planting
the Seeds of Partnership: Parents as Instructors in Teacher Education. Session presented
at the YAI Network/National Institute for People with Disabilities International
Conference, New York City, NY.

Wood, Jim
Publications
Epistemology, Diversity and Social Justice Education in Davis, R.D. (Ed.) How Do We Know
They Know? Conversations about Pre-service Teachers’ Learning about Culture & Social
Justice (2009). Peter Lang.
Middle Childhood in Hutchison, E.D. (Ed.). Dimensions of Human Behavior: The Changing
Life Course (2003, 2008, 2010). 2 nd , 3 rd and 4 th Editions, Sage Publications.
Presentations
International ACEI Conference, Phoenix, Spring, 2010 (collaborative presentation) - Redefining
Family Support: Undertaking Educational Resilience in Rural Honduras.

Redefining Family Support:
Understanding Educational Risk &
Resilience in Copán Ruinas, Honduras
Presenters:
Thérèse McKinny-Wood – tfmckinn@syr.edu
Dr. Leanne Charlesworth - lcharle8@naz.edu
Dr. James Wood - jwood@sjfc.edu
1

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
2

I. Introduction: Objectives
Describe challenges and opportunities for
achieving universal primary education in
Honduras
Analyze the role of family context in shaping
educational risk and resilience
Articulate implications for expanding educational
access and successful school achievement in
developing nations.
3

I. Introduction: Honduras
4

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
5

II. World Educational Models
Human Capital World Model
Nationally standardized curriculum
Standardized testing for promotion, entrance and exiting from different
levels of schooling
Teaching of world language: Spanish
Mandated textbooks
Develop educated workers to compete in global economy
Value of education measured by economic growth and development
Scripted lessons
6

II. World Educational Models
Progressive Education World Model
Teacher professionalism and autonomy
Learning based on students’ interests and participation
Active learning
Protection of local languages
Education for assuring social justice
Education for active participation in determining social and
political change
7

II. World Educational Models
Religious Education World Model
Study of traditional religious texts
Study and practice of religious rites
Emphasis on spirituality
Emphasis on instilling moral and ethical standards
Rejection of secularism
8

II. World Educational Models
Indigenous Education World Model
Indigenous nations control their own educational institutions
Traditional indigenous education serves as a guide for the
curriculum and instructional methods
Education is provided in the language of the indigenous nation
Education reflects the culture of the indigenous nation
9

II. World Educational Models
Millennium Development Goal #2
Ensure that, by 2015, children everywhere, boys and
girls alike, will be able to complete a full course of
primary schooling
Net enrolment ratio in primary education
Proportion of pupils starting grade 1 who reach last
grade of primary
Literacy rate of 15-24 year-olds, women and men
10

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
11

III. Education in Honduras
“ . . . Almost half a million [Honduran]
children between the ages of 5 and 16 do
not attend school.”
Source: Fundación para la Educación Ricardo Ernesto Maduro Andreu, FEREMA
12

III. Education in Honduras
Honduran Net School Enrollment Rates by Level 2000 & 2004
Source: Fundación para la Educación Ricardo Ernesto Maduro Andreu, FEREMA
13

III. Education in Honduras
Reasons for Not Attending School, Population Ages 5-16, 2004
Source: Fundación para la Educación Ricardo Ernesto Maduro Andreu, FEREMA
14

III. Education in Honduras
Sixth grade graduates by department, 2004
15

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
16

IV. Evolution of Research
Copán Ruinas, Honduras
17

IV. Evolution of Research
Leading up to the Fulbright . . .
Honduras Bound 2007 Honduras Bound 2008
18

IV. Evolution of Research
Purpose
Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 1& 2
To understand
the nature of
barriers to
educational
success in la
Estanzuela.
To understand
the educational
resilience of
students from
disadvantaged
backgrounds in
Copán Ruinas.
To develop
targeted
strategies to
improve primary
completion for all
students within
La Estanzuela.
19

IV. Evolution of Research
Study Overview
Phase 1: Understanding the Educational Context
• August 2008 - January 2009
• Field Research: Ethnographic Approach
o Exploratory; Analysis & findings led to Phase 2
Phase 2: Educational Resilience
• February 2009 - April 2009
• Semi-Structured Interviews
o Guided by existing educational resilience research
20

IV. Evolution of Research
Research site: La Estanzuela
The school building Students outside during a class break
21

IV. Evolution of Research
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
Final Level of School Completion in La Estanzuela
30.8%
1.7%
41.4%
24.1%
2.1%
No School Kindegarten Grades 1-3 Grades 4-6 Grades 7-9
22

IV. Evolution of Research
Around La Estanzuela
Students participate in survey Interviewee with her daughter
23

IV. Evolution of Research
Educational Resilience?
Sixth graders from la Estanzuela on the last day of school, November 2008
24

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
25

V. Methodology: Phase 1
Understanding the Educational Context
Phase 1: Field Research
• School record data review
• School-based participant observation.
• In-depth unstructured interviews with teachers, parents, and
students.
• Case study, exploratory design; grounded theory conceptual
framework
• Daily field notes maintained and reviewed; Interviews
audio-taped and transcribed.
• NVivo 7 used to aid open-coding analytical approach.
26

V. Findings: Phase 1
Perceptions of the causes of dropout
• Age – too young or too old
• No enforcement of attendance
• Lack of engagement in school
• Poor relationship with teacher
• Opportunity cost of attendance
• Direct costs
• School not valued
• Low expectations for the future
• Poor health
27

V. Methodology: Phase 2
Educational Resilience
Participants
Non-probability, purposeful sample of 12 secondary school students.
Sample overview: 5 men, 7 women; ages 16-27; all from communities surrounding
Copán Ruinas.
Interviews
In-person, semi-structured interview guide with 19 key questions.
Took place in the months of March and April 2009; each interview lasted
approximately 30 minutes.
Audio-taped and transcribed interviews.
Qualitative transcript analysis; open coding followed by selective coding.
28

V. Findings: Resilience Study
RISK FACTORS: BARRIERS TO SUCCESS
School Location, Transportation
Weather
Threat of Violence
Financial Worries
Self, Family
Hunger, Malnutrition
Exhaustion
School work, Paid work
Anxiety
29

V. Findings: Resilience Study
PROTECTIVE FACTORS: FACILITATORS OF SUCCESS
Social & Financial Support
Family:
Parents, Siblings
Broader Network:
Sponsor, Teacher(s), Community as whole
Cognitive Schema:
Educational Rewards
Identity: Well-mannered, respectful, successful
Protection: Defend rights
Collective well-being: Family & community welfare
30

Implications: Fundamental Educational Needs
Agenda
I. Introduction
II. World Educational Models
III. Education in Honduras
IV. Evolution of Research
V. Methodology & Findings
VI. Implications & Recommendations
31

VI. Implications and Recommendations
Existing Knowledge Base Case Study
Personal qualities are important but family
and community factors play a potent role in
the school success of at-risk students.
School location and ownership is important.
Resources, most importantly teachers, are
critical. Invest in schools and teachers
within the community.
Opportunity costs are complex. Children
(especially eldest & daughters) provide
families with critical domestic and financial
support.
“Promising” students receive critical
supports; resilience becomes
interactive process.
Getting to school is one of several
potent barriers to success.
Families as a whole– parents &
siblings– engage in complex and
dynamic decision-making regarding
educational investments.
32

VI. Implications and Recommendations
Recommendations:
Enforce compulsory attendance laws.
Implement government-sponsored merit-based high school
scholarships for high achieving 6th graders.
Subsidize “busing” service to reduce the opportunity costs and
safety concerns associated with traveling to the local high
school.
Create official network of home-grown education advocates in
each community.
Facilitate sibling based educational support.
33

Educational Risk and Resilience in
Copán Ruinas, Honduras
Questions?
34

References
35

References: Educational Resilience in Developing Countries
Bedi, A.S., & Marshall, J.H. (2000). Primary school attendance in Honduras. Institute of Social
Studies. Working Paper Series No. 320, 1-24.
Bornstein, E. (2001). Child sponsorship, evangelism, and belonging in the work of World
Vision Zimbabwe. American Ethnologist, 28(3), 595-622.
Castellanos, R.R., Aguilar, C.R., & Mazariegos, K. (2005). Educación. El futuro es hoy: IInforme
del progreso educativo Honduras. Fundación para la Educación Ricardo Ernesto Maduro
Andreu & Programa de Promoción de la Reforma Educativa en América Latina y el Caribe.
Retrieved July 2, 2009
http://www.preal.org/Biblioteca.asp?Id_Carpeta=270&Camino=63|Preal%2
Publicaciones/262|Informes%20de%20Progreso%20Educativo/270|Informes%20Nacionales
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21 st century: Applications for advancing social
justice studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative
Research (3 rd ed.), pp. 507-535. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36

References: Educational Resilience in Developing Countries
Chaudhuri, K. & Roy, S, (2005). Gender gap in school completion rates: Evidence from rural
India, Social Science Research Network. Retrieved June 23, 2009:
http://ssrn.com/abstract=918242
DeStefano, J., Moore, A.S. , Balwanz, D., & Hartwell, A. (2006). Meeting EFA: Reaching the
underserved through Complementary Models of Effective Schooling. Washington DC
Education Quality Improvement Program 2 (EQUIP2). Academy for Educational
Development.
Ilon, L., & Moock, P. (1991). School attributes, household characteristics, and demands for
schooling: A case study of rural Peru. International Review of Education, 37(4), 429-451.
Ingram, G., Wils, A., Carrol, B. & Townsend, F. (2007). The untapped opportunity: How
public-private partnerships can advance education for all. Washington, DC: Education Policy
and Data Center.
Marshall, J.H., Mjia R, M.T., & Aguilar, C.R. (2008). Quality and efficiency in a complementary
middle school program: The Educatodos experience in Honduras. Comparative Education
Review, 52(2), 147-173.
37

References: Educational Resilience in Developing Countries
Moore, A.S., DeStefano, J., Gillies, J. (2008). Creating an opportunity to learn through
complementary models of education. Journal of Education for International Development,
3(3), 1-15.
Post, D. (2001). Region, poverty, sibship, and gender inequality in Mexican education: Will
targeted welfare policy make a difference for girls? Gender & Society, 15(3), 468-489.
Rawlings, L.B. & Rubio, G.M. (2005). Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfer
programs. The World Bank Research Observer, 20(1), 29-55.
Saihjee, A & Jandhyala, K. (2003). Through the life cycle of children: factors that
facilitate/impede successful primary school completion. Economic and Political Weekly,
38(47), 4994-5602.
Spring, J. (2009). Globalization of education: An introduction. New York: Routledge.
Stake, R.E. (2005). Qualitative case studies. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds). The Sage
Handbook of Qualitative Research (3 rd ed.), pp. 443-466. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
38

References: Educational Resilience in Developing Countries
United Nations Department of Public Information (2008). Millennium Development Goals: Fact
Sheet. Retrieved June 23, 2009: http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/mdg.htm
United Nations Development Program (2003). Millennium development goals: A compact among
nations to end poverty . New York, Oxford University Press.
Ward, M. (1995). Butterflies and bifurcations: Can chaos theory contribute to our understanding of
family systems? Journal of Marriage & the Family, 57, 629-638.
Waxman, H.C., Gray, J.P., & Padron, Y.N. (2003). Review of research on educational resilience. Santa
Cruz, CA: Center for Research on Education, Diversity & excellence. Retrieved, February 11, 2009
from http://repositories.cdlib.org/creded/rsrchrpts/rr_11/
Waxman, H.C., Brown, A., & Chang, H.L. (2004). Future directions for educational rresiliency
research. In H.C. Waxman, Y.N. Padron, & J.P. Gray (Eds). Educational resiliency: Student, teachers,
and school perspectives (pp. 263-273). Greenwich, CN: Information Age Publishing.
Wolff, L., Schiefelbein, E. & Schiefelbein, P. (2002). Primary education in Latin America: The
unfinished agenda. Washington, D.C.: Inter-American Development Bank. Retrieved June 23, 2009:
39

Appendix
40

100
Appendix: Honduras - MDG 2.1
95
90
85
80
75
70
88.3
Net Enrollment Ratio in Honduran Primary Education
89
89.4
88.6
96.9
95.1
93.2
91.5
97.9
96.2
94.7
93.2
2000 2001 2004 2005 2006 2007
Total net
enrollment ratio in
primary education,
boys
Total net
enrollment ratio in
primary education,
girls
41

100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Appendix: Honduras – MDG 2.2
Proportion of Pupils Starting Grade 1 Who Reach Last
Grade of Primary School in Honduras
67.2
61.1
83
84.5
79.2 79.3
91.3
86.2
1991 2004 2005 2006
Primary
completion
rate, boys
Primary
completion
rate, girls
42

100
95
90
85
80
75
70
Appendix: Honduras – MDG 2.3
86.9
Literacy Rates of Hondurans Aged 15-24
90.9
92.7
2001 2007
95.1
Literacy rates of
men aged 15-24
Literacy rates of
women aged 15-
24
43

Hutchinson, E. (Ed.). (2010). Dimensions of human behaviour: The changing life course (4th
ed.).Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
CHAPTER 5
MIDDLE CHILDHOOD
Leanne Charlesworth, Jim Wood, and Pamela Viggiani
Key Ideas
Case Study 5.1:Anthony Bryant’s Impending Assessment
Case Study 5.2:Brianna Shaw’s New Self-Image
Case Study 5.3: Manuel Vega’s Difficult Transition
Historical Perspective on Middle Childhood
Middle Childhood in the Multigenerational Family
Development in Middle Childhood
Physical Development
Cognitive Development
Cultural Identity Development
Emotional Development
Social Development
The Peer Group
Friendship and Intimacy
Team Play

Gender Identity and Gender Roles
Middle Childhood & Formal Schooling
Formal Schooling and Cognitive Development
Formal Schooling and Diversity
Formal Schooling: Home and School
Formal Schooling: Schools Mirror Community
Special Challenges in Middle Childhood
Poverty
Family and Community Violence
Mental and Physical Challenges
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
Autistic Spectrum Disorders
Emotional/Behavioral Disorder
Family Disruption
Risk Factors and Protective Factors in Middle Childhood
Implications for Practice
Key Terms
Active Learning
Web Resources
• How have our conceptions of middle childhood changed through time?
• What types of individual, family, school, community, and other systemic qualities are
most conducive to positive development during middle childhood?
• During middle childhood, what factors heighten developmental risk for children, and

what supports resilience?
KEY IDEAS
As you read this chapter, take note of these central ideas:
1. Values and beliefs regarding childhood in general, and middle childhood specifically, are
shaped by historical and sociocultural context.
2. During middle childhood, a wide variety of bio/psycho/social/spiritual changes take place
across the developmental domains.
3. As children progress through middle childhood, the family environment remains extremely
important, while the community environment—including the school—also becomes a
significant factor shaping development.
4. During middle childhood, peers have an increasingly strong impact on development; peer
acceptance becomes very important to well-being.
5. Poverty, family or community violence, special needs, and family disruption create
developmental risk for many children.
Case Study 5.1
Anthony Bryant’s Impending Assessment
Anthony is a 6-year-old boy living in an impoverished section of a large city. Anthony’s mother,
Melissa, was 14 when Anthony was born. Anthony’s father—James, 15 when Anthony was

orn—has always spent a great deal of time with Anthony. Although James now also has a 2-
year-old daughter from another relationship, he has told Melissa that Anthony and Melissa are
the most important people in his life. Once Anthony was out of diapers, James began spending
even more time with him, taking Anthony along to visit friends and occasionally, on overnight
outings.
James’s father was murdered when he was a toddler and he rarely sees his mother, who
struggles with a serious substance addiction and is known in the neighborhood as a prostitute.
James lived with his paternal grandparents until he was in his early teens, when he began to stay
with a favorite uncle. Many members of James’s large extended family have been incarcerated
on charges related to their involvement in the local drug trade. James’s favorite uncle is a well-
known and widely respected dealer. James himself has been arrested a few times and is currently
on probation.
Melissa and Anthony live with her mother. Melissa obtained her GED after Anthony’s birth,
and she has held a variety of jobs for local fast food chains. Melissa’s mother, Cynthia, receives
SSI because she has been unable to work for several years due to her advanced rheumatoid
arthritis, which was diagnosed when she was a teenager. Melissa remembers her father only as a
loud man who often yelled at her when she made noise. He left Cynthia and Melissa when
Melissa was 4 years old, and neither has seen him since. Cynthia seemed pleased when Anthony
was born and she has been a second mother to him, caring for him while Melissa attends school,
works, and socializes with James and her other friends.
Anthony has always been very active and energetic, frequently breaking things and creating
“messes” throughout the apartment. To punish Anthony, Cynthia spanks him with a belt or other
object—and she sometimes resorts to locking him in his room until he falls asleep. Melissa and

James are proud of Anthony’s wiry physique and rough and tough play; they have encouraged
him to be fearless and not to cry when he is hurt. Both Melissa and James use physical
punishment as their main discipline strategy with Anthony, but he usually obeys them before it is
needed.
Anthony entered kindergarten at the local public school last fall. When he started school, his
teacher told Melissa that he seemed to be a very smart boy, one of the only boys in the class who
already knew how to write his name and how to count to 20. It is now spring, however, and
Melissa is tired of dealing with Anthony’s teacher and other school staff. She has been called at
work a number of times, and recently the school social worker requested a meeting with her.
Anthony’s teacher reports that Anthony will not listen to her and frequently starts fights with the
other children in the classroom. Anthony’s teacher also states that Anthony constantly violates
school rules, like waiting in line and being quiet in the hallways, and he doesn’t seem bothered
by threats of punishment. Most recently, Anthony’s teacher has told Melissa that she would like
Anthony assessed by the school psychologist.
Case Study 5.2
Brianna Shaw’s New Self-Image
When Brianna was born, her mother Deborah was 31 years old with a 13-year-old daughter
(Stacy) from a prior, short-lived marriage. Deborah and Michael’s relationship was relatively
new when Deborah became pregnant with Brianna. Shortly after Deborah announced the
pregnancy, Michael moved into her mobile home. Michael and Deborah initially talked about
setting a wedding date and pursuing Michael’s legal adoption of Stacy, whose father had
remarried and was no longer in close contact.

Michael made it clear throughout Deborah’s pregnancy that he wanted a son. He seemed very
content and supportive of Deborah until around the time the couple found out the baby was a
girl. In Stacy’s view, Michael became mean and bossy in the months that followed. He started
telling Stacy what to do, criticizing Deborah’s appearance, and complaining constantly that
Deborah wasn’t any fun anymore since she stopped drinking and smoking while she was
pregnant.
During Brianna’s infancy, the couple’s relationship began to change even more rapidly.
Michael was rarely home and instead spent most of his free time hanging out with old friends.
When he did come by, he’d encourage Deborah to leave Brianna with Stacy so the two of them
could go out like “old times.” Even though her parents were Deborah’s full-time day care
providers and both Brianna and Stacy were thriving, Deborah was chronically exhausted from
balancing parenting and her full-time job as a nursing assistant. Soon, whenever Michael came
by, the couple frequently argued and their shouting matches gradually escalated to Michael
threatening to take Brianna away. Michael was soon dating another woman and his relationship
with Deborah and Stacy became increasingly hostile during the following four years.
The summer that Brianna turned 5, the local hospital closed down and Deborah lost her job.
After talking with her parents, Deborah made the decision to move her daughters to Fairfield, a
city four hours away from home. An old high school friend had once told Deborah that if she
ever needed a job, the large hospital her friend worked for had regular openings and even offered
tuition assistance. Within two months, Deborah had sold her mobile home, obtained a full-time
position with her friend’s employer, and signed a lease for a small townhouse in a suburb known
for its excellent school system.
When Brianna started kindergarten in their new town, her teacher described her to Deborah as

shy and withdrawn. Deborah remembered reading something in the school newsletter about a
social skills group run by a school social worker, and she asked if Brianna could be enrolled.
Gradually, the group seemed to make a difference and Brianna began to act more like her old
self, forming several friendships during the following two years.
Today, Brianna is 8 years old and has just entered third grade. Brianna usually leaves for
school on the bus at 8:00 a.m. and Deborah picks her up from an afterschool program at 5:45
p.m. When possible, Stacy picks Brianna up earlier, after her own classes at a local community
college are over. Brianna still spends summers with her grandparents in the rural area where she
was born. Academically, she has thus far excelled in school but a new concern is Brianna’s
weight. Brianna is 49 inches tall and weighs 72 pounds. Until the last year or so, Brianna seemed
unaware of the fact that many people viewed her as overweight. In the last several months,
however, Brianna has told Stacy and Deborah various stories about other children calling her
“fat” and making other comments about her size. Deborah feels that Brianna is increasingly
moody and angry when she is home. Brianna recently asked Deborah why she is “fat” and told
Stacy that she just wishes she were dead.
Case Study 5.3
Manuel Vega’s Difficult Transition
A slightly built 11-year-old Manuel is in seventh grade in Greenville, Mississippi. He speaks
English moderately well. He was born in Texas where his mother, Maria, and father, Estaban,
met. For Estaban, it has been an interesting journey from his home town in Mexico to
Mississippi. For generations, Esteban’s family lived and worked near Izucar de Matamoros, a
small city in Mexico on the inter-American highway. During their teen years in Izucar de

Matamoros, Estaban and his four younger brothers worked on the local sugar cane farms and in
the sugar refineries. By the time he was in his early twenties, Estaban began to look for better
paying work and was able to get his license to haul products from Izucar de Matamoros to larger
cities, including Mexico City. Estaban and one brother eventually moved to a medium-sized city
where his employer, the owner of a small trucking company, provided an apartment for several
of his single truckers.
After three productive years in the trucking industry, the company went bankrupt. With his
meager savings, Estaban made arrangements to travel to Arizona to pursue his dream of owning
his own trucking company. Working as a day laborer, he eventually made his way to Laredo,
Texas where he met and married Maria. Although both Maria and Estaban’s formal schooling
ended relatively early, both acquired a basic command of English while living in Laredo. During
the late 1970s, Maria and Estaban requested documentation for Estaban and after a lengthy
process, they were successful.
Estaban and Maria began their family while Estaban continued to work at day labor
construction jobs in and around Laredo. At home and with their relatives and neighbors, Maria
and Estaban spoke Spanish exclusively. In their neighborhood, Maria’s many relatives not only
provided social support, but also helped Maria sell tamales and other traditional Mexican foods
to locals and occasional tourists. Eventually, the family saved enough money for the purchase of
a small truck that Estaban used to make deliveries of Maria’s specialties to more distant
restaurants. However, the family faced many competitors in the local Mexican food industry.
Maria’s Uncle Arturo urged the family to move to the Mississippi Delta where he owns Mi Casa,
a Mexican restaurant and wholesale business. Uncle Arturo was hopeful that Maria would enrich
his menu with her mastery of Mexican cuisine. He promised employment for Estaban, hauling

Mexican specialty food staples to the growing number of Mexican restaurants in the Delta,
ranging from Memphis to Biloxi.
Almost three years ago, Estaban and Maria decided to take Arturo up on his offer and together
with their two sons, they moved to Greenville. Their older son Carlos never adjusted to school
life in Mississippi. Now 16, Carlos did not return to school this fall. Instead, he began working
full-time for his father loading and unloading the truck and providing his more advanced English
language capacity to open up new markets for the business. At first Maria and Estaban resisted
the idea of Carlos dropping out of school, but he was insistent. Carlos always struggled in
school; he repeated a grade early on in his education and found most of his other subjects
challenging. The family’s new business, after initially thriving has struggled financially. Carlos
knows the family finances have been in peril and that he is needed.
Carlos and his younger brother Manuel have always been close. Manuel yearns to be like his
older brother and Carlos has always considered it his job to protect and care for his younger
brother. Carlos sees in Manuel the potential for school success that he never had. He tells Manuel
that he must stay in school to acquire the “book learning” that he could never grasp. But leaving
the warm embrace of their former neighborhood in Texas for the Mississippi Delta has been hard
for Manuel. Their tight knit family bonds are still in tact, but they are still struggling to
understand how Delta culture operates. In Manuel’s old school, most students and teachers spoke
or knew how to speak Spanish and Manuel always felt he fit in. Now, Manuel is one of a small
percentage of Spanish speaking students in his new school, where the vast majority of students
and staff are African American and speak only English.
In the school setting, Manuel’s new ESL teacher, Ms. Jones, is concerned about him. His
teacher reports that he struggles academically and shows little interest in classroom activities or

peers, often seeming sullen. Ms. Jones has observed that Manuel frequently appears to be
daydreaming and when teachers try to talk with him, he seems to withdraw further. Ms. Jones
knows that Manuel’s records from Texas indicate that he was an outgoing, socially adjusted
primary school student. However, his records also show that his reading and writing performance
was below grade level starting in first grade. Ms. Jones has found that if she speaks with Manuel
in Spanish while taking a walk around the school, he will share stories about his family and his
old neighborhood and friends. To date, no educational or psychological assessments have taken
place. When Manuel meets his social worker, he avoids eye contact and appears extremely
uncomfortable.
Historical Perspective on Middle Childhood
Until the beginning of the twentieth century, children were viewed primarily in economic terms
within most European countries and the United States (Fass & Mason, 2000). Emphasis was
often placed on the child’s productivity and ability to contribute to the family’s financial well-
being. Middle childhood represented a period during which children became increasingly able to
play a role in maintaining or improving the economic status of the family and community.
Beginning in the early twentieth century, however, a radical shift occurred in the Western world’s
perceptions of children. Children passing through middle childhood became categorized as
“school age” and their education became a societal priority. Child labor and compulsory
education laws supported and reinforced this shift in societal values. In many parts of the
nonindustrialized world, however, children continue to play important economic roles for
families. In Latin America, Africa, and some parts of Asia, childhood is short. Many children
from the most impoverished families ive and work on the streets (called “street children”). There
is no time for the luxury of an indulged childhood. In rapidly industrializing countries, children

must balance their economic productivity with time spent in school (Leeder, 2004).
Mirroring political ideals, the shift toward the public education of children was intended to
be an equalizer, enabling children from a variety of economic backgrounds to become successful
citizens. Public schools were to be free and open to all. Instead, however, they reflected
traditional public ambiguity toward poverty and diversity, and they embodied particular value
systems and excluded certain groups (Allen-Meares, Washington, & Walsh, 1996). In the United
States, the first public schools were, in effect, open to European Americans only, and children
from marginalized or nondominant groups rarely received advanced education. Today, in the
United States and around the globe, schools continue to play a pivotal role in reinforcing
segregation and deculturalizing various groups of children (Kozol, 2005; Spring, 2004). In
essence, as schools pressure children from nondominant groups to assimilate or direct unequal
resources toward their development (Darling-Hammond, 2007), they play a role in intentionally
or unintentionally destroying or severely limiting a culture’s ability to sustain itself. These
marginalized groups consistently achieve more poorly than the rest of the student population, a
situation often referred to as the “achievement gap.”
The evolution of our perceptions of middle childhood continues. Although there is incredible
diversity among children, families, and communities, generally speaking, middle childhood has
come to be viewed in the United States as a time when education, play, leisure, and social
activities should dominate daily life (Fass & Mason, 2000). Sigmund Freud perceived middle
childhood as a relatively uneventful phase of development. But in the twenty-first century,
middle childhood is recognized as a potentially turbulent time in children’s lives.
The age range classified as middle childhood is subject to debate. In the United States, it is
most often defined as the period beginning at approximately ages 5 or 6 and ending at

approximately ages 10 to 12 (Berk, 2002a, 2002b; Broderick & Blewitt, 2006; Craig & Baucum,
2002). However, some assert that middle childhood begins a bit later than 6 (Allen & Marotz,
2003) and ends at the onset of puberty (Davies, 2004), which ranges tremendously among
children.
Images of middle childhood often include children who are physically active and
intellectually curious, making new friends and learning new things. But as Anthony Bryant,
Brianna Shaw, and Manuel Vega demonstrate, middle childhood is filled with both opportunities
and challenges. For some children, it is a period of particular vulnerability. In fact, when we
think of school-aged children, images of child poverty and related school inequities, family and
community violence, sexual victimization or precociousness (early development), learning
challenges and physical and emotional ailments like depression, asthma, and Attention
Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder may dominate our thoughts. In some parts of the world, children
between the ages of 6 and 12 are vulnerable to war, land mines, and forced enlistment as
soldiers. They are also vulnerable to slave-like labor and being sold as sex workers in an
international child trafficking economy (Human Rights Watch, 2006).
Middle Childhood in the Multigenerational Family
During middle childhood, the child’s social world expands dramatically. Although the family is
not the only relevant force in a child’s life, it remains an extremely significant influence on
development. Families are often in a constant state of change and so the child’s relationships
with family members and the environment that the family inhabits are likely to be different from
the child’s first experiences of family. For example, consider the changes in Anthony Bryant’s,
Brianna Shaw’s, and Manuel Vega’s families over time and the ways in which family
relationships have been continually evolving.

Despite the geographical distances that often exist between family members today, nuclear
families are still emotional subsystems of extended, multigenerational family systems. The
child’s nuclear family is significantly shaped by past, present, and anticipated future experiences,
events, and relationships (Carter & McGoldrick, 2005a). Profoundly important factors such as
historical events, culture, and social structure often influence children through their family
systems. And family members’ experiences and characteristics trickle through families via
generational ties. These experiences or characteristics may be biological in nature and therefore
fairly obvious, or they may include more nebulous qualities such as acquired emotional strengths
or wounds. For example, consider Brianna’s maternal grandfather, who is African American and
grew up with the legacy of slavery under Jim Crow laws and legal segregation in the United
States, or Anthony’s maternal grandmother, who as a child was repeatedly victimized sexually.
Children become connected to events or phenomena such as a familial history of child abuse or a
group history of discrimination and oppression (restrictions and exploitation), even in the
absence of direct experiences in the present generation (see Crawford, Nobles, & Leary, 2003;
Hass, 1990; Karson, 2001; McGoldrick, 2004).
How are Anthony, Brianna, and Manuel affected by their multigenerational families?
Thus, the developing school-age child is shaped not only by events and individuals explicitly
evident in present time and physical space but also by those events and individuals that have
more directly influenced the lives of their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, and beyond.
These influences—familial, cultural, and historical in nature—shape all aspects of each child’s
development in an abstract and complex fashion.
Development in Middle Childhood

New developmental tasks are undertaken in middle childhood and development occurs within the
physical, cognitive, emotional, and social dimensions. Although each developmental domain is
considered separately for our analytical purposes, changes in the developing child reflect the
dynamic interaction continuously occurring across these dimensions.
Physical Development
During middle childhood, physical development continues steadily but children of the same
chronological age may vary greatly in stature, weight, and sexual development. For most
children, height and weight begin to advance less rapidly than during prior developmental
phases, but steady growth continues. The nature and pace of physical growth during this period
is shaped by both genetic and environmental influences in interaction (Craig & Baucum, 2002).
As children progress from kindergarten to early adolescence, their fine and gross motor skills
typically advance. In the United States today, children in this age range are often encouraged to
gain a high level of mastery over physical skills associated with a particular interest such as
dance, sports, or music. However, medical professionals caution that school-age children
continue to possess unique physical vulnerabilities related to the growth process. They remain
quite susceptible to injuries associated with excessive physical activity or training (Craig &
Baucum, 2002).
Middle childhood is a developmental phase of entrenchment or eradication of many potent
risk or protective factors manifesting in this developmental domain. Focusing on risk, for
children residing in chronically impoverished countries and communities, issues such as
malnutrition and disease threaten physical health. Seemingly innocuous issues such as poor
dental hygiene or mild visual impairment may become more serious as they begin to impact
other areas of development such as cognitive, emotional, or social well-being. In the United

States, health issues such as asthma and obesity are of contemporary concern and often either
improve or become severe during middle childhood.
Unintentional physical injuries change in nature but continue as a major threat to well-being
(Berk, 2002b). In the United States, motor vehicle injuries and drowning are currently the
leading causes of injury-related death among children ages 5 to 14 (National Center for Injury
Prevention and Control, 2001). Nearly one-third of bicyclists killed in traffic accidents are
children in this age range. Playground-related injuries are also common in middle childhood and
are often severe or even fatal, including falls from playground surfaces and strangulation on
playground equipment. Check that this is still accurate and update citation date
Moreover, school-age children gain new risks: almost one-third of rapes occur before age 12
and, among children ages 10 to 14, suicide is the third leading cause of death. Some speculate
that the physical injuries unique to middle childhood may be indirectly facilitated by declines in
adult supervision and adult over-estimation of children’s safety-related knowledge and ability to
implement safety practices. In addition, children’s continued physical and cognitive (specifically,
judgment and decision making processes) vulnerabilities combine, potentially, with an increasing
propensity to engage in risk-taking activities and behaviors (Berk, 2002b; National Center for
Injury Prevention and Control, 2001). UPDATE CITE YEAR
Insert Photo 5.1 Here
Photo 5.1 During middle childhood, physical development continues steadily and children are
encouraged to gain mastery over physical skills. WHAT ABOUT A PHOTO OF A GROUP OF
DIVERSE CHILDREN, VARYING IN SIZE AS WELL?
Middle childhood is the developmental phase that leads from prepubescence (the period prior
to commencement of the physiological processes and changes associated with puberty) to

pubescence (the period during which the child begins to experience diverse and gradual physical
processes associated with puberty). Pubescence includes the growth of pubic hair for boys and
girls, breast development for girls, and genitalia development for boys. Many of us may not think
of middle childhood as the developmental phase during which puberty becomes relevant.
Precocious puberty has traditionally been defined as puberty beginning before age 8 in girls and
9 in boys (Nakamoto, 2000). However, although ongoing consultation with a child’s pediatrician
or other health care provider is always recommended, recent research suggests that the initial
signs of pubic hair and breast development may be considered normative when it begins as early
as 7 to 8 years of age among non-Hispanic white girls and 6 to 7 years of age among non-
Hispanic black girls (Nakamoto, 2000). Kaplowitz (2006) explains that “it now appears that the
great majority of early-maturing girls (using the 8-years-old definition) are normal girls who are
at the early end of the normal age distribution for pubertal onset” (p. 490).
What impact do these differences in biological age have on psychological and social
development during middle childhood?
Exhibit 5.1 summarizes recent research focusing on puberty onset differences according to
race and gender. Understanding of sexual development and puberty trends broadens knowledge
of development generally, as well as increases our ability to detect maturation patterns indicating
a need for more thorough assessment, for example, to rule out endocrine pathology including
growth disorders or hormone imbalances. Professionals working with children should be
knowledgeable about the full spectrum of pubescence as well as related personal biases or
misconceptions.
Exhibit 5.1 Puberty Onset Comparison
Median Age at Onset

Non-
Hispanic
White
Girls Boys
Non-
Hispanic
Black
an
Mexic
American
Non-
Hispanic
White
Non-
Hispanic
Black
Pubic Hair 10.6 9.4 10.4 12.0 11.2 12.3
Breast
Development
Genitalia
Development
SOURCE: Sun et al., 2002.
10.4 9.5 9.8 — — —
— — — 10.0 9.2 10.3
an
Mexic
American
Focusing on racial differences, many studies have found that in the United States, non-
Hispanic African American girls begin puberty earlier than other children (Adair & Gordon-
Larsen, 2001; Benefice, Caius, & Garnier, 2004; Chumlea et al., 2003; Peck, 1997). However,
Sun et al. (2002) point out that across gender and racial groups, children continue to complete
their secondary sexual development, or development of secondary sex characteristics, at
approximately the same age. This issue will receive further attention in Chapter 6. UPDATE
REFERENCES WHERE POSSIBLE HERE
A trend toward earlier age of puberty onset, particularly among girls, has brought much
attention to the potential causes. Some have argued that the trend may be due to certain food-
based or environmental chemicals known to impact hormonal activity (Wang, Needham, & Barr,
2005), or changing social conditions including family characteristics (Ellis & Garber, 2000;

Moffitt, Caspi, Belsky, & Silva, 1992); popular media speculates that the sexualization of young
girls may play a role (Irvine, 2006; Levin, 2005). Recently, an oft cited cause is a gradual
increase in children’s average Body Mass Index (BMI) and the related issue of childhood
obesity.
There is evidence suggesting that a fat-protein called leptin may be the underlying link
between the weight and puberty trend association. Kaplowitz (2006) explains that leptin levels
typically rise in girls, but not boys, at the time of puberty and states “we can speculate that
overweight girls with higher leptin levels are more likely to enter puberty and reach menarche at
an earlier age. Such a connection between leptin and normal reproductive functioning makes
evolutionary sense, in that it ensures that pregnancy will not occur unless there are adequate fat
stores to sustain the viability of the fetus” (p. 490). However, Wang, Needham, and Barr (2005)
caution that “the signaling pathway for leptin in the development of puberty is not known, and
further work is necessary to define this mechanism and the difference in leptin levels among
racial/ethnicity groups” (p. 1101). Wang, Needham, and Barr (2005) identify nutritional status;
genetic predisposition, including race/ethnicity; and environmental chemical exposure as
associated with age of puberty onset.
It should be noted that careful examination of puberty onset trends suggests that the “trend
toward earlier onset of puberty in U.S. girls over the past 50 years is not as strong as some
reports suggested” (Kaplowitz, 2006, p. 487). Indeed, within the United States, research suggests
that there is evidence supporting this trend, but only to a certain point. Specifically, the average
age of menarche decreased from approximately 14.8 years in 1877 to about 12.8 years in the mid
1960s (Kaplowitz, 2006). Most researchers have concluded that the general trend observed
during this broad historical time period is due to health and nutrition improvement within the

population as a whole. A recent examination of available data concludes that there is little
evidence to support a clear continued decline in more recent years. Nevertheless, some have
suggested that our public education and health systems should reconsider the timing and nature
of health education for children because the onset of puberty may impact social and emotional
development and has traditionally been associated with a variety of “risky and unhealthy
behaviors” (Wang et al., p. 1101) among children and adolescents. Indeed a relationship, albeit
complex, appears to exist between puberty and social development for both boys and girls
(Felson, 2002; Kaltiala-Heino, Kosunen & Rimpela, 2003; Martin, 1996; McCabe &
Ricciardelli, 2003). As they progress through puberty, girls in particular may be faced with new
sexual attention from both peers and adults (American Association of University Women, 1995).
Intervention focused on self-protection and individual rights and responsibilities may be
beneficial, and schools committed to the safety of their students must diligently educate staff and
students about sexual development, sexual harassment, and sexual abuse.
Middle childhood is the developmental phase when increased public attention and self-
awareness is directed toward various aspects of physical growth, skill, or activity patterns and
levels deemed outside the normal range. Because physical development is outwardly visible, it
affects perceptions of self and the way a child is viewed and treated by peers and adults in a
cyclical fashion. Physical development can also affect children’s peer relationships. School-age
children constantly compare themselves to others, and physical differences are often the topic of
discussion. Whereas “late” developers may feel inferior about their size or lack of sexual
development, “early” developers may feel awkward and out of place among their peers. Many
children worry about being “normal.” Reassurance by adults that physical development varies
among people and that all development is “normal” is crucial.

Cognitive Development
For most children, the acquisition of cognitive abilities that occurs early in middle childhood
allows the communication of thoughts with increasing complexity. Public education plays a
major role in the cognitive development of children in the United States, if only because children
attend school throughout the formative years of such development. When Anthony Bryant,
Brianna Shaw, and Manuel Vega first entered school, their readiness to confront the challenges
and opportunities that school presents was shaped by prior experiences. Anthony, for example,
entered school generally prepared for the academic emphases associated with kindergarten. He
was perhaps less prepared for the social expectations present in the school environment.
In Jean Piaget’s (1936/1952) terms, children start school during the second stage
(preoperational thought) and finish school when they are completing the fourth and final stage of
cognitive development (formal operations). In the third stage (concrete operations), children are
able to solve concrete problems using logical problem-solving strategies. By the end of middle
childhood, they enter the formal operations stage and become able to solve hypothetical
problems using abstract concepts (refer back to Exhibit 3.4 for an overview of Piaget’s stages of
cognitive development). School children rapidly develop conceptual thought, the ability to
categorize complicated systems of objects, and the ability to solve problems (Allen-Meares,
1995). UPDATE CITATION
Bergen and Coscia (2001) point out that as you observe children moving into and through
middle childhood, you will note these rapid gains in intellectual processes and memory. These
brain-produced shifts in the child’s understanding of him or herself and the surrounding world
are consistent with the transition into Piaget’s concrete operational stage of cognitive
development. Potential gains in cognitive development enable new learning in a variety of

environments. For example, children gain enhanced ability to understand people, situations, and
events within their surrounding environments. The task for caregivers and others within the
child’s environment is to recognize and respond to this ability sensitively by nurturing and
supporting the child’s expanding cognitive abilities.
Insert Photo 5.2 Here
Photo 5.2 Middle childhood is a critical time for children to acquire a sense of self-confidence
and develop conceptual thought.
Beyond Piaget’s ideas, brain development and cognitive functioning during middle childhood
have received relatively little attention when compared to research devoted to brain development
in prior developmental phases. However, our ever-expanding general understanding of the
human brain illuminates opportunities and vulnerabilities present throughout childhood. For
example, professionals working with children are increasingly aware of the meaning and
implications of brain plasticity. As pointed out in Chapter 3, infancy, toddlerhood, and early
childhood appear to represent “sensitive periods” in brain development. By middle childhood, a
child’s brain development and functioning has been profoundly shaped by the nature of earlier
experiences and development. And yet, remarkable brain plasticity continues, with brain
structure and functioning capable of growth and refinement throughout life (Shonkoff & Phillips,
2000). The conceptual framework perhaps most useful to understanding this potential and the
processes at play is nonlinear dynamic systems theory, also known as complexity or chaos theory
(Applegate & Shapiro, 2005). Applied to this context, this theoretical perspective proposes that
changes in one area or aspect of the neurological system may stimulate or interact with other
neurological or broader physiological system components in an unpredictable fashion,
potentially leading to unanticipated outcomes. Brain development follows a coherent

developmental process, but brain plasticity in particular demonstrates the role of complex
nonlinear neurological system dynamics and processes.
There are at least two aspects of brain development of particular interest when we focus on
middle childhood. The first is the idea that different brain regions appear to develop according to
different time lines. In other words, middle childhood may be a “sensitive period” for certain
aspects of brain development not yet clearly understood. The second important idea is the notion
that brain synapses (connections between cells in the nervous system) that are initially present as
children enter this developmental phase may be gradually eliminated if they are not used. As
reported in Chapter 3, there seems to be a pattern of synaptogenesis, or creation and fine-tuning
of brain synapses, in the human cerebral cortex during early childhood which appears to be
followed by a gradual pruning process that eventually reduces the overall number of synapses to
their adult levels (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Ongoing positive and diverse learning
opportunities during middle childhood may help facilitate continued brain growth and optimal
refinement of existing structures. The National Research Council of Medicine (Shonkoff &
Phillips, 2000) argues that it is essential to recognize that although genetic factors and the nature
and timing of early experiences matter, “more often than not, the developing child remains
vulnerable to risk and open to protective influences throughout the early years of life and into
adulthood” (p. 31).
Variations in brain development and functioning appear to play a critical role in learning
abilities and disabilities as well as patterns of behavior (Bergen & Coscia, 2001). During middle
childhood, identification and potential diagnosis of special needs, including issues such as
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder and autism spectrum disorders, typically peak. In recent
years, an area of public interest is gender or sex-based differences in brain functioning and,

possibly, learning styles. This interest has been stimulated in part by evidence suggesting that
boys are currently at higher risk than girls for poor literacy performance, special education
placement, and school drop out (Weaver-Hightower, 2003).
Gurian (2001) and Sax (2005) have argued that brain-based cognitive processing, behavior,
and learning style differences may be responsible for the somewhat stable trends observed in
gender differences in educational achievement. The importance of sex, or gender, in shaping the
human experience cannot be overstated. Gender is a profoundly important organizing factor
shaping human development and its biological correlates may impact behavior and learning
processes in ways we do not clearly understand. In particular, the nature and causes of
educational achievement differences among girls and boys are “complex and the
interconnections of the causes are poorly understood” (Weaver-Hightower, 2003, p. 487). Also, it
is critically important to remember that among children, gender is but one of several personal
and group characteristics relevant to understanding educational privilege specifically, as well as
risk and protection generally.
Concern about the well-being of boys in schools has been stimulated, in part, by the assertion
that in the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, boys’ performance has been declining
on indicators of educational achievement and attainment. Some argue that boys have suffered, in
educational contexts, from the amount of attention dedicated to supporting girls’ educational
success during the late twentieth century (Sommers, 2000). Indeed, a variety of publications and
educational initiatives in the late twentieth century attempted to correct the role that schools and
other social institutions had traditionally played in placing girls at risk emotionally, socially, and
academically (see American Association of University Women, 1995; Orenstein, 1994; Pipher,
1994; Sadker & Sadker, 1994).

There is speculation, however, that today’s schools, in particular the early years of public
schooling, privilege a predominately “female” learning style (Sax, 2005). On the other hand,
evidence suggests that boys continue to receive advantage in a subtle fashion throughout the
schooling experience (Sadker & Sadker, 1994; Guzzetti, Young, Gritsavage, Fyfe, &
Hardenbrook, 2002). And while girls may “out perform” boys in certain areas, such as literacy
(reading and writing), there is evidence that boys generally continue to “out perform” girls in the
math, science, and technology domains (Barrs, 1994; Dee, 2005; Rowan, Knobel, Bigum, &
Lankshear, 2002). In sum, careful analysis of contemporary data and shortcomings indicates that
the differences between boys and girls are complex and there simply is not clear evidence of
exclusively one-sided advantage or disadvantage (Bailey, 2002).
Several developmental theorists, including those listed in Exhibit 5.2, have described the
changes and developmental tasks associated with middle childhood. According to these
traditional theorists, thinking becomes more complex, reasoning becomes more logical, the
child’s sense of morality expands and develops into a more internally based system, and the
ability to understand the perspectives of others emerges. However, shortcomings in the focus,
methods, and findings of many traditional developmental theorists are today widely recognized
(see Gibbs & Huang, 1989; Gilligan, 1982; Langford, 1995; Mowrer & Klein, 2001). In
particular, much developmental research historically lacked rigor and did not devote sufficient
attention to females and children belonging to nondominant groups.
A number of contemporary developmental theorists have focused on assessing the relevance
and applicability of these developmental tasks to all children. Most agree that the central ideas of
the theorists summarized in Exhibit 5.2 continue to be meaningful. For example, Erikson’s
thoughts remain widely recognized as relevant to our understanding of school-age children. In

some areas, however, these developmental theories have been critiqued and subsequently
expanded. This is particularly true in the area of moral development.
The best-known theory of moral development is Lawrence Kohlberg’s stage theory (for an
overview of this theory, refer back to Exhibit 4.1). Kohlberg’s research on moral reasoning found
that children do not enter the second level of conventional moral reasoning, or morality based on
approval of authorities or upon upholding societal standards, until about age 9 or 10, sometime
after they have the cognitive skills for such reasoning. Robert Coles (1987, 1997) expanded upon
Kohlberg’s work and emphasized the distinction between moral imagination—the gradually
developed capacity to reflect on what is right and wrong—and moral conduct, pointing out that a
“well-developed conscience does not translate, necessarily, into a morally courageous life” (p. 3).
To Coles, moral behavior is shaped by daily experiences, developing in response to the way the
child is treated in his or her various environments such as home and school. The school-age child
often pays close attention to the discrepancies between the “moral voices” and actions of the
adults in his or her world, including parents, friends’ parents, relatives, teachers, and coaches.
Each new and significant adult sets an example for the child, sometimes complementing and
sometimes contradicting the values emphasized in the child’s home environment.
Exhibit 5.2 Phases and Tasks of Middle Childhood
Theorist Phase or Task Description
Freud
(1938/1973)
Latency Sexual instincts become less dominant;
Erikson (1950) Industry versus inferiority
superego develops further.
Capacity to cooperate and create
develops; result is sense of either

Piaget
(1936/1952)
Piaget
(1932/1965)
Kohlberg
(1969)
mastery or incompetence.
Concrete operational Reasoning becomes more logical but
Moral realism and autonomous
morality
Preconventional and
conventional morality
remains at concrete level; principle of
conservation is learned.
Conception of morality changes from
absolute and external to relative and
internal.
Reasoning based on punishment and
reward is replaced by reasoning based
on formal law and external opinion.
Selman (1976) Self-reflective perspective taking Ability develops to view own actions,
thoughts, and emotions from another’s
perspective.
Also, Gilligan (1982) has extensively criticized Kohlberg’s theory of moral development as
paying inadequate attention to girls’ “ethic of care” and the keen emphasis girls often place on
relationships and the emotions of others. Gilligan has argued that gender differences can be
observed not necessarily in basic values or moral choices but in ethical thinking and decision
making processes (Davies, 2004). Consistent with Gilligan’s ideas, a number of developmental
theorists have argued that girls moving through middle childhood must reconcile increasing
emphasis and abilities in the area of abstract linear thinking with their interrelational
intelligence, which is based on emotional and social intelligence and is similar to Howard
Gardner’s concept of interpersonal intelligence (Borysenko, 1996, p. 41). Such
developmentalists, drawing upon feminist scholarship, point out that both girls and boys advance

apidly in the cognitive and moral developmental domains during middle childhood, but the
genders may be distinct in their approaches to social relationships and interactions, and such
differences may shape the nature of development in all domains (Borysensko, 1996; Davies,
2004; Gilligan, 1982; Taylor, Gilligan & Sullivan, 1995).
Many developmentalists have also examined the implications of advancing cognitive abilities
for children’s understanding of their group identities. Children become much more aware of
ethnic identities and other aspects of diversity (such as socioeconomic status and gender
identities) during their middle childhood years. Cultural awareness and related beliefs are shaped
by the nature of experiences such as exposure to diversity within the family and community,
including school, contexts. Unlike the preschoolers’ attraction to “black and white”
classifications, children progressing through middle childhood are increasingly capable of
understanding the complexities of group memberships; in other words, they are cognitively
capable of rejecting over-simplistic stereotypes and recognizing the complexities present within
all individuals and groups (Davies, 2004). McAdoo (2001) asserts that, compared to children
who identify with the majority group, children from nondominant groups are much more likely
to possess awareness of both their own group identity or identities, as well as majority group
characteristics. Thus, a now widely recognized developmental task associated with middle
childhood is the acquisition of positive group identity or identities (Davies, 2004; Verkuyten,
2005). The terms bicultural or multicultural competence are widely used to refer to the skills
children from nondominant groups must acquire in order to survive and thrive developmentally
(Chestang, 1972; Lum, 2003a, 2003b; Norton, 1993).
Manuel speaks English as a second language and in some ways is representative of many
school-age children. An estimated 47.0 million people age 5 and older in the United States, or

approximately 18% of the population, speak a language other than English at home, a figure that
is expected to increase steadily over time (Shin & Bruno, 2003). Multi and bilingual children in
the United States have traditionally been thought to be at risk of developmental deficits.
However, significant research evidence demonstrates that bilingualism may have a positive
impact on cognitive development. Bilingual children often perform better than monolingual
children on tests of analytical reasoning, concept formation, and cognitive flexibility (Hakuta,
Ferdman, & Diaz, 1987). Moreover, bilingual children may be more likely to acquire capacities
and skills that enhance their reading achievement (Campbell & Sais, 1995). With growing
evidence of brain plasticity and the way that environmental demands change brain structures,
researchers have begun to explore the relationship between bilingualism and the brain. They
have found that learning a second language increases the density of grey matter in the left
inferior parietal cortex. The earlier a second language is learned and the more proficient the
person becomes, the more benefit to brain development (Mechelli et al., 2004). Despite such
findings, however, too often bilingual children receive little support for their native language and
culture in the school context.
Cultural Identity Development
For many European American children, ethnicity does not lead to comparison with others or
exploration of identity (Rotheram-Borus, 1993). But for most children who are members of
nondominant groups, ethnicity or race may be a central part of the quest for identity that begins
in middle childhood and continues well into adolescence and young adulthood. By around age 7,
cognitive advances allow children to view themselves and others as capable of belonging to more
than one “category” at once, as capable of possessing two or more heritages simultaneously
(Morrison & Bordere, 2001). As children mature, they may become more aware of not only dual

or multiple aspects of identity but also of the discrimination and inequality to which they may be
subjected. Such issues may in fact present overwhelming challenges for the school-age child
belonging to a nondominant group. At a time when development of a sense of belonging is
critical, these issues set some children apart from members of dominant groups and may increase
the challenges they experience.
How can cultural identity serve as a protective factor for children from nondominant groups?
Segregation based on ethnicity/race and social class is common in friendships at all ages,
including middle childhood. Like adults, children are more likely to hold negative attitudes
toward groups to which they do not belong. However, children, like adults, vary in the extent to
which they hold ethnic and social class biases. Specific learning experiences appear to be
influential in the development of childhood prejudice (Powlishta, Serbin, Doyle, & White, 1994).
Verbalized prejudice declines during middle childhood as children learn to obey social norms
against overt prejudice. However, children belonging to nondominant groups continue to face
institutional discrimination and other significant challenges throughout this period of the life
course (Bigler & Liben, 1993; Gutierrez, 2004; Harps, 2005).
A particular challenge for children like Manuel Vega may be blending contradictory values,
standards, or traditions. Some children respond to cultural contradictions by identifying with the
mainstream American culture (assimilation) in which they are immersed or by developing
negative attitudes about their subcultural group memberships either consciously or
subconsciously (stereotype vulnerability). Research evidence indicates that rejection of
ethnic/race identity is particularly likely among members of nondominant groups lacking a
supportive social movement that stresses group pride (Phinney, 1989). On the other hand,
children whose experience in the mainstream culture challenges self-esteem and raises barriers to

academic success may reject the dominant culture and define themselves in reaction against
majority values (Matute-Bianchi, 1986). Other children begin to develop their own unique blend
of group memberships and cultures. Individual reactions, like that of Manuel, will be shaped by
the child’s unique experiences and social influences. Blending the values of both dominant and
nondominant groups in a manner that promotes self-esteem is possible but may be difficult and
confusing for the school-age child (Bautista de Domanico, Crawford, & DeWolfe, 1994;
Markstrom-Adams & Adams, 1995; Roebers & Schneider, 1999). It is a major developmental
task to integrate dual or multiple identities into a consistent personal identity as well as a positive
ethnic or racial identity (Gibbs & Huang, 1989).
Many models of identity development have been developed for children of mixed ethnicity,
with new ideas and theories constantly emerging. It is clear that identity development for such
children is diverse, extremely complex, and not well understood. As always, however, parents
and professionals must start where the child is, with a focus on facilitating understanding and
appreciation of heritage in order to promote development of an integrated identity and positive
self-regard (Kopola, Esquivel, & Baptiste, 1994). Children should be provided with opportunities
to explore their dual or multiple heritages and to select their own terms for identifying and
describing themselves (Morrison & Bordere, 2001). Although studies have produced diverse
findings, positive outcomes seem to be associated with supportive family systems and
involvement in social and recreational activities that expose children to their heritage and lead to
self-affirmation (Fuligni, 1997; Gibbs & Huang, 1989; Guarnaccia & Lopez, 1998; Herring,
1995).
Key tasks for adults, then, include educating children about family histories and supporting
the creation of an integrated sense of self. Individuals and organizations within the child’s social

system can provide support by being sensitive to issues related to ethnic/racial origin and
ethnic/racial distinctions; they can also help by celebrating cultural diversity and trying to
increase the cultural sensitivity of all children. Such interventions appear to encourage fewer
negative stereotypes of peers belonging to nondominant groups (Rotheram-Borus, 1993).
In general, it is critical to the positive identity development of all children, but particularly
those from nondominant groups, that schools value diversity and offer a variety of experiences
that focus on positive identity development (Morrison & Bordere, 2001). Ensuring that schools
respect nondominant cultures and diverse learning styles is an important step. In order for
schools to do this, all school staff must develop self-awareness. A variety of materials have been
designed to facilitate this process among educators (see Lee, Menkart & Okazawa-Rae, 1998;
Matsumoto-Grah, 1992; Seefeldt, 1993) and other professionals (Fong, 2003; Lum, 2003b; Sue
& McGoldrick, 2005).
The family environment of course plays a critical role in shaping all aspects of development,
and the family is typically the vehicle through which cultural identity is transmitted. Children
typically learn, through their families, how to view their ethnicity/race as well as that of others,
as well as coping strategies to respond to potential or direct exclusion, discrimination, or racism
(Barbarin, McCandies, Coleman, & Atkinson, 2004).
Emotional Development
As most children move from early childhood into and through middle childhood, they experience
significant gains in their ability to identify and articulate their own emotions as well as the
emotions of others. Exhibit 5.3 summarizes several gains school-age children often make in the
area of emotional functioning. It is important to recognize, however, that culture and other
aspects of group identity may shape emotional development. For example, cultures vary in their

acceptance of expressive displays of emotion.
What are our societal expectations for emotional intelligence during middle childhood?
Many children in this age range develop more advanced coping skills that help them when
encountering upsetting, stressful, or traumatic situations. As defined by Daniel Goleman (1995),
emotional intelligence refers to the ability to “motivate oneself and persist in the face of
frustrations, to control impulse and delay gratification, to regulate one’s moods and keep distress
from swamping the ability to think, to empathize and to hope” (p. 34). To Goleman (2006),
emotional and social intelligence are inextricably linked, and many other developmentalists
agree. As a result, interventions used with children experiencing social difficulties often focus
upon enhancing some aspect of emotional intelligence.
Goleman also asserts that social and emotional intelligence are key aspects of both moral
reasoning and moral conduct. In other words, although often it may seem that advancing
capacities in the moral domain occurs naturally for children, positive conditions and interactions
must exist in a child’s life in order for optimal emotional and social competencies to develop.
Thus, a child like Anthony Bryant, with seemingly great academic promise, may not realize his
potential without timely intervention targeting the development of critical emotional
competencies. These competencies include, for example, self-awareness, impulse control, and
the ability to identify, express, and manage feelings, including love, jealousy, anxiety, and anger.
Healthy emotional development can be threatened by a number of issues, including challenges
such as significant loss and trauma. We increasingly recognize the vulnerability of school-age
children to serious emotional and mental health issues. Assessment approaches that incorporate
awareness of and attention to the possible existence of such issues are critical.
Exhibit 5.3 Common Emotional Gains During Middle Childhood

• Ability to mentally organize and articulate emotional experiences
• Cognitive control of emotional arousal
• Use of emotions as internal monitoring and guidance systems
• Ability to remain focused on goal directed actions
• Ability to delay gratification based on cognitive evaluation
• Ability to understand and use the concept of planning
• Ability to view tasks incrementally
• Use of social comparison
• Influence of internalized feelings (e.g., self-pride, shame) on behavior
• Capacity to tolerate conflicting feelings
• Increasingly effective defense mechanisms
SOURCE: Davies, 2004, pp. 369–372.
Fortunately, a substantial knowledge base regarding the promotion of positive emotional
development exists. Many intervention strategies appear effective, particularly when they are
preventive in nature and provided during or before middle childhood (see Hyson, 2004).
For example, Brianna Shaw, like too many children—particularly girls her age—is at risk of
developing depression and could benefit from intervention focusing on the development of
appropriate coping strategies. A number of interacting, complex biopsychosocial-spiritual factors
shape vulnerability to ailments such as depression. Goleman (1995) argues that many cases of
depression arise from deficits in two key areas of emotional competence: relationship skills and
cognitive, or interpretive, style. In short, many children suffering from—or at risk of
developing—depression likely possess a depression-promoting way of interpreting setbacks.
Children with a potentially harmful outlook attribute setbacks in their lives to internal, personal

flaws. Appropriate preventive intervention, based on a cognitive behavioral approach, teaches
children that their emotions are linked to the way they think and facilitates productive, healthy
ways of interpreting events and viewing themselves. For Brianna, such cognitive-behavioral
oriented intervention may be helpful. Brianna also may benefit from a gender-specific
intervention, perhaps with a particular focus upon relational resilience. Potter (2004) argues that
gender-specific interventions are often most appropriate when the social problem is experienced
primarily by one gender. She identifies eating disorders and depression as two examples of issues
disproportionately impacting girls. Identifying the relevance of gender issues to Brianna’s current
emotional state and considering a gender-specific intervention strategy therefore may be
appropriate. The concept of “relational resilience” is built upon relational-cultural theory’s belief
that “all psychological growth occurs in relationships;” the building blocks of relational
resilience are “mutual empathy, empowerment, and the development of courage” (Jordan, 2005,
p. 79).
Many school-age girls and boys also experience depression and other types of emotional
distress due to a variety of factors, including trauma (severe physical or psychological injury) or
significant loss. Children with close ties to extended family are particularly likely to experience
loss of a close relative at a young age and therefore are more prone to this sort of depression.
Loss, trauma, and violence may present serious obstacles to healthy emotional development.
Research demonstrates the remarkable potential resilience of children (see Garmezy, 1994;
Goldstein & Brooks, 2005; Kirby & Fraser, 2004; Luthar, 2003; Werner & Smith, 2001), but
both personal and environmental attributes play a critical role in processes of resilience. To
support the healthy emotional development of children at risk, appropriate multilevel prevention
and intervention efforts are crucial.

Social Development
Perhaps the most widely recognized developmental task of this period is the acquisition of
feelings of self-competence. Traditional developmentalists have pointed out that the school-age
child searches for opportunities to demonstrate personal skills, abilities, and achievements. This
is what Erik Erikson (1963) was referring to when he described the developmental task of middle
childhood as industry versus inferiority (refer back to Exhibit 3.6 for a description of all eight of
Erikson’s psychosocial stages). Industry refers to a drive to acquire new skills and do meaningful
“work.” The experiences of middle childhood may foster or thwart the child’s attempts to acquire
an enhanced sense of mastery and self-efficacy. Family, peer, and community support may
enhance the child’s growing sense of competence; lack of such support undermines this sense.
The child’s definitions of self and accomplishment vary greatly according to interpretations in
the surrounding environment. But superficial, external bolstering of self-esteem is not all that
children of this age group require. External appraisal must be supportive and encouraging but
also accurate in order for children to value such feedback.
How does a growing sense of competence promote the capacity for human agency in making
choices?
Some theorists argue that children of this age must learn the value of perseverance and
develop an internal drive to succeed (Kindlon, 2003; Seligman, Reivich, Jaycox, & Gillham,
1995). Thus, opportunities to both fail and succeed must be provided, along with sincere
feedback and support. Ideally, the developing school-age child acquires the sense of personal
competence and tenacity that will serve as a protective factor during adolescence and young
adulthood.
Families play a critical role in supporting development of this sense. For example, as the

child learns to ride a bike or play a sport or musical instrument, adults can provide specific
feedback and praise. They can counter the child’s frustration by identifying and complimenting
specific improvements and emphasizing the role of practice and perseverance in producing such
improvements. Failures and setbacks can be labeled as temporary and surmountable rather than
attributed to personal flaws or deficits. The presence of such feedback loops is a key feature of
high-quality adult-child relationships, in the family, school, and beyond. Middle childhood is a
critical time for children to acquire this sense of competence. In the process they gain an
increasing awareness of their fit in the network of relationships in their surrounding
environments. Each child experiences events and daily interactions that enhance or diminish
feelings of self-competence. A systems perspective is critical to understanding the multiple
influences on children’s development during this period.
Children are not equally positioned as they enter this developmental phase, as Anthony
Bryant’s, Brianna Shaw’s, and Manuel Vega’s stories suggest. Developmental pathways
preceding entry into middle childhood are extremely diverse. Children experience this phase of
life differently based not only on differences in the surrounding environment—such as family
structure and socioeconomic status—but also on their personality differences. A particular
personality and learning style may be valued or devalued, problematic or nonproblematic, in
each of the child’s expanding social settings (Berk, 2002a, 2002b; Green, 1994). Thus, although
Anthony, Brianna, and Manuel are moving through the same developmental period and facing
many common tasks, they experience these tasks differently and will emerge into adolescence as
unique individuals. Each individual child’s identity development is highly dependent upon social
networks of privilege and exclusion. There is a direct relationship between the level of control
and power a child experiences and the degree of balance that is achieved in the child’s emerging

identity between feelings of power (privilege) and powerlessness (exclusion) (Johnson, 2005;
Tatum, 1992). As children move toward adolescence and early adulthood, the amount of
emotional, social, spiritual, and economic capital, or resources, acquired determines the
likelihood of socioeconomic and other types of success as well as feelings of competence to
succeed. Experiencing economically and socially just support systems is key to optimum
development.
Middle childhood is a critical time in moral development, a time when most children become
intensely interested in moral issues. Advancing language capability serves not only as a
communication tool but also as a vehicle for more sophisticated introspection. Language is also a
tool for positive assertion of self and personal opinions as the child’s social world expands
(Coles, 1987, 1997). In recent years, many elementary schools have added character education
to their curricula. Such education often consists of direct teaching and curriculum inclusion of
mainstream moral and social values thought to be universal in a community (e.g., kindness,
respect, tolerance, and honesty). Renewed focus on children’s character education is in part
related to waves of school violence and bullying. Survey research with children suggests that,
compared to children in middle and high school settings, children in elementary school settings
are at highest risk of experiencing bullying, either as a perpetrator or victim (Astor, Benbenishty,
Pitner, & Meyer, 2004).
At a broader level, federal and state legislative initiatives have encouraged school personnel
to confront bullying and harassment in the school setting (Limber & Small, 2003). Schools have
been particularly responsive to these initiatives in the wake of well-publicized incidents of
school violence. Today, most schools have policies in place designed to facilitate efficient and
effective responses to aberrant behavior, including bullying and violence. The content and

implementation details of such policies, of course, vary widely.
There is plentiful evidence to suggest that “the bully” or “bullying” has existed throughout
modern human history (Astor et al., 2004). During the late twentieth century, changes occurred
within our views of and knowledge regarding bullying. In general, the public has become less
tolerant of bullying, perhaps because of a fairly widespread belief that school shootings (such as
the Columbine High School massacre) can be linked to bullying. Bullying is today recognized as
a complex phenomenon, with both direct bullying (physical) and indirect bullying viewed as
cause for concern (Astor et al., 2004). Indirect bullying is conceptualized as including verbal,
psychological, and social or “relational” bullying tactics.
In recent years, new interest has centered on gender differences in bullying. Initially,
attention was drawn to the previously underrecognized phenomenon of girls experiencing direct
bullying, or physical aggression and violence, at the hands of other girls (Garbarino, 2006).
Although both direct and indirect bullying crosses genders, more recent attention has centered on
the widespread existence of indirect, or relational, bullying particularly among girls, and its
potentially devastating consequences (Simmons, 2003; Underwood, 2003).
A positive outcome of recent attention to bullying is interest in establishing “best practices”
in bullying prevention and intervention. Astor and colleagues (2004) argue that the United States
is lagging behind other countries such as Norway, the United Kingdom, and Australia in
implementing and evaluating comprehensive bullying prevention and intervention strategies; a
benefit of our delayed status is our ability to learn from this international knowledge base. This
knowledge base suggests that the most effective approaches to reducing bullying within a school
is implementation of a comprehensive, school-wide prevention and intervention plan that
addresses the contributing factors within all levels of the school environment (Espelage &

Swearer, 2003; Plaford, 2006). In recent years, many school districts in the United States have
implemented such initiatives and have experienced positive results (Beaudoin & Taylor, 2004).
As children increasingly view their lives as part of the network of lives within their
environment, communities gain greater potential to provide important support and structure.
Today, however, many communities provide as many challenges as opportunities for
development. Communities in which challenges outweigh opportunities have been labeled as
“socially toxic,” meaning that they threaten positive development (Garbarino, 1995). In contrast,
within a socially supportive environment, children have access to peers and adults who can lead
them toward more advanced moral and social thinking. This development occurs in part through
the modeling of pro-social behavior, which injects moral reasoning and social sensitivity into the
child’s accustomed manner of reasoning and behaving. Thus, cognitive and moral development
is a social issue. The failure of adults to take on moral and spiritual mentoring roles contributes
significantly to the development of socially toxic environments.
This type of moral mentoring takes place in the zone of proximal development—the
theoretical space between the child’s current developmental level and the child’s potential level if
given access to appropriate models and developmental experiences in the social environment
(Vygotsky, 1986). Thus, the child’s competence alone interacts dynamically with the child’s
competence in the company of others. The result is developmental progress. This continuous
process of social interaction and shaping is consistent with systems theory or with a biological
model of equilibration, where organisms develop as they respond to environmental stimuli in a
constant process of equilibrium, disruption, and re-equilibration.
The Peer Group
Nearly as influential as family members during middle childhood are peer groups—collections

of children with unique values and goals (Hartup, 1983). As children progress through middle
childhood, peers have an increasingly important impact on such everyday matters as social
behavior, activities, and dress. By this phase of development, a desire for group belongingness is
especially strong. Within peer groups, children potentially learn three important lessons. First,
they learn to appreciate different points of view. Second, they learn to recognize the norms and
demands of their peer group. And, third, they learn to have closeness to a same-sex peer
(Newman & Newman, 2006). Whereas individual friendships facilitate the development of
critical capacities such as trust and intimacy, peer groups foster learning about cooperation and
leadership.
What role do peer groups play in developing the capacity for meaningful relationships in
middle childhood?
Throughout middle childhood, the importance of group norms is highly evident (von Salisch,
2001). Children are sensitive, sometimes exceedingly so, to their peers’ standards for behavior,
appearance, and attitudes. Brianna Shaw, for instance, is beginning to devalue herself because
she recognizes the discrepancy between her appearance and group norms. Often it is not until
adolescence that group norms may become more flexible, allowing for more individuality. This
shift reflects the complex relationship among the developmental domains. In this case, the
association between social and cognitive development is illustrated by simultaneous changes in
social relationships and cognitive capacities.
In most middle childhood peer groups, dominance hierarchies establish a social order among
group participants. Those hierarchies may predict outcomes when conflict arises (Pettit, Bakshi,
Dodge, & Coie, 1990; Savin-Williams, 1979); typically, more dominant children prevail.
Furthermore, through reinforcement, modeling, and direct pressure to conform to expectations,

children’s dominance hierarchies contribute to socialization.
Again, through middle childhood, gains in cognitive abilities promote more complex
communication skills and greater social awareness. These developments, in turn, facilitate more
complex peer interaction, which is a vital resource for the development of social competence—
the ability to engage in sustained, positive, and mutually satisfactory peer interactions. Positive
peer relationships reflect and support social competence, as they potentially discourage
egocentrism, promote positive coping, and ultimately serve as a protective factor during the
transition to adolescence (Spencer, Harpalani, Fegley, Dell’Angelo, & Seaton, 2003).
Gender and culture influence the quantity and nature of peer interactions observed among
school-age children (Potter, 2004). Sociability, intimacy, social expectations and rules, and the
value placed on various types of play and other social activities are all phenomena shaped by
both gender and culture. The relationship between gender and peer relationships has been studied
fairly extensively, however, the specific ways in which culture influences the nuances of
children’s peer relationships remain unclear because the state of research in this area is
significantly underdeveloped (Robinson, 1998).
Spencer et al. (2003) point out that children from nondominant groups are more likely to
experience dissonance across school, family, and peer settings; for example, such children may
experience language differences, misunderstandings of cultural traditions or expressions, and
distinct norms, or rules, regarding dating behavior, peer intimacy, or cross-gender friendships.
These authors also assert that although many youth experiencing dissonance across school,
family, and peer systems may suffer from negative outcomes such as peer rejection or school
failure, some may learn important coping skills that will serve them well later in life. In fact, the
authors argue that given the clear trend toward increasing cultural diversity around the globe,

“experiences of cultural dissonance and the coping skills they allow youth to develop should not
be viewed as aberrant; instead, privilege should be explored as having a ‘downside’ that
potentially compromises the development of coping and character” (p. 137).
A persistent finding is that, across gender and culture, peer acceptance is a powerful predictor
of psychological adjustment. One well-known study asked children to fit other children into
particular categories. From the results, the researchers developed five general categories of social
acceptance: popular, rejected, controversial, neglected, and average (Coie, Dodge, & Coppotelli,
1982). Common predictors of popular status include physical appearance (Adams & Crane,
1980) and pro-social behaviors in the social setting (Newcomb, Bukowski, & Pattee, 1993;
Rotenberg et al., 2004). Rejected children are those who are actively disliked by their peers.
They are particularly likely to be unhappy and to experience achievement and self-esteem issues.
Rejected status is strongly associated with poor school performance, antisocial behavior, and
delinquency in adolescence (DeRosier, Kupersmidt, & Patterson, 1994; Ollendick, Weist,
Borden, & Greene, 1992). For this reason, we should be concerned about Brianna Shaw’s
growing sense of peer rejection.
Support for rejected children may include interventions to improve peer relations and
psychological adjustment. Most of these interventions are based on social learning theory and
involve modeling and reinforcing positive social behavior—for example, initiating interaction
and responding to others positively. Several such programs have indeed helped children develop
social competence and gain peer approval (Lochman, Coie, Underwood, & Terry, 1993; Mize &
Ladd, 1990; Wyman, Cross, & Barry, 2004; Young, Marchant, & Wilder, 2004).
Friendship and Intimacy
Throughout middle childhood, children develop their ability to look at things from others’

perspectives. In turn, their capacity to develop more complex friendships—based on awareness
of others’ thoughts, feelings, and needs—emerges (Selman, 1976; von Salisch, 2001). Thus,
complex and fairly stable friendship networks begin to form for the first time in middle
childhood (Hartup, 1983). Although skills such as cooperation and problem solving are learned
in the peer group, close friendships facilitate understanding and promote trust and reciprocity.
Most socially competent children maintain and nurture both close friendships and effective peer
group interaction.
As children move through middle childhood, friendship begins to entail mutual trust and
assistance and thus becomes more psychologically rather than behaviorally based (Asher &
Paquette, 2003; Damon, 1977). In other words, school-age children may possess close
friendships based on the emotional support provided for one another as much as, if not more
than, common interests and activities. The concept of friend is transformed from the playmate of
early childhood to the confidant of middle childhood. Violations of trust during this period are
often perceived as serious violations of the friendship bond. As children move out of middle
childhood and into adolescence, the role of intimacy and loyalty in friendship becomes even
more pronounced. Moreover, children increasingly value mutual understanding and loyalty in the
face of conflict among peers (Berndt, 1988).
Team Play
The overall incidence of aggression during peer activities decreases during middle childhood,
and friendly rule-based play increases. This transition is due in part to the continuing
development of a perspective-taking ability, the ability to see a situation from another person’s
point of view. In addition, most school-age children are exposed to peers who differ in a variety
of ways, including personality, ethnicity, and interests.

School-age children are able to take their new understanding of others’ needs and desires into
account in various types of peer interaction. Thus, their communication and interaction reflects
an enhanced ability to understand the role of multiple participants in activities. These
developments facilitate the transition to many rule-based activities, such as team sports (Rubin,
Fein, & Vandenburg, 1983). Despite occasional arguments or fights with peers, involvement with
team sports may provide great enjoyment and satisfaction. Participation in team sports during
middle childhood may also have long-term benefits. One research team found a link between
voluntary participation in team sports during middle childhood and level of physical activity in
adulthood (Taylor, Blair, Cummings, Wun, & Malina, 1999). While participating in team sports,
children also develop the capacity for interdependence, cooperation, division of labor, and
competition (Van der Vegt, Eman, & Van De Vliert, 2001).
Gender Identity and Gender Roles
Although most children in middle childhood have a great deal in common based upon their
shared developmental phase, girls and boys differ significantly in areas ranging from their self-
understanding and social relationships to school performance and life aspirations (Potter, 2004).
Among most school-age children, gender identity, or an “internalized psychological experience
of being male or female,” is quite well-established (Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2003, p. 105).
But during middle childhood, boys and girls seem to follow different paths in gender role
development. Often, boys’ identification with “masculine” role attributes increases while girls’
identification with “feminine” role attributes decreases (Archer, 1992; Levy, Taylor, & Gelman,
1995; Potter, 2004). For instance, boys are more likely than girls to label a chore as a “girl’s job”
or a “boy’s job.” As adults, females are the more androgynous of the two genders, and this
movement toward androgyny appears to begin in middle childhood (Diamond & Savin-Williams,

2003; Serbin, Powlishta, & Gulko, 1993).
These differences have multiple causes, from social to cognitive forces. In the United States,
during middle childhood and beyond, cross-gender behavior in girls is more socially acceptable
than such behavior among boys. Diamond and Savin-Williams use the term “gender typicality,”
or the “degree to which one’s appearance, behavior, interests, and subjective self-concept
conform to conventional gender norms” (p. 105). Research to date suggests that for both genders,
a traditionally “masculine” identity is associated with a higher sense of overall competence and
better academic performance (Boldizar, 1991; Newcomb & Dubas, 1992). Diamond and Savin-
Williams also emphasize the role of culture in this relationship, pointing out that this is likely due
to the fact that traits associated with male, or for girls, “tomboy” status are those traits most
valued in many communities. These traits include qualities such as athleticism, confidence, and
assertiveness. Indeed, local communities with “more entrenched sexist ideologies” regarding
male versus female traits are those in which boys exhibiting feminine or “sissy” behaviors are
likely to suffer (p. 107).
A related issue is a disturbing trend noted among girls transitioning from middle childhood to
adolescence. Specifically, in recent years, women’s studies’ experts have pointed out that school-
age girls often seem to possess a “vibrant, feisty, and confident understanding of self” which
gradually disintegrates as they increasingly “discredit their feelings and understandings,
experiencing increased self-doubt” during early adolescence and subsequently becoming
susceptible to a host of internalizing and externalizing disorders linked to poor self-esteem
(Potter, 2004, p. 60). A number of studies and theories attempt to explain this shift in girls’ self-
image and mental health (see Pipher, 1994; Simmons, 2003), but Potter (2004) cautions against
overgeneralization of the phenomena and in particular suggests that the trend may not apply

widely across girls from differing ethnic groups, socioeconomic statuses, and sexual orientations.
Our understanding of the structure of gender roles is derived from various theoretical
perspectives. An anthropological or social constructionist orientation illuminates the ways in
which, throughout history, gender has shaped familial and societal systems and inevitably
impacts individual development in an intangible yet profound fashion (Wertsch, del Rio &
Alvarez, 1995). Cognitive theory suggests that at the individual level, self-perceptions emerge.
Gender, as one component of self-perception, joins related cognitions to guide children’s gender-
linked behaviors. A behavioral perspective suggests that gender-related behaviors precede self-
perception in the development of gender role identity; in other words, at a very young age, girls
start imitating feminine behavior and later begin thinking of themselves as distinctly female, and
boys go through the same sequence in developing a masculine identity. Gender schema theory
(see Bem, 1993, 1998), an information-processing approach to gender, combines behavioral and
cognitive theories, suggesting that social pressures and children’s cognition work together to
perpetuate gender-linked perceptions and behaviors.
Feminist psychodynamic theorists such as Nancy Chodorow (1978, 1989) have proposed that
while boys typically begin to separate psychologically from their female caregivers in early
childhood, most girls deepen their connection to and identification with their female caregivers
throughout childhood. Such theorists propose, then, that as girls and boys transition into
adolescence and face a new level of individuation, they confront this challenge from very
different psychological places and girls are more likely to find the task emotionally confusing if
not deeply overwhelming. This feminist, psychoanalytic theoretical orientation has been used to
explain not only gender identity and role development, but also differences between boys and
girls in their approaches to relationships, or relational orientations, and emotional expressiveness

throughout childhood.
In general, due to expanding cognitive capacities, as children leave early childhood and
progress through middle childhood, their gender stereotypes gradually become more flexible and
most school-age children begin to accept that males and females can engage in the same
activities and occupations (Carter & Patterson, 1982; Sagara, 2000). In addition, school-age
children increasingly rely on unique characteristics, rather than a gender label, in attempting to
predict the nature and behavior of a specific individual (Biernat, 1991; Potter 2004).
African American children may hold less stereotyped views of females than do European
American children (Bardwell, Cochran, & Walker, 1986). In addition, children from middle and
upper-income backgrounds appear to hold more flexible views of gender than children from
lower-income backgrounds (Serbin et al., 1993).
The implications of gender stereotyping for individual gender role adoption are not clear cut.
Even children well aware of community gender norms and role expectations may not conform to
gender role stereotypes in their actual behavior (Diamond & Savin-Williams, 2003; Downs &
Langlois, 1988; Serbin et al., 1993). Perhaps children acquire personal gender role preferences
before acquiring knowledge of gender role stereotypes or perhaps they learn and interpret gender
role stereotypes in very diverse ways. Our understanding of the complexities of gender and
sexual identity development—and the relationships between the two during the life course—is in
its infancy.
Spiritual Development
During the past two and a half decades there has been an increased academic, clinical,
and research interest in exploring the importance of spiritual development and spirituality across
the lifespan. The literature regarding the study of spiritual development across disciplines has
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold

grown as it has become increasingly apparent that spirituality plays an important role in many if
not most individuals’ lives. Children have been recognized as having both awareness of
spirituality and of utilizing that spirituality to create meaning in their lives (Hyde, 2008). Thus,
spirituality in children is increasingly seen as an important dimension of development (Mercer,
2006). Early work in spiritual development in children viewed spirituality in the context of
religious development (Hyde, 2008). For instance, Robert Coles argued that religion and
spirituality overlapped in children and that even children with no religious affiliation utilized
religious language to describe their spiritual lives (Coles, 1990). It has been suggested that
during this early work on the spiritual development of children that the utilization of religious
language by children to describe their spirituality simply mirrored the language of the
researchers. Simply put, the researchers posed questions to the children in their study utilizing
religious terminology (Hyde, 2008).
Subsequent research explored spirituality in children in the context of how children’s
spirituality was a way for them to conceptualize the meaning of life. Further, this research looked
at how children’s understanding of spirituality related to an awareness of something other or
greater at play in the course of everyday happenings (Hyde, 2008). Researchers such as Davis
Hay and Rebecca Nye, and Elaine Champagne explored the themes of transcendence and
spirituality as human experience, respectively (Champagne, 2001; Hay & Nye, 2006). Despite
the varying views regarding how children understand and utilize their spirituality, researchers
agree that children in middle childhood (and younger) do have a spiritual life and that the
spirituality of children can be protective factor in the lives of children.
Spiritual development in middle childhood has been described in a variety of ways.
Some researchers have identified children in middle childhood as in the “mythic-literal” stage of
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5"
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Font: Not Bold
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0"

spiritual development (Fowler & Dell, 2006). The mythic-literal stage coincides with the
cognitive (concrete/operational) and emotional stages of development children in middle
childhood are experiencing. Children in the mythic-literal stage of spiritual development utilize
storytelling to make sense of the world “often along the lines of simple fairness and moral
reciprocity . . .(t)he child believes that goodness is rewarded and badness is punished” (Fowler &
Dell, 2006, p. 39). This stage marks the beginning of ponderings on personal conceptions of and
feelings about spirituality and faith (Fowler & Dell, 2006). A child at this stage of development
may view getting a physical illness like the stomach flu with having done something wrong like
hitting a sibling.
However, children in middle childhood are also capable of going beyond a simple good
versus evil conception of spirituality and can “weave(ing) the threads of meaning” together to
create a complex worldview that is meaningful to them (Hyde, 2008b, p. 244). For instance
when children are asked about heaven they understand it differently; it has a unique meaning to
each child. For instance, one child, when interviewed viewed heaven as “a thought. It’s in your
heart if you believe’ it’s there” (Hyde, 2008b, p. 239). Whereas another thought of heaven as
different for everyone based on the people, places, and things they loved or valued in life. This
child explained heaven as unique, so “if a person liked a painting, then they’d go to a place
where you can paint all you want” (Hyde, 2008b, p. 239). As is apparent, children, while being
influenced by family, community, and society, take an active role in constructing meaning in
their lives and creating a personal spiritual meaning that helps them make sense of their world
(Mercer, 2006). They, “are engaged in finding ‘personal significance and meaning in (both)
religious and other world views, by exercising their freedom to these meanings as (their) own”
(Webster as quoted in Hyde, 2008b, p. 242). Utilizing spirituality to create threads of meaning
Formatted: Indent: First line: 0.5"

may help children cope with difficult macro environments that entail poverty and violence as
well as cope with and understand micro events in their lives including familial illness or death.
Hart (2006) argues that children’s spirituality encompasses the dimensions of wonder, wisdom,
and interconnectedness. He suggests these aspects of spirituality provide a sense of hope and
perspective, allow for reflection, and help shape morality.
The spiritual education of children occurs in families, faith congregations/communities
(e.g. churches, synagogues, mosques, temples), and schools. Families provide spiritual
education in the form of family religious traditions and belief systems (Alexander & Carr, 2006).
Faith congregations provide a community of members that share a common vision and tradition
of spirituality as well as a space to express that spirituality (Alexander & Carr, 2006). And,
schools have the opportunity to foster and teach spirituality in all of its manifestations. While in
secular democratic countries, the teaching of spirituality is fraught with concern regarding the
separation of church and state, it is possible that general spiritual teaching and the cultivation of
spirituality in schools especially as it relates to the development of a life with meaning, purpose,
and hope as well as the development of morality/character development could enhance the
curriculum as it seeks to foster the development of healthy caring children with a sense of
interconnectedness. Spirituality and morality are intertwined and the attention to both of these
areas of development in schools helps to meet the needs of children.
Middle Childhood and Formal Schooling
Before discussing the role of formal schooling in the life of the school-age child in the United
States and other relatively affluent societies, it is important to note that, in an era of a knowledge-
based global economy, there continue to be large global gaps in opportunities for education.
Formatted: Normal, Indent: First line: 0.5",
Space Before: 0 pt, Don't hyphenate
Formatted: Font: Not Bold

Although educational participation is almost universal between the age of 5 and 14 in affluent
countries, 115 million of the world’s children, most residing in Africa or South Asia, do not
receive even a primary education and are particularly susceptible to economic downturns and
environmental crises (United National Development Program, 2005, World Bank, 2009). There
is a widening gap in average years of education between rich and poor countries (McMichael,
2004). The average child born in Mozambique in 2005 will receive four years of formal
education, compared to eight years in South Asia, and 15 years in France (United Nations
Development Program, 2005.Females will receive one year less of education, on average, than
males in African and Arab countries and two years less in South Asia (United Nations
Development Program, 2005). In both sub-Saharan, Middle-Eastern/North African and South
Asian countries, primary school completion rates continue to track well below the UN’s
Millennium Education goals (World Bank, 2009) and while females in most affluent
industrialized countries receive higher levels of education than males, on average, females in the
three areas mentioned above fall below well below that of males (Sen, Partelow, & Miller, 2005).
Although development is framed by multiple human interactions at home and in the
community, the current importance of formal schooling during middle childhood in advanced
industrial countries cannot be overstated. Children entering school must learn to navigate a new
environment quite different from the family. In school, they are evaluated on the basis of how
well they perform tasks; people outside the family—teachers and other school staff as well as
peers—begin shaping the child’s personality, dreams, and aspirations (Good & Nichols, 2001).
For immigrant children like Manuel Vega, the environmental adjustment can be even more
profound since the educational attainment of family members may be limited and high stakes
tests place a premature burden on English Language Learners (Solórzano, 2008). At the same

time, the school environment has the potential to serve as an important resource for the physical,
cognitive, emotional, and social tasks of middle childhood for all children regardless of the
previous schooling available to their parents. This role for schools is particularly important to
help immigrant children deal with the cultural shock that many experience transitioning to their
adoptive countries. In addition, schools must be aware of conditions that the same children suffer
from traumatic events that have occurred in their home countries or in transit to their new homes
(Vaage, et al, 2007).
Success in the school environment is very important to the development of self-esteem.
Anthony Bryant, Brianna Shaw, and Manuel Vega illustrate the potentially positive as well as
painful aspects of schooling. Manuel and Brianna seem increasingly distressed by their
interactions within the school environment. Often, difficulties with peers create or compound
academic challenges. Brianna’s school experience is becoming threatening enough that she may
begin to withdraw from the environment, which would represent a serious risk to her continued
cognitive, emotional, and social development.
As children move through the middle years, they become increasingly aware that they are
evaluated on the basis of what they are able to do. In turn, they begin to evaluate themselves
based on treatment by teachers and peers and on self-assessments of what they can and cannot do
well (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2004). School-age children consistently rate parents, classmates,
other friends, and teachers as the most important influences in their lives (Harter, 1988). Thus,
children are likely to evaluate themselves in a positive manner if they receive encouraging
feedback from these individuals in their academic and social environments.
Insert Photo 5.3 Here
Photo 5.3 As children get older, schools are the primary context for development in middle

childhood.
Formal Schooling and Cognitive Development
In the past few decades, school-age children have benefited from new research and theory
focusing on the concept of intelligence. Traditional views of intelligence and approaches to
intelligence testing benefited European American children born in the United States. Howard
Gardner’s work, however, represented a paradigm shift in the field of education. He proposed
that intelligence is neither unitary nor fixed, and argued that intelligence is not adequately or
fully measured by IQ tests. More broadly, in his theory of multiple intelligences, intelligence is
“the ability to solve problems or fashion products that are of consequence in a particular cultural
setting or community” (Gardner, 1993, p. 15). Challenging the idea that individuals can be
described, or categorized, by a single, quantifiable measure of intelligence, Gardner proposed
that at least eight critical intelligences exist: verbal/linguistic, logical/mathematical,
visual/spatial, musical/rhythmic, bodily/kinesthetic, naturalist, interpersonal, and intrapersonal.
This paradigm shift in the education field encouraged a culturally sensitive approach to students
(Campbell, Campbell, & Dickinson, 1999) and a diminished role for standardized testing.
In its practical application, multiple intelligence theory calls for use of a wide range of
instructional strategies that engage the range of strengths and intelligences of each student
(Kagan & Kagan, 1998). Gardner specifically calls for matching instructional strategies to the
needs and strengths of students, stretching the intelligences—or maximizing development of
each intelligence—by transforming education curricula, and celebrating or (at a minimum)
understanding the unique pattern of intelligences of each student.
How might this increased emphasis on cognitive diversity alter the life course of students like
Anthony, Brianna, and Manuel?

This last point is critical. Such understanding can facilitate self-knowledge and self-
acceptance. Understanding and celebration of cognitive diversity, Gardner believes, will come
from a transformation not only of curricula, or instructional methods, but also of the fundamental
way in which adults view students and students view themselves and one another. Schools help
children develop a positive self-evaluation by providing a variety of activities that allow children
with different strengths to succeed. For example, schools that assess children in many areas,
including those described by Gardner, may help children who have a deficit in one area
experience success in another realm. Children can also be encouraged to evaluate themselves
positively through the creation of individual student portfolios and through school initiatives that
promote new skill development. Classroom and extracurricular activities can build on children’s
abilities and interests and help them develop or maintain self-confidence (Barr & Parrett, 1995,
Littky & Grabelle, 2004).
For example, most children benefit from diverse educational materials and varied activities
that appeal to visual, auditory, and experiential learning styles. Such activities can include group
work, student presentations, field trips, audiovisual presentations, written and oral skill activities,
discussion, and lectures (Roueche & Baker, 1986). In recent years, flexible grouping is frequently
employed. It draws on both heterogeneous and homogenous grouping and recognizes that each
method is useful to achieve distinct objectives. Grouping strategies include pairing students,
forming cooperative and collaborative groups, modeling lessons for students, conducting guided
practice, and setting up subject-based learning laboratories. A teacher may draw on any
appropriate technique during a class period, day, or week. These approaches represent an attempt
to adapt instruction to meet diverse student needs. Students like Anthony Bryant, with more
academic skill, may model effective methods of mastering academic material for less advanced

students. Meanwhile, Anthony simultaneously learns more appropriate school behavior from his
socially adept peers. Furthermore, this teaching method may help Anthony strengthen peer
friendships—an important potential source of support as he confronts family transitions or
conflict in the future.
On the other hand, schools can contribute to the development of a negative self- evaluation
by emphasizing norm-referenced testing, judging students against other people taking the test,
and providing little opportunity for skill development. Thus, in addition to calling for changes in
instructional strategies, multiple intelligence theory calls for movement away from norm-
referenced testing and toward more comprehensive assessments of diverse areas of student
performance. Such assessment includes naturalistic, across-time observation and development of
self-appraisal materials such as student portfolios (Lazear, 1994). This shift, however, has
occurred in tandem with the standards movement within the United States. Most schools and
states have moved away from norm-referenced testing and toward criterion-referenced testing,
which requires all graduating students to meet certain absolute scores and requirements. At
present, all states have established some form of learning standards that all students must achieve
in order to graduate from high school.
Formal Schooling and Diversity
Students like Manuel Vega face considerable challenges in the school setting. Manuel’s ability to
engage in the school environment is compromised, and many schools are ill equipped to respond
to the issues confronting children like him. If Manuel is not supported and assisted by his school
system, his educational experience may assault his healthy development. But if Manuel’s
personal and familial support systems can be tapped and mobilized, they may help him overcome
his feelings of isolation in his new school environment. Carefully constructed and implemented

interventions must be used to help Manuel. These interventions could include a focus on
bridging the gap between his command of the rules of the informal register of English and the
acquisition of formal standard English, without destroying his Spanish language base and his
Mexican cultural heritage.
Today in the United States, Manuel’s situation is not rare. About one in four elementary and
high school students have at least one foreign-born parent (U.S. Census Bureau, 2006) and in
general, students are more diverse than ever before. There are many challenges facing children
who have recently arrived in the United States, particularly those fleeing war-torn countries.
Research suggests that immigrant and refugee children are at heightened risk of experiencing
mental health challenges and school failure (Coughlan and Owens-Manley, 2006, Escobar,
Hoyos-Nervi, & Gara, 2000; Jaycox, L., Stein, B.., Kataoka, S., Wong, M., Fink, A., Escudero,
P., Zaragoza, C. (2002). Miller & Rasco, 2004;, Vaage, A. B., Garløv, C., Hauff, E., Thomsen.
P. H. , 2007)
Language difficulties and their consequences among such children are increasingly
recognized. It has been established that children are best served when they are able to speak both
their native language and the language of their host country (Moon, Kang. and An, 2009;
Vuorenkoski, Kuure, Moilanen, Penninkilampi, & Myhrman, 2000). The mental health status
among immigrant populations, however, appears to be dependent on a wide number of factors.
In general, acculturation, or a process by which two or more cultures remain distinct but
exchange cultural features (such as foods, music, clothing), is easier on children than
assimilation, or a process by which the minority culture must adapt and become incorporated
into the majority culture, particularly in the school environment. Communication and interaction
between families and schools is always important (Bhattacharya, 2000; U.S. Department of

Health & Human Services, 2000).
It is essential for schools and professionals to recognize the importance of language to
learning. Children acquire an informal language that contains the communication rules needed to
survive in the familial and cultural group to which the child belongs. Schools often ignore the
potency of these informal registers as they work toward their mission of teaching the “formal
register” of the dominant middle class, deemed necessary to survive in the world of work and
school. The need for specific strategies to acknowledge and honor the “informal register,” while
teaching the formal, has been identified by several literacy researchers (see Gee, 1996; Knapp,
1995). These researchers emphasize the importance of teaching children to recognize their
internal, or natural, “speech” and the “register” they use in the school environment. Identifying
and mediating these processes is best accomplished in the context of a caring relationship
(Noddings, 1984). By sensitively promoting an awareness of such differences in the home and
school, teachers, social workers, and other adults can help children experience less confusion and
alienation.
Formal Schooling: Home and School
Indeed, for all children, parental involvement in school is associated with better school
performance (Domina, 2005). Schools serving diverse populations are becoming increasingly
creative in their approaches to encouraging parent involvement, including the development of
sophisticated interpretation and translation infrastructures (Pardington, 2002). Unfortunately,
many schools lag behind, suffering from either inadequate resources or the consequences of
exclusive and racist attitudes within the school and larger community environments (see Jones,
2001).
The link between school and home is important in poor and affluent neighborhoods alike,

ecause school and home are the two major spheres in which children exist. The more similar
these two environments are, the more successful the child will be at school and at home. Students
who experience vastly different cultures at home and at school are likely to have difficulty
accommodating the two worlds (Ryan & Adams, 1995). A great deal of learning goes on before a
child enters school. By the time Anthony Bryant, Brianna Shaw, and Manuel Vega began school,
they had acquired routines, habits, and cognitive, social, emotional, and physical styles and skills
(Kellaghan, Sloane, Alvarez, & Bloom, 1993). School is a “next step” in the educational process.
The transition is relatively easy for many students because schools typically present a
mainstream model for behavior and learning. As most parents interact with their children, they
model and promote the behavior that will be acceptable in school. Children are taught the
necessities of widely accepted social interactions, such as saying “thank you,” “excuse me,” and
“please” (Comer, 1994; Payne, 2005). Many parents also teach their children the basic rules of
the classroom, such as “sit in your chair” and “wait to speak until you are acknowledged.”
Children from such backgrounds are often well prepared for the school environment because,
quite simply, they understand the rules; as a result, the school is accepting of them. Furthermore,
the school environment helps reinforce rules and skills taught in the home environment, just as
the home environment helps reinforce rules and skills taught in the school environment.
Research indicates that this type of home-school continuity often predicts school success (Ameta
& Sherrard, 1995; Comer, 1994; Epstein & Lee, 1995; Kellaghan et al., 1993; Ryan & Adams,
1995).
In contrast, children with a distinct background may not be fluent in mainstream speech
patterns and may not have been extensively exposed to school rules or materials such as scissors
and books. These children, although possessing skills and curiosity, are often viewed as inferior

in some way by school personnel (Comer, 1994; Solórzano, 2008). Children viewed in this
manner may begin to feel inferior and either act out or disengage from the school process (Finn,
1989). Because the school environment does not support the home environment and the home
environment does not support the school environment, these children face an increased risk of
poor school outcomes.
Schools that recognize the contribution of home to school success typically seek family
involvement. Parents and other family members can help establish the motivation for learning
and provide learning opportunities within the home environment (Constable & Walberg, 1996;
Jones, 2001). Children whose parents are involved in their education typically succeed
academically (Fan, 2001; Fan & Chen, 2001; Houtenville and Conway, 2007; Kurtz, 1988; Kurtz
& Barth, 1989; Zellman & Waterman, 1998). Unfortunately, poor communication between
parents, children, and schools may short-circuit parental involvement. Traditionally, schools
asked parents only to participate in Parent Teacher Association meetings, to attend parent-teacher
meetings, to act as helpers in the classroom, and to review notes and written communications
sent home with the schoolchild. This sort of parental participation does not always facilitate
meaningful, open communication. Schools can establish more meaningful relationships with
parents by reaching out to them, involving them as partners in decision making and school
governance, treating parents and other caregivers (and their children) with authentic respect,
providing support and coordination to implement and sustain parental involvement, and
connecting parents with resources (see Comer, 1980; Dupper & Poertner, 1997; Kellaghan et al.,
1993; Patrikakou, Weisberg, Redding, & Walberg, 2005; Swap, 1993).
Formal Schooling: Schools Mirror Community
As microcosms of the larger U.S. society, schools mirror its institutional structures. Thus,

schools often uphold racism, classism, and sexism (Bowles & Gintis, 1976; Harry, 2006;
Keating, 1994; Ogbu, 1994). As discussed, cognitive development can be impacted by cultural
factors specific to second language usage and gender socialization as well as racial and class
identities. Students belonging to nondominant groups have often been viewed as inherently less
capable and thus failed to receive the cognitive stimulation needed for optimal growth and
development. This problem has led to lowered expectations, segregation, and institutionalized
mistreatment throughout the history of schooling. At the federal and state levels, from the mid-
1960s through 1980, specific legislation was developed to attempt to rectify the effects of the
unequal treatment of a variety of groups.
In most parts of the country, however, members of historically mistreated groups (e.g.
children with mental and physical challenges, children belonging to ethnic and racial minority
groups) did not receive equal treatment, and they were forced to attend segregated and inferior
schools throughout most of the twentieth century. Over time, various court rulings, most
prominently the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision (347 U.S. 483), made equal,
integrated education the right of all U.S. citizens, ruling that “separate but equal” has no place in
public education. However, in the past 15 years, courts at both the state and federal levels have
been lifting desegregation orders, arguing that separate can be equal or at least “good enough.”
As a result, today the school systems in the United States are more segregated by race than they
were thirty years ago (Boger and Orfield, 2005; Kozol, 2005). These court rulings as well as
housing patterns and social traditions work against integrated public schooling. Schools continue
to mirror the social systems with which they interact and thus often fall short of their democratic
ideals (Darling-Hammond, 2007). Informal segregation often persists in schools, and poor
children still suffer in schools that frequently do not provide enough books, supplies, teachers, or

curricula challenging enough to facilitate success in U.S. society that has led to the achievement
gap between historically underrepresented groups and the more advantaged. Gloria Ladson-
Billings in her presidential address to the 2006 American Educational Research Association
identified a major cause of the gap as the nation’s education debt for our current and past
educational and political policies toward these groups of students (Ladson-Billings 2006; Kozol,
1991, 2005). The juxtaposition of inner-city, rural and suburban schools continues to point to
substantial divisions between economically rich and impoverished communities. For example,
although less well documented, a consistent difficulty for rural schools throughout much of the
world is access to a consistent supply of teachers, especially in math and science. Many countries
in the developing world offer a range of incentives (Ladd, 2007) to attract teachers in subject
shortage areas. Chronic teacher shortages inhibit rural children from receiving access to
consistent high quality teaching. In the United States, the challenges of rural education are
compounded by the historic inability of American educational practice to provide consistent
educational expertise and resources in low wealth school districts. Often set in communities with
agricultural economies, rural schools struggle to meet the language needs of migrant populations
(Gutiérrez, 2008), overcome the legacy of historical and re-constituted segregated schooling in
many southern states (Ladson-Billings, G., 2004), compensate for the isolation of remote
indigenous populations throughout the Native-American reservation lands of the west and
overcome the effects of rural poverty that has stayed close to 20% for several decades and has
remained 5% more than the percentage for urban children in poverty since the late 1990s
(O’Hare, W., 2009). The lack of access to high quality schooling and health care combined with
high poverty rates, make rural children particularly vulnerable to reduced opportunity.
During all phases of childhood, children benefit from equal treatment and attention and suffer

when institutional discrimination—the systemic denial of access to assets, economic
opportunities, associations, and organizations based on minority status—is in place. Indeed even
when African American and poor children, and children from predominantly Spanish speaking
populations, were integrated into public school systems in the twentieth century, the process of
tracking students assured that the vast majority of students of color and low socioeconomic
status were relegated to less rigorous course sequences (Oakes, 1985; Owens, 1985). In addition,
such division of students has often been based on standardized tests, which research suggests
may be culturally and class biased. Students have also been divided based on school personnel
reports. Such reports are often subjective and may inadvertently be based on assessments of
students’ dress, language, and behavior (Oakes, 1985; Oakes & Lipton, 1992). Throughout the
history of public schooling, most teachers and other school staff have belonged to dominant
groups, and consciously or unconsciously, they may have awarded privilege and preference to
learning styles, language, and dress that they found familiar.
In short, post desegregation, tracking has traditionally served as a two-tiered system of
ongoing educational inequality. Although it is necessary to understand the complexities of
tracking, including both advantages and disadvantages (see Brunello & Checchi, 2007; Loveless,
1999; Wang, Walberg, & Reynolds, 2004), it is equally important to recognize that special
education, non-college-bound, and non-accelerated classes have been disproportionately
populated by historically excluded students. These classes too often prepared students to work
only in low-skilled, low-paying jobs. Conversely, regular education, college-bound, and
accelerated classes have been disproportionately white and middle or upper class. These classes
typically prepare their members for college and leadership roles. Thus, the traditional structure of
public education often both reflected and supported ethnic and class divisions within U.S. society

(Kozol, 2005; Oakes, 1985; Oakes & Lipton, 1992; Winters, 1993).
For an example of the dangers of tracking, consider Anthony Bryant. His behavior puts him
at risk for eventual placement in specialized classes for emotionally disturbed children, even
though his behavior may be a normal part of his developmental process (Hosp & Reschly, 2003).
Currently, his fairly infrequent aggressive behavior seems to be dealt with by school personnel
appropriately, which may prevent an escalation of the problem. Intervention with Anthony’s
family members may also facilitate a consistent, positive family response to Anthony’s behavior.
However, the professionals making decisions at Anthony’s school and in his community could
begin to interpret his behavior as serious and threatening. Thus, Anthony faces an increased risk
of placement outside the “regular” track. What could follow, through a series of steps intended
by the school system to provide special programming for Anthony, is his miseducation based on
a set of faulty cultural lenses that diagnose his needs and prescribe deficient remedies. The
potential miseducation of Anthony is compounded by social patterns that have persisted for years
and work against the success of African American males and immigrant youth in particular.
Many school systems have now recognized their historically unequal treatment of students
and taken steps to reduce discrimination. One approach is mainstreaming, or inclusion, the
practice of placing all children who could be assigned to special education classrooms into
regular education classrooms (Connor, et al, 2008: Sleeter, 1995). An increasingly common and
innovative approach in the disability arena is the collaborative classroom. Children with and
without disabilities are team-taught by both a “regular” and a “special” education teacher.
Heterogeneous grouping helps prevent students of different races, socioeconomic classes, and
genders from being separated and treated unequally. Different approaches to teaching academic
content are used in hopes of accommodating a variety of learning styles and social backgrounds.

Teachers, students, and other school personnel receive training on diversity. And sexual
harassment policies have slowly been implemented and enforced in public schools. The policies
are enforced by the requirement that all schools receiving federal funds designate a Title IX
hearing officer to inquire about and, if warranted, respond to all allegations of harassment in its
many forms.
Schools have also begun to include, in their curricula, content that reflects the diversity of
their students. As the topic of diversity has become prominent in academic and popular
discourse, educational materials are increasingly likely to include the perspectives of
traditionally nondominant groups. As a result, more literature and history lessons represent
females and minorities who have contributed to U.S. life.
In the last decade, clear and consistent educational research in the fields of literacy education
and educational theory has also begun to detail effective instructional strategies and
methodological approaches. Implementation of such research findings has disrupted the “stand
and deliver,” or lecture format, as the dominant approach to teaching and knowledge acquisition.
Schools located in areas with high rates of poverty have also been targeted for extra attention.
Full-service schools attempt to provide school-based or school-linked health and social services
for school children and their families (Dryfoos, 1994). Similarly, school- based family resource
centers attempt to provide children, families, and communities with needed supports (Adler,
1993). Such provision of holistic family services illustrates public education’s continuing effort
to meet the ideal of equal and comprehensive education, allowing all U.S. children equal
opportunity to achieve economic and social success.
In addition, the U.S. Department of Education launched a major initiative to close the
achievement gap of historically excluded populations with the passage by Congress of the No

Child Left Behind Education Act of 2001 (NCLB) as an extension of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act. Increasingly, schools have been refocused on English Language Arts
and math skill development training by the national standards movement and advanced by the
requirements of NCLB and its accountability arm, but to the potential detriment of educating the
whole child (Guisbond & Neill, 2004).
The NCLB shifted federal focus to school and teacher accountability for higher achievement,
which is monitored by annual “high stakes” tests. All children must take such standardized
assessments and schools are required to disaggregate their results for each of five subpopulations
including gender and students with disabilities, limited English proficiency, low socioeconomic
status, as well as students who are black, Hispanic, American Indian/Alaskan Native,
Asian/Pacific Islander, or white. Under the provisions of the law, school districts must meet
annual yearly progress (AYP) goals for both aggregated and disaggregated data sets. Districts
failing to meet such goals face consequences ranging from providing extra funding for parents to
acquire support services to having a school closed down for consistently missing AYP targets. As
a result, educational research has been given higher status to influence educational policy than it
has received in the past.
This push for educational accountability and its impact on the lives of children is complex
and highly controversial. The application of the NCLB standards spurred a number of
organizations and states (e.g., the National Educational Association, Michigan, Connecticut, and
Utah) to either sue the federal government or sharply criticize the act for raising state
achievement requirements without adequate supporting funds or as a violation of states’ rights.
Nonetheless, many schools have adopted innovative practices designed to raise achievement
of basic skills while attempting to meet the educational needs of all students (Sherer, 2009).,

However, only ten reform programs received the highest grade (defined as moderate or limited
success) by the Comprehensive School Reform Quality Center and American Institutes for
Research (2006) in their federally funded three year study of school reform programs. Two
initiatives examined within this study serve as prime examples of the variety of philosophies that
drive such schools. The Knowledge Is Power Program (KIPP) follows a prescription that
demands that its students strictly adhere to a regimen of social behavior development coupled
with long hours dedicated to mastering content-based curricula (Carter, 2000). On the other
hand, Expeditionary Learning Schools (a consortium of 140 schools) immerse their students in
problem-based learning that is linked to authentic experiences often consummated outside the
walls of the school (Cousins, 2000; Levy, 2000). As this report suggests, most schools are
struggling to balance a number of competing demands while meeting the standards of the NCLB
Act. Evidence regarding the effectiveness of the NCLB Act was to be examined during
congressional hearings in 2007, when the act was up for reauthorization. In 2009, the Obama
administration laid out an ambitious plan to provide the financial backing to carry out several
new initiatives as well to encourage innovative ways to meet the goals of NCLB. Money was
allocated as part of the stimulus funding process to reverse the under-funding trends of the Bush
administration (Obama, 2009) and optimistic idea generation began anew.
Special Challenges in Middle Childhood
In the last several decades in the United States, family structures have become more diverse than
ever (Amato, 2003; Fields, 2004; Parke, 2003). The percentage of children living with both
parents has steadily declined during the last four to five decades. According to the U.S. Census

Bureau data, in 2002, 69% of children resided with two parents, 23% lived with only their
mother, and 5% lived with only their father. About 4% of children do not live with either parent,
and about one-half of these children have at least one grandparent in their household (Fields,
2003).
Dual-income families are now commonplace. Social and economic trends have placed more
parents of young children into the workforce in order to make ends meet. Legislation requires
single parents who receive public assistance to remain engaged in or to re-enter the workforce
(Parham, Quadagno &, Brown, 2008). The school day often does not coincide with parents’ work
schedules, and recent research suggests that due to parental employment, more than half of
school-age children regularly need additional forms of supervision when school is not in session.
Most of these children either participate in a before or afterschool program (also known as wrap-
around programs) or receive care from a relative (Lerner, Castellino, Lolli, & Wan, 2003). Many
low- and middle-income families struggle to find affordable child care and often are forced to
sacrifice quality child care for economic reasons (National Association of Child Care Resource
and Referral Agencies, 2006; Wertheimer, 2003).
Unfortunately, available data suggest that the quality of child care experienced by the average
child in the United States is less than ideal (Helburn & Bergmann, 2002; Vandell & Wolfe,
2000). This fact is particularly troubling because child care quality has been linked to children’s
physical health as well as cognitive, emotional, and social development (Burchinal, 1999; Hayes,
Palmer, & Zaslow, 1990; Tout & Zaslow, 2003; Vandell & Wolfe, 2000 – I will update these
references). These findings apply not only to early childhood programs but also to before and
afterschool programs for older children. Moreover, as children move from the early (ages 5 to 9)
to later (10 to 12) middle childhood years, they are increasingly likely to take care of themselves

during the before and afterschool hours (Lerner et al., 2003). Regular participation in a high
quality before and afterschool program is positively associated with academic performance and a
significant body of research suggests that how school-age children spend their afterschool hours
is strongly associated with the likelihood of engaging in risky behaviors (Lerner et al., 2003).
Inadequate and low-quality child care is just one of the challenges facing school-age
children—along with their families and communities—in the twenty-first century. Other
challenges include poverty, family and community violence, mental and physical challenges, and
family disruption.
Poverty
There is growing international consensus that poverty is one of the most significant human rights
challenges facing the world community (Grinspun, 2004). Indeed, foremost among threats to
children’s healthy development is poverty, which potentially threatens positive development in
all domains (Duncan, Kalil, & Ziol-Guest, 2008; Gordon, Pantazis,Nandy, & Harper, 2003;
Harper, 2004; United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000a, 2000b; Vandivere, Moore, & Brown,
2000). Unfortunately, it is estimated that half of the children of the world live in poverty, many in
extreme poverty (Bellamy, 2004). That children should be protected from poverty is not
disputed; in the United States, this societal value dates back to the colonial period (Trattner,
1998). The nature of policies and programs targeted at ensuring the minimal daily needs of
children are met, however, has shifted over time, as has our success in meeting this goal (Chase-
Lansdale & Vinovskis, 1995; United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000a).
How does poverty serve as a risk factor in middle childhood?
In the United States, the late twentieth century brought a dramatic rise in the child poverty
rate, which peaked in the early 1990s, declined for approximately a decade, and has gradually

increased again during the early years of the twenty-first century (Koball & Douglas-Hall, 2006).
In 2007, the national poverty rate for the population as a whole was approximately 12.5%. The
number of children living in poverty in 2007 was 18%. In other words, approximately one in five
children live in a family with an income below the federal poverty level (National Center for
Children in Poverty, 2008).
As illustrated in Exhibit 5.4, (update table with 2007 statistics from National Poverty Center)
Caucasian children comprise the majority of poor children in the United States. Young children
and children from minority groups are statistically overrepresented among the population of poor
children (National Center for Children in Poverty, 2008; Linver, Fuligni, Hernandez & Brooks-
Gunn, 2004). This is a persistent modern trend; in other words, although in absolute numbers
Caucasian children consistently compose the majority of poor children, children from Latino and
African American families are consistently significantly overrepresented among all children in
poverty. Currently, the percentage of African American or Latino children living in poverty is
approximately three times as high as the percentage of Caucasian children; 33.7% and 28.6%,
respectively. (National Center for Children Living in Poverty, 2008; Linver et al., 2004).
In general, the risk factors associated with child poverty are numerous, especially when
poverty is sustained. Children who grow up in poverty are more likely to be born with low birth
weight, to experience serious and chronic health problems, to receive poorer health care and
nutrition, to live in substandard and overcrowded housing, live in violent communities, and
experience family turmoil than children who grow up in better financial circumstances (Evans &
English, 2002; Linver et al., 2004; United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000b).
A number of perspectives attempt to explain the ways in which poverty impacts child
development. Limited income constrains a family’s ability to obtain or invest in resources that

promote positive development. Poverty detrimentally impacts caregivers’ emotional health and
parenting practices. Individual poverty is correlated with inadequate family, school, and
neighborhood resources and, thus, children experiencing family poverty are likely experiencing
additional, cumulative risk factors. Each of these perspectives is valid and sheds light on the
complex and synergistic ways in which poverty threatens optimal child development (Linver et
al., 2004 move this citation down to the end of the paragraph).
Exhibit 5.4 U.S. Child Poverty Data 2005 (Tony will update)
Race Children in
Low-
Income
Families
(by Race)
Number Children
in Poor
Families
(by Race)
Number
Black 61% 6,531,529 35% 3,685,360
Latino 61% 8,843,389 28% 4,108,988
White 26% 11,094,359 10% 4,223,801
Asian 28% 823,221 11% 323,148
Children in Low-Income Families in
US
Children in Poor Families in US
Age Percent Number Age Percent Numbe r
Under 6
years
42% 10,211,991 Under 6
years
20% 4,872,428

Over 6
years
37% 18,153,810 Over 6
years
16% 7,942,378
SOURCES: National Center for Children in Poverty, 2006c, 2006d.
NOTE: Low-income families are those with an income below 200% of the federal poverty level
(i.e., incomes approximately twice that of the federal poverty level). Poor families are defined as
families with incomes below the federal poverty level (FPL). In 2009, the FPL was $18,310 for a
family of three and $22,050 for a family of four (see www.census.gov for more information).
Children who have spent any part of their prenatal period, infancy, or early childhood in
poverty have often already encountered several developmental challenges by the time middle
childhood begins. Children who enter, progress through, and leave middle childhood in poverty
are at much greater risk of negative developmental outcomes than those who briefly enter and
then exit poverty while still in middle childhood. In other words, evidence suggests that
persistent and “deep,” or extreme, poverty poses the most significant threat to healthy child
development (Linver et al., 2004; United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000a).
But what does it actually mean, to a child, to be poor? Being poor is a relative concept, the
meaning of which is defined by perceptions of and real exclusion (Dinitto, D.M. & Cummins,
L.K. 2006; Kozol, 2005). In most communities, one must be not poor in order to be fully
engaged and included. Lack of income and certain goods deprive poor people of what is
expected among those who belong; thus, poverty results in perceived and real inabilities and
inadequacies. For example, children often participate in extracurricular activities such as sports,
music, or art. These programs often involve registration, program, and equipment fees that are
prohibitive to impoverished families. This is the essence of relative poverty, or the tendency to
define one’s poverty status in relation to others within one’s social environment. Fundamentally,

then, poverty is as much a social as an economic phenomenon. The social aspect of poverty has
been extended by Payne (2005) to include emotional, spiritual, and support system
impoverishment in addition to economic poverty. Such deficits in the developing child’s
background accumulate and result in impediments to the development of critical capacities
including coping strategies. Unfortunately, income disparity—or the gap between the rich and
the poor—has only continued to widen in recent years, both within and across countries around
the globe.(United Nations Children’s Fund, 2000b, 2009)
The meaning of relative poverty for the school-age child is particularly profound. As
evidence, James Garbarino (1995) points to an innocent question once asked of him by a child:
“When you were growing up, were you poor or regular?” (p. 137). As the child struggles with the
normal developmental tasks of feeling included and socially competent, relative poverty sends a
persistent message of social exclusion and incompetence.
Family and Community Violence
Children are increasingly witness or subject to violence in their homes, schools, and
neighborhoods (Hutchison, 2007). Although child maltreatment and domestic violence have
always existed, they have been recognized as social problems only recently. Community violence
is slowly becoming recognized as a social problem of equal magnitude, affecting a tremendous
number of children and families. Exposure to violence is a particular problem in areas where a
lack of economic and social resources already produces significant challenges for children
(Maluccio, 2006). Among children from war-torn countries, the atrocities witnessed or
experienced are often unimaginable to children and adults who have resided in the United States
all of their lives (Machel, 20097; OSRSG-CAAC & UNICEF, 2009, UNICEF, 20097)
What protective factors can buffer the effects of neighborhood violence on school-age

children?
Witnessing violence deeply affects children, particularly when the perpetrator or victim of
violence is a family member. In the United States, experts estimate that anywhere between 3 and
10 million children may be impacted each year, but no consistent, valid data source exists
regarding children witnessing or otherwise exposed to domestic violence (Children’s Defense
Fund, 2000; Fantuzzo, Mohr, & Noone, 2000).
In the United States, children appear most susceptible to nonfatal physical abuse between the
ages of 6 and 12. Some speculate that in the United States, at least, this association may be due to
increased likelihood of public detection through school contact during these years. The number
of children reported to child protective services (CPS) agencies annually is staggering. In 2003
(Have Tony update CPS figures), CPS agencies across the United States received 2.9 million
referrals, or reports, of suspected child abuse or neglect. This figure represents a reporting rate of
39.1 per 1,000 children. CPS agencies accepted approximately two-thirds of these reports for
investigation or assessment purposes, ultimately identifying approximately 906,000 children as
“confirmed” victims of abuse or neglect in 2003 (USDHHS ACYF, 2005). Child neglect is
consistently the most common form of documented maltreatment, but it is important to note that
victims typically experience more than one type of abuse or neglect simultaneously and therefore
are appropriately included in more than one category. Maltreatment subtype trends are relatively
stable over time; victims of child neglect consistently account for more than half of all child
maltreatment victims (see Exhibit 5.5).
African American and Native American children are consistently overrepresented among
confirmed maltreatment victims. Careful examination of this issue, however, has concluded that
although children of color are disproportionately represented within the child welfare population,

studies that are cognizant of the relationship between culture and parenting practices, that control
for the role of poverty, and that examine child maltreatment in the general population find no
association between a child’s race or ethnicity and likelihood of child maltreatment. Thus, it is
likely that the disproportionate representation of children of color within the child welfare
system is caused by the underlying relationship between poverty and race or ethnicity
(Thomlison, 2004).
A variety of factors contribute to child maltreatment and family violence (Charlesworth,
2007; Choi & Tittle, 2002; Freisthler, Merritt & LaScala, 2006). These factors include parental,
child, family, community, and cultural characteristics. Typically, the dynamic interplay of such
characteristics leads to maltreatment, with the most relevant factors varying significantly
depending upon the type of maltreatment examined. Thus, multiple theoretical perspectives,
particularly the life course, ecological, systems, and stress and coping perspectives, are helpful
for understanding situations of child maltreatment.
Not surprisingly, children who experience abuse have been found to report more unhappiness
and troubled behavior than children who only witness abuse (Maschi, Morgen, Hatcher, Rosato,
Violette, 2009). Witnesses, in turn, report more adjustment difficulties than children who have
neither been abused nor witnessed domestic violence. Because of the strong association between
domestic violence and child maltreatment, however, many children are likely to experience these
challenges to healthy development simultaneously (Crozier & Barth, 2005; Vivien & PeterLee &
Hoaken, 2007).
The impact of child maltreatment varies based on a number of factors, including but certainly
not limited to, the type of maltreatment, the age of the child, and many other child, family, and
community characteristics.. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (2005) has

published a helpful overview of child maltreatment consequences, pointing out that experiencing
maltreatment as a child is associated with an overwhelming number of negative health outcomes
as an adult. These outcomes include an increased likelihood of using or abusing alcohol and
other substances, disordered eating, depression, and susceptibility to certain chronic diseases.
Insert Exhibit 5.5 Here
Exhibit 5.5 Child Maltreatment Subtypes
Children who experience trauma, induced by either indirect or direct exposure to violence,
may experience post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)—a set of symptoms that include feelings
of fear and helplessness, reliving of the traumatic experience, and attempts to avoid reminders of
the traumatic experience (Balaban, 2008; Farkas, 2004)). Researchers have also found changes in
the brain chemistry of children exposed to chronic violence (Kowalik, 2004; Perry, 2006).
Clearly, witnessing or experiencing violence adversely affects children in a number of areas,
including the ability to function in school and the ability to establish stable social, including peer,
relationships (Guterman & Embry, 2004). Children who directly experience violence are at high
risk of negative outcomes, but secondary exposure to violence and trauma—such as when a
child’s parents are suffering from PTSD—also may lead to negative outcomes for children
(Hamblen, 2002). In general, the intergenerational nature of family violence has been established
(Herrenkohl et al., 2004). Childhood exposure to violence significantly increases the likelihood
of mental health difficulties and violence perpetration or revictimization. Currently, the focus is
on understanding the specific pathways of intergenerational processes (Coid et al., 2001;
Heyman & Smith Slep, 2002; Lang, Stein, Kennedy, & Foy, 2004). It is clear that prolonged
exposure to violence has multiple implications for child development. Children are forced to
learn lessons about loss and death, perhaps before they have acquired the cognitive ability to

understand. They may therefore come to believe that the world is unpredictable and violent, a
belief that threatens children’s natural curiosity and desire to explore the social environment.
Multiple experiences in which adults are unable to protect them often lead children to conclude
that they must take on such responsibility for themselves, a prospect that can easily overwhelm
the resources of a school-age child.
Experiencing such helplessness may also lead to feelings of incompetence and hopelessness,
to which children who experience chronic violence react in diverse ways. Responses may be
passive, including withdrawal symptoms and signs of depression; or they may be active,
including the use of aggression as a means of coping with and transforming the overwhelming
feelings of vulnerability (Groves, 1997; Guterman & Cameron, 1997).
The emotional availability of a parent or other caretaker who can support the child’s need to
process traumatic events is critical. However, in situations of crisis stimulated by child
maltreatment, domestic violence, and national or international violence, families are often unable
to support their children psychologically. Even with the best of parental resources, moreover,
children developing in violent and chronically dangerous communities continue to experience
numerous challenges to development. The child’s need for autonomy and independence is
directly confronted by the parent’s need to protect the child’s physical safety. For example, hours
spent indoors to avoid danger do not promote the much-needed peer relationships and sense of
accomplishment, purpose, and self-efficacy so critical during this phase of development
(Hutchison, 2007).
Mental and Physical Challenges
Although the term “disability” is still widely used in academic discourse and government policy,
many are actively seeking to change popular discourse to reflect the need to see all children as

possessing a range of physical and mental abilities. The use of the term disability establishes a
norm within that range and labels those with abilities outside the norm as “disabled,” which
implies that group of individuals is “abnormal” and the group of individuals within the norm is
“normal.” Since the latest government data (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005) suggest that 6.7% of 5-
to 20-year-olds, 12.7% of 21- to 64-year-olds, and 40.5% of those people 65 and older in the
United States have some form of mental or physical “disability,” such a label confines “normal”
and “abnormal” to fixed categories that are not helpful to realizing a vision of a just and equal
society. Just over one in ten children in the United States has difficulty performing one or more
everyday activities, including for example, learning and self-care (Emmons, 2005; Hauser-Cram
& Howell, 2003). Some of these difficulties are discussed below.
Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
ADHD is a commonly diagnosed childhood behavioral disorder impacting learning in the school
environment. ADHD includes predominately inattentive, predominately impulsive-hyperactive,
and combined inattentive-hyperactivity (American Psychiatric Association, 19942000) (see
Exhibit 5.6 for diagnostic criteria for ADHD). Estimates of the prevalence of ADHD among
school-age children range from 3% to 12%, with highest incidence of ADHD diagnosis occurring
between ages 5 and 10; compared to girls, boys are significantly more likely to receive a
diagnosis of ADHD (Schneider & Eisenberg, 2006; Strock, 2006). ADHD is associated with
school failure or academic underachievement, but the relationship is complex in part due to the
strong relationship between ADHD and a number of other factors also associated with school
difficulties (Barry, Lyman & Klinger, 2002; LeFever, Villers, Morrow & Vaughn, 2002;
Schneider & Eisenberg, 2006). Also, several studies suggest that the interpretation and evaluation
of ADHD behaviors is significantly influenced by culturally-linked beliefs (Glass & Wegar,

2000; Kakouros, Maniadaki, & Papaeliou, 2004). In other words, the extent to which ADHD-
linked behaviors are perceived as problematic varies according to individual and group values
and norms.
Autistic Spectrum Disorders
In recent years, growing public attention and concern has focused upon autistic spectrum
disorders. Among children ages 3 to 10, just over 3 per 1,000 children are diagnosed with autistic
spectrum disorders; compared to girls, boys are three times as likely to receive such a diagnosis
(Strock, 2004). Autism typically manifests and is diagnosed within the first two years of life;
however, some children may not receive formal assessment or diagnosis until their early or
middle childhood years. Like children with any special need or disability, children diagnosed
with autistic spectrum disorders are extremely diverse; in particular, such children vary widely in
terms of their intellectual and communicative abilities as well as the nature and severity of
behavioral challenges (Volkmar, Paul, Klin, & Cohen, 2005). In general, autism consists of
impairment within three major domains: reciprocal social interaction, verbal and nonverbal
communication, and range of activities and interests (Holter, 2004) (see diagnostic criteria in
Exhibit 5.7).
Exhibit 5.6 Diagnostic Criteria for Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder
Either (1) or (2):
(1) Inattention: Six (or more) of the following symptoms of inattention have persisted for
at least 6 months to a degree that is maladaptive and inconsistent with developmental level:
• Often fails to give close attention to details or makes careless mistakes in schoolwork,
work, or other activities

• Often has difficulty sustaining attention in tasks or play activities
• Often does not seem to listen when spoken to directly
• Often does not follow through on instructions and fails to finish schoolwork, chores, or
duties in the workplace (not due to oppositional behavior or failure to understand
instruction)
• Often has difficulty organizing tasks and activities
• Often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort
(such as schoolwork or homework)
• Often loses things necessary for tasks or activities (toys, school assignments, pencils,
books, or tools) Is often easily distracted by extraneous stimuli
• Is often forgetful in daily activities
(2) Hyperactivity-Impulsivity: Six (or more) of the following symptoms of hyperactivity-
impulsivity have persisted for at least 6 months to a degree that it is maladaptive and
inconsistent with developmental level:
Hyperactivity
• Often fidgets with hands or feet or squirms in seat
• Often leaves seat in classroom or in other situations in which remaining seated is
expected
• Often runs about or climbs excessively in situations in which it is inappropriate (in
adolescents or adults, may be limited to subjective feelings of restlessness)
• Often has difficulty playing or engaging in leisure activities quietly
• Is often “on the go” or often acts as if “driven by a motor”
• Often talks excessively

Impulsivity
• Often blurts out answers to questions before they have been completed
• Often has difficulty awaiting turn
• Often interrupts or intrudes on others (e.g., butts into conversations or games)
• Some hyperactive-impulsive or inattentive symptoms that caused impairment were
present before age 7
• Some impairment from the symptoms is present in two or more settings (e.g., at school
[or work] and at home)
• There must be clear evidence of clinically significant impairment in social, academic, or
occupational functioning
• The symptoms do not occur exclusively during the course of a pervasive developmental
disorder, schizophrenia, or other psychotic disorder and are not better accounted for by
another mental disorder (e.g., mood disorder, anxiety disorder, dissociated disorder, or a
personality disorder)
SOURCE: American Psychiatric Association, 2000. Update Symptoms/Table with DSM IV-TR
Exhibit 5.7
Diagnostic Criteria for Autistic Disorder
A. A total of six (or more) items from (1), (2), and (3), with at least two from (1), and one each
from (2) and (3):
(1) qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:
(a) marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye
gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction
(b) failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level

(c) a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with
other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest)
(d) lack of social or emotional reciprocity
(2) qualitative impairments in communication as manifested by at least one of the following:
(a) delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied by
an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication such as gesture or
mime)
(b) in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to initiate or
sustain a conversation with others
(c) stereotyped and repetitive use of language or idiosyncratic language
(d) lack of varied, spontaneous make-believe play or social imitative play appropriate
to developmental level
(3) restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as
manifested by at least one of the following:
(a) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of
interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus
(b) apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals
(c) stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or
twisting, or complex whole-body movements)
(d) persistent preoccupation with parts of objects
B. Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas, with onset prior to
age 3 years: (1) social interaction, (2) language as used in social communication, or (3) symbolic
or imaginative play.

C. The disturbance is not better accounted for by Rett’s Disorder or Childhood Disintegrative
Disorder.
SOURCE: American Psychiatric Association, p. 75, 2000 (Look at DSM IV-TR)
Emotional/Behavioral Disorder
In many schools, the children perhaps presenting the greatest challenge to educators and
administrators are those who consistently exhibit disruptive or alarming behavior yet do not
clearly fit the criteria for a disability diagnosis. Although the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) includes a definition for “seriously emotionally disturbed” children, not
all school professionals and government education agencies consistently agree with or use this
definition (Young et al., 2004). In fact, the National Mental Health and Special Education
Coalition has publicized a definition of “emotionally/behaviorally disordered” children,
suggesting that this term and a set of diagnostic criteria could be used in place of the IDEA
definition (see Exhibit 5.8). Because of these definitional inconsistencies, it is extremely difficult
to accurately estimate the number of school-age children falling within this population. Such
estimates range from 0.05% to 6% of students.
Early identification and intervention, or provision of appropriate supportive services, are key
protective factors for a child with special needs. In addition, the social environment more
generally may serve as either a risk or protective factor, depending on its response to the child
with a special need. Although difference of any sort is often noticed by children and adults,
students with special needs or chronic illness are at particular risk for being singled out by their
peers, and middle childhood is a critical time for such children. For children to acquire a clear
and positive sense of self, they need positive self-regard. The positive development of all
children is facilitated by support at multiple levels to promote feelings of self-competence and

independence (Goldstein, Kaczmarek, & English, 2002). Educating all children and adults about
special needs and encouraging the support of all students may help to minimize negative
attitudes and incidents (Gargiulo, 2005; Garrett, 2006).
Exhibit 5.8 Diagnostic Criteria for Emotional/Behavioral Disorder or Disturbance
Emotionally Disturbed 1. A condition exhibiting one or more of the following
Emotional/Behavioral
Disorder
characteristics over a long period of time and to a marked degree,
which adversely affects educational performance:
a. An inability to learn which cannot be explained by intellectual,
sensory, or health factors;
b. An inability to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal
relationships with peers and teachers;
c. Inappropriate types of behavior or feelings under normal
circumstances;
d.A general, pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression;
e. A tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated
with personal or school problems.
2. Includes children who are schizophrenic (or autistic). The term
does not include children who are socially maladjusted, unless it is
determined that they are seriously emotionally disturbed.
1. A disability characterized by behavioral or emotional responses
in school programs so different from appropriate age, culture, or
ethnic norms that they adversely affect educational performance,

including academic, social, vocational, or personal skills, and
which:
a. Is more than a temporary, expected response to stressful events
in the environment;
b. Is consistently exhibited in two different settings, at least one of
which is school-related; and
c. Persists despite individualized interventions within the
education program, unless, in the judgment of the team, the child
or youth’s history indicates that such interventions would not be
effective.
2. May include children or youth with schizophrenia disorders,
affective disorders, anxiety disorders, or other sustained
disturbances of conduct or adjustment when they adversely affect
educational performance in accordance with Section I.
SOURCE: Young, Marchant, & Wilder, 2004, pp. 177–178.
What educational initiatives could minimize the risks associated with ADHD, autistic
spectrum disorders, and other emotional/behavioral disorders?
Students who feel misunderstood by their peers are particularly likely to feel alone or isolated
in the school setting. Students who are socially excluded by their peers often develop a dislike of
school. Some students who are teased, isolated, or harassed on a regular basis may begin to
withdraw or act out in order to cope with unpleasant experiences. Teachers, parents, and other
school personnel who pay special attention to, and intervene with, students in this situation may
prevent the escalation of such problems.

Children’s adjustment to special needs is highly dependent on the adjustment of those around
them. Families may respond in a number of ways to a diagnosis of a disability or serious illness.
Often caregivers experience loss or grief stages ; these stages may include: denial, withdrawal,
rejection, fear, frustration, anger, sadness, adjustment, and acceptance (Bouschey, 2001; Bruce &
Schultz, 2002; Pejlert, 2001, Ziolko, 1993). The loss and grief stages ar not linear, but can be
experienced repeatedly as parents interface with educational, social, and medical institutions
throughout their child’s life (Bruce & Schultz, 2002; Pejlert, 20012). Awareness of and
sensitivity to these stages and the ongoing nature of grief and loss is critical for those assessing
the need for intervention. Typically, parents are helped by advocacy and support groups and
access to information and resources.
Families of children with special needs also typically desire independence and self-
determination for their children. Family empowerment was an explicit focus of the Education for
All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94-142) of 1975,which stresses parental participation in the
development of an individual education plan (IEP) for each child. The IEP charts a course for
ensuring that each child achieves as much as possible in the academic realm. The need to include
the family in decision making and planning is also embodied in the IDEA of 1990 (reauthorized
in 1997 and 2004), which replaced the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (Hauser-
Cram & Howell, 2003). The IDEA requires that the IEP includes specific educational goals for
each student classified as in need of special educational services. In addition, the IDEA assures
all children the right to a free and appropriate public education and supports the placement of
children with disabilities into integrated settings.
Prior to this act, the education of children with disabilities was left to individual states. As a
result, the population labeled “disabled” and the services provided varied greatly. Today,

however, through various pieces of legislation and several court decisions, society has stated its
clear preference to educate children with special needs in integrated settings (least restrictive
environment) to the maximum extent possible.
A recent examination of the nature of inclusion nationwide concluded that during the last two
decades, students with special needs (including learning disabilities) were much more likely to
be formally identified, but only approximately 15 states clearly moved toward educating students
with special needs in less restrictive settings (McLeskey, Hoppey, Williamson, & Rentz, 2004).
Evaluations of the impact of inclusive settings on children’s school success suggest positive
academic gains for children with special needs and neutral impact on academic performance for
children without identified special needs (McDonnel et al., 2003).
However, some caution against a “one size fits all” model of inclusion for all students with
special needs, arguing that assessment of the optimal educational setting must be thorough and
individualized. For example, some within the deaf community have argued that current full
inclusion programs are unable “to meet the unique communication and social development needs
of solitary deaf students” (Hehir, 2003, p. 36).
Hehir (2003) explains that while inclusion in statewide assessments has been shown to
improve educational opportunities and achievement for some students with disabilities, “high-
stakes” testing negatively impacts such progress if it alone is used as the basis for preventing
students from being promoted a grade or graduating. In other words, standards-based reforms
can positively impact students with disabilities if they improve the educational opportunities for
all students. If such reforms, however, shift practice toward a system in which standardized
testing is the only format through which student knowledge and capabilities are assessed, then
many students, particularly those with special needs, are likely to suffer (Hehir, 2003, p. 40).

Family Disruption
Throughout history, most nuclear and extended families have succeeded in their endeavor to
adequately protect and socialize their young. For too many children, however, the family serves
as both a protective and risk factor due to unhealthy family attributes and dynamics. In the
specific realm of family disruption, divorce was traditionally viewed as a developmental risk
factor for children. Today, among U.S. children with married parents, approximately one-half
experience the divorce of their parents (Amato, 2003). Many parents marry a second time,
thus“in 2001, 5.4 million children lived with one biological parent and either a stepparent or
adoptive parent” this represents 11 percent of all children living with two parents(Kreider &
Fields, 2005, p. 2). The likelihood of divorce is even greater for second marriages, and
approximately half of these children experience the end of a parent’s second marriage (Bramlett
& and Mosher, 2002). Many children experience the dissolution of their parents’ nonmarital
romantic relationships, and related attachments, without being counted in official “children of
divorce” statistics or research. Although no reliable data on similar nonmarital relationship
patterns exists, we can assume that similar trends exist among children’s nonmarried parents and
other caregivers.
Divorce and other types of family disruption lead to situations,including the introduction of
new people, new housing and income arrangements, and new family roles and responsibilities
(Hetherington & Jodl, 1994). Family disruption may also immerse the child in poverty
(Zagorsky, 2005). As the body of research on children and divorce grows in depth and breadth, it
has become apparent that divorce and other types of family disruption may detrimentally or
positively impact children depending on the circumstances preceding and following the divorce
(Adam & Chase-Lansdale, 2002; Amato, 2003; Gilman, Kawachi, & Fitzmaurice, 2003). For

example, if divorce brings an end to seriously dysfunctional spousal tension or violence and
results in positive changes within the home environment, child outcomes may be positive.
Alternatively, if the divorce disrupted a healthy, nurturing family system and led to declines in
the emotional and financial health of the child’s primary caregiver(s), child outcomes may be
negative.
Historically, many children experienced family disruption due to the death of one or both
parents (Amato, 2003). Although improvements in public health have significantly reduced the
likelihood of parental death, a substantial number of children continue to experience the death of
a primary caregiver. Compared to adults, children have less cognitive and other resources to cope
with death and loss (Saldinger, Cain, Kalter, & Lohnes, 1999). For children coping with the
death of a parent, the circumstances of the death and the adjustment of the remaining caregivers
are critical variables impacting child outcomes (Hope & Hodge, 2006; Kwok et al., 2005). Also,
in recent years, a number of studies have focused upon “children of suicide.” This literature notes
the potential long-term impacts of parental suicide on surviving children and identifies the ways
in which outcomes may be carried through generations (Cain, 2006).
Many school-age children experience disruption of attachment relationships through other
means. For example, approximately 800,000 children spend some amount of time in foster care
each year (Child Welfare League of America, 2005). Some of these children spend lengthy
periods of time in some type of foster care setting, while some children enter and leave foster
care rapidly and only once during their childhoods, and still other children cycle in and out of
their home and foster care settings repeatedly. Approximately one-third of the children in foster
care at any time have been in substitute care for three years or more; approximately one-fifth of
children in foster care are identified as unlikely to ever return home and are awaiting a

permanent plan (Downs, Moore, McFadden, Michaud, & Costin, 2004).
Family disruption is stressful for all children. Great variation exists, however, in the
circumstances preceding and following the family disruption, the nature of the changes involved,
and how children respond to this type of stress. Critical factors in outcomes for children include
social supports within the family and surrounding community, the child’s characteristics, the
emotional well-being of caregivers, and in general the quality of care received following the
family disruption. In addition, because middle childhood spans a wide age range, school-age
children exhibit a wide range of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral responses to divorce and
other types of family disruption. They may blame themselves and experience anxiety or other
difficult emotions, or they may demonstrate a relatively mature understanding of the reasons
behind the events.
Children experiencing family disruption without supports or those who have experienced
difficulties preceding the disruption are most likely to experience long-term emotional and
behavioral problems. Children placed in foster care or otherwise exposed to traumatic or multiple
losses are more likely to fall into this group (Webb & Dumpson, 2006). These children are likely
to face additional stress associated with the loss of familiar space, belongings, and social
networks (Groves, 1997). However, with appropriate support and intervention as well as the
presence of other protective factors, many children experiencing family disruption adjust over
time.

NEW REFERENCES
Balabon, V. (2008). Assessment of children. In E.B. Foa, T.M. Keane, M.J. Friedman & J.A. Cohen
(Eds.), Effective treatments for PTSD: Practice guidelines from the international society for traumatic
stress studies (2 nd ed.). (pp.62 -82). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Boushey, A. (2001). The grief cycle—one parent’s trip around. Focus on Autism and other
Developmental Disabilities, 16(1), 27-30.
Bramlett, M.D.& Mosher W.D. (2002). Cohabitation, marriage, divorce, and remarriage in the United
States. (CDC National Center for Health Statistics and Vital Health Stat Series 23Number 22)
Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/series/sr_23/sr23_022.pdf
Bruce, E. & Schultz, C. (2002). Non-finite loss and challenges to communication between parents and
professionals. British Journal of Special Education, 29(1), 9 – 14.
Choi, S. & Tittle, G. (2002). Parental substance abuse and child maltreatment literature review. Retrieved
from http://www.cfrc.illinois.edu/LRpdfs/ParentalSAMaltx.LR.pdf
Crozier, J.C. & Barth, R.P. (2005). Cognitive and academic functioning in maltreated children. Children &
Schools, 27(4), 197 – 206.
Dinitto, D.M. & Cummings, L.K. (2006). Social welfare: Politics and public policy. (6 th ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Duncan, G., Kalil, A., Ziol-Guest, K. (2008). Economic costs of early childhood poverty (Issue Paper #4).
Retrieved from Partnership for America’s Economic Success website:
http://www.partnershipforsuccess.org/docs/researchproject_duncan_200802_paper.pdf
Evans, G.W., & English, K. (2002). The environment of poverty: Multiple stressor exposure,
psychophysiological stress and socioemotional adjustment. Child Development,73(4),1238-1248.
Retrieved from http://jstor.org/pss/3696282
Farkas, B. (2004). Etiology and pathogenis of PTSD in children and adolescents. In R.R. Silva (Ed.).
Postraumatic stress disorders in children and adolescents. (pp. 123 – 140). New York: NY: W.W.
Norton and Company.
Freisthler, B., Merritt, D.H., & LaScala, E.A. (2006). Understanding the ecology of child maltreatment: A

eview of the literature and directions for future research. Child Maltreatment, 11(3), 263 – 280.
Gordon, D, Nandy, S., Pantazis, C. (2003). Measuring child poverty and deprivation. Child poverty in the
developing world. Retreived from http://www.undp.org/povertycentre/
Grinspun, A. (2004, March). From the editor. In Focus. Retrieved from
http://www.undp.org/povertycentre/
Harper, C. (2004, March). Escaping poverty cycles. In Focus. Retrieved from http://www.undp.org/
Hutchison, E, D. (2007). Community violence. In E.D. Hutchison, H.C. Matto, M.P. Harrigan, L.W.
Charlesworth, & P.A. Viggiani (Eds). Challenges of living (pp. 71 – 104). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Kowalik, S. C. (2004). Neurobiology of PTSD in children and adolescents. In In R.R. Silva (Ed.).
Postraumatic stress disorders in children and adolescents. (pp. 83 – 122). New York: NY: W.W.
Norton and Company.
Kreider, R. M. & Fields, J. (2005). Living arrangements of children 2001 (Current Population Reports,
P70-104). Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p70-104.pdf
http://www.census.gov/prod/2005pubs/p70-104.pdf
Lee, V. & Hoaken, P.N.S. (2007). Cognitive, emotion, and neurobiological development: Mediating the
relation between maltreatment and aggression. Child Maltreatment, 12(3). 281 – 298.
Maschi, T., Morgen, K., Hatcher, S.S., Rosato, N.S., Violette, N.M. (2009). Maltreated children’s thoughts
and emotions as behavioral predictors: Evidence for social work action. Social Work, 54(2), 135 -143.
National Center for Children Living in Poverty. (2008). Low-income children in the United States (Report).
Retrieved from National Center for Children in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health Columbia
University website: http://www.nccp.org/publications/pub_851.html
Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict and United
Nations Children’s Fund. (2009). Machel study 10-year strategic review: Children and conflict in a
changing world. New York, NY: UNICEF.
Parham, L., Quadagno, J, Brown, J. (2008). Race, politics, and social policy. In J.Midgley & M.
Livermore (Eds.), The handbook of social policy (pp.263 – 278). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Pejlert, A. (2001). Being a parent of an adule son or daughter with severe mental illness receiving

professional care: parents’ narrative. Health and Social Care in the Comkunity 9(4), 194 – 204.
Trattner, W. (1998). From poor law to welfare state: A history of social welfare in America. (6 th ed.). New
York, NY: Free Press.
United Nations Children’s Fund (2009, July). Economic update: Countries’ evolving vulnerability from a
child’s perspective. (Social and Economic Working Brief). New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from
http://www.unicef.org/socialpolicy/files/Countries_Evolving_Vulnerability_final.pdf
Zagorsky, J. (2005). Marriage and divorce’s impact on wealth. Journal of Sociology, 41(4), 406-424.
Boger, J. and Orfield, G. (2005). School resegregation: Must the south turn back? Chapel Hill, NC: University
of North Carolina Press.
Brunello, G.., & Checchi, D. (2007), Does school tracking affect equality of opportunity? New evidence.
Economic Policy: October, 2007. Vol. 22 781-861.
Connor, D., Gabel, S., Gallagher, D., & Morton, M. (2008). Disability studies and inclusive education:
Implications for theory, research and practice. International Journal of Inclusive Education. Vol. 12. N. 5-6. 441-
457.
Coughlan, R. and Owens-Manley, J. (2006). Bosnian Refugees in America: New Communities, New Cultures.
NYC: Springer Science and Business Media, Inc.
Darling-Hammond, L. (2007). The flat earth and education: How America’s commitment to equity will
determine our future. Educational Researcher, August/September/2007. Vol. 36. No. 6. 318-334.
Gutiérrez, K. (2008), Developing a sociocritical literacy in the third space, Reading
Research Quarterly, Vol. 43, No. 2 (Apr. - Jun., 2008), pp. 148-164
Houtenville, A and Conway, K. (2007). Parental effort, school resources, and student achievement. Journal of
Human Resources: Spring, 2008. Vol. 43. No. 2, 437-453.
Jaycox, L., Stein, B.., Kataoka, S., Wong, M., Fink, A., Escudero, P., Zaragoza, C. (2002). Violence Exposure,
Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, and Depressive Symptoms Among Recent Immigrant Schoolchildren. Journal of the
American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry: September 2002. Vol. 41. No. 9, 1104-1110.
Ladd, H. (2007), Teacher labor markets in developed countries, The Future of Children: Excellence in the
Classroom (Spring, 2007), Vol. 17, No. 1, pp. 201-217. Princeton: The
Ladson-Billings, G. (2006). From the achievement gap to educational debt: Understanding achievement in U.
S. schools. Educational Researcher: October, 2006. Vol. 35. N. 7, 3-12. Brookings Insitute.
Ladson-Billings, G. (2004), Landing on the wrong note: The price we paid for Brown. Educational Researcher,
(Oct., 2004), Vol. 33, No. 7, pp. 3-13

Littky, D. and Grabelle, S. (2004) The big picture: Education in everyone’s business. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Moon, S., Kang, S. and An, S. (2009). Predictors of immigrant children’s school achievement: A comparative
study. Research in Childhood Education: Spring, 2008. Vol. 23, No 3. 278-289.
Obama, B., (2009). Taking on Education. http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/09/03/10/Taking-on-Education/.
Retrieved, August 4, 2009.
O’Hare, W. (2009), The forgotten fifth: Child poverty in rural America. Carsey Institute Report, No. 10.
University of New Hampshire.
Sherer, M. (2009). Challenging the whole child: Reflections on Best Practices in Learning, Teaching and
Leadership. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development.
Solórzano, R. (2008). High stakes testing: Issues, implications, and remedies for English language learners.
Review of Educational Research. June, 2008. Vol. 78, No 2. 260-329.
United States Census Bureau (2006). www.census.gov/compendia/statab/tables/09s0220.xls . Retrieved, July
20, 2009.
Vaage, A. B., Garløv, C., Hauff, E., Thomsen. P. H. (2007). Psychiatric Symptoms and Service Utilization
among Refugee Children Referred to a Child Psychiatry Department: A Retrospective Comparative Case Note
Study. Transcultural Psychiatry, Vol. 44, No. 3, 440-458.
World Bank, (2009). Global monitoring report, 2009: A developing emergency. NYC: World Bank.
Barr & Parrett, 1995
Fuligni, 1997
Guarnaccia & Lopez, 1998
Harter, 1988
Oakes, 1985
Pernice & Brook, 1996
Winters, 1993
Deleted references

CHAPTER 11: Epistemology in Diversity and Social Justice Education

human activity,” which is in-and-of-itself a highly political act (p. 1007). Due to
the “inter-relationship between epistemology, ideology, and politics,” researchers
who engage their research through an epistemological entrance to their paradigm
develop ontological (or truth) claims which “…are simultaneously epistemological
and political” (p. 1008).
A major concern in orientation for our chapter is understanding that any
conversation about knowing what our students know, come to know, or never
will know with reference to social justice and diversity is an inherently epistemological
and paradigmatic issue as opposed to a simple question addressed by
a methodology. Thus our exploration may appear overwhelmingly theoretical at
times, yet the epistemology that guides our conversation is important since one
of our major claims hereinto is that we are inherently skeptical of claiming that
“we know” that our students “get it” or “don’t get it,” with an understanding of
epistemology as both personal and political, epistemologies can simultaneously
be linked to ontolologies, or the nature of truths, insofar as once one commits
interior_davis2.indd main:212 7/8/2009 10:17:08 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 213
to the fact that all pedagogues operate from multiple ideological and epistemological
positions, and thus “none of us can claim to know the truth or to have
the exclusive franchise from nature on the way to find it out” (Lincoln & Guba,
1990, p. 22). Our hope as authors is that educators can “…offer a thoughtful
and deliberate epistemological perspective and methodology and not merely an
“alternative” methodology because “racial or ethnic” epistemologies are the ‘in’
thing to do at this moment in qualitative inquiry” when teaching courses related
to diversity, multiculturalism, and/or social justice (Dixson, 2005, p. 110).
Given the aforementioned framework we will explore the nature of knowledge
first in theory, then relative to how educators frame their own knowledge, and
then finally and more specifically how educators frame student knowledge. An
underlying assumption for each part of the chapter is that educators can truly
never know what others know; we may however begin to approximate knowing
what we think we know as educators, and thus we will conclude the chapter
with each chapter author exploring what “turns them on” in terms of knowledge
and the markers of knowledge we look for as instructors that align with what
we think we know about our own knowing.
Epistemology (…and Privilege)
As authors of this chapter we want to make clear at the outset that we are three
white teacher educators, and whilst our commitments pedagogically are to social
justice and diversity, we wish to avoid staking any knowledge claims that position
us as “knowers” for topics and areas for which we can never truly “know.” Our
task therefore is not to provide an in-depth way or method of how to come to
understand what it is students or even we as educational researchers know, but
rather our focus in this chapter is on sharing with you the tough epistemological
work inherent in trying to understand what it is we think we know, and how we
use what we think we know about ourselves and students, to organize our work
as educators.
In line with a discussion of the way in which educators have had a historic
focus on the “othering” of poor, dark-skinned, and indigenous “others,” the guiding
epistemological orientation in place for such work has operated in what
Ladson-Billings (2003) calls the “Euro-American epistemological tradition” (p.
399). Equally, Gordon (1995), citing Foucault, asserts that most “educational
literature in…the academy…is grounded in the Euro-American “regime of truth.”

(p. 184); ultimately it is the epistemological traditions of white Euro-Americans
that have created the privileging and “the canonization of “Whiteness” in the
dominant narratives” of educational practice (p. 184). Lather (1992), adding the
interior_davis2.indd main:213 7/8/2009 10:17:08 PM
214 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
complexity of gender to epistemological orientation, avers that “male domination
results in partial and distorted accounts of social life” (p. 93).
The epistemological domination of educational practices has, according to
Mazama (2001), placed students, academics, and peoples of color at “the periphery,
the margin of the European experience” as a “footnote in the White man’s
book (p. 387). The overarching implication of these Euro-American epistemologies
has resulted in an “epistemology of oppression . . .” where “the racist ideology
that drives hegemony moves the oppressed other into a paradigm of survival so
that these intersecting cycles of oppression and survival create a particular
epistemological view of the world” for everyone (Tyson, 1997, p. 22).
The development of race-based and indigenous epistemologies have, in part
been an attempt to bring to bear the epistemological view of the world that Tyson
(1997) described to challenge the privileging and dominant discourse. Researchers
such as Hill (1991), Ladson-Billings (1995; 2003), Gordon (1995), Asante (1987),
Taylor (1987), and Smith (1999) among others, have developed raced-based
epistemologies that stand in the face of dominant Euro-American epistemologies.
Tyson (1997) asserts that “…the history of race and race relations cannot
be ignored in discussion about epistemology” (p. 22). Disheartening is the attempt
by some educational researchers, particularly Scheurich & Young (1997), that
have consciously or unconsciously, refocused the attention of race-based epistemological
conversations back to the purview of the dominant Euro-American
viewpoint by positioning that race-based epistemologies are somehow new and
‘acceptable’ with white co-signers to acknowledge race-based epistemologies as
legitimate (Mills, 1995). For researchers of color, already cautious given the
hegemonic organization of research in the 21st century, the question becomes
does white interest in race-based epistemologies create “scholarly legitimization”
despite that “race-based epistemologies have been a part of the research discourse”
long before white acknowledgment, interest, and acceptance (Tyson, 1997, p.
22)?
White supremacist epistemology meets
our paradigmatic orientation
To help guide you as you read on to what we mean by paradigmatically full,
we wish to highlight a set of three guiding principles that can serve as a metric
to ensure that out scholarly work addresses problems that we are epistemologically
capable of addressing. The three guiding principles are as follows:
1. A recognition that carefully orchestrated methods do not in and of
themselves obtain ontologically rich understandings or “true results.”
(Lather, 1986, p. 259)
interior_davis2.indd main:214 7/8/2009 10:17:09 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 215
2. Epistemology, not ontology or methodology, provides the best entrance
to the framing of the paradigm; given that choice of method and path
to ‘truths’ is highly dependent on the systems of knowing in place.
3. Our status as privileged whites necessitates a research agenda that casts
a critical ‘othering’ gaze on ourselves and our beliefs as well as on other
privileged whites, recognizing that our epistemologies have the propensity
for being white supremacist in nature, coming from a history of white

supremacy.
The guiding principles above ‘work’ for us and our desire to engage in a
chapter that is more fully paradigmatic in nature. Geertz (1977) offered that
“man is an animal suspended in the webs of significance he himself has spun”
(p. 5). It is our belief that acting upon the paradigmatic guidelines presented
above allows us to begin the act of disentangling these cobwebs. We are reminded
by Fine (1997) that educational research has involved “acts of cumulative privileging
quietly loaded up on whites,” and consequently the disentanglement of
the privilege and significance we spin upon ourselves must be an open and
transparent process involving a commitment to change now and over time (p.
57).
Given the pervasiveness of whiteness in the educational arena,1 educators
are socialized often in, with, and around white supremacist privilege; thus educators
can no longer continue to operate paradigmatically within the traditional
milieu that has created spaces and places for the conducting of hegemonic
practice. Nor will it be enough to simply deconstruct the ‘center’ of white privilege
in educational practice, namely the Euro-American epistemologies, without
attention to simultaneously deconstructing the entire paradigmatic whole. White
educational practictioners in particular are understood as having attempted to
define and cast both what the center and margins look like, thus creating an
unsafe space for growth (Tyson, 1995; hooks, 2000).
Vidich & Lyman (2003) caution against acting with “an attitude of engagement
with a world that is ontologically absurd but always meaningful to those
who live in it” (p. 94). To push further beyond Vidich & Lyman’s thoughts, the
limit of educational thought seems to be a disparity between educators’ fetishes
and overemphasized reliance on methods to make sense of truth and understand
others’ knowledge. The absurdity rests not within the nature of each individual’s
truth, as single truths are not apprehendable but rather the absence of epistemological
alignment to the subjective, partial, and situated truths we believe
must exist. The ‘absurd’ and often profane use of method, and not epistemology,
to explain the nature of truth, ignores and disenfranchises the very people that
educators typically cast as ontologically absurd and ‘other.’ Vidich and Lyman
recognize that in fact the life and the truth of the life is meaningful to those
who live it, calls for a greater paradigmatic responsibility in the construction of
interior_davis2.indd main:215 7/8/2009 10:17:09 PM
216 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
research agendas and our examination of what it might mean to know what
someone else knows.
Donmoyer (2001) noted that “the world was once a simpler place” (p. 174).
This statement is fairly misleading. In the Eurocentric paradigms that have
guided principles of educational practice, the world probably has been a simple
place—there are plenty of ‘others’ to teach and plenty of opportunity to advance
personal interests at the cost of our students’ success, simple indeed. Paradigmatic
honesty necessitates that the world previously thought to be so simple be understood
in more complex and “messy” (Ladson-Billings, 1995, p. 155) ways. Our
knowledge is situated, subjective (Peshkin, 1988) and partial. Our task as multicultural
educators thus is to fully attend to the paradigm, entering through our
multiple systems of knowing, engaging with methods connected to these systems
of knowing, and searching for the multiple truths that exist.
How Educators Frame Their Own Knowledge
In a Foucauldian fashion, we argue that conceptions of knowledge arise from a

grid of discourses that permeate the school culture as well as the wider state
and national contexts, and the individual and institutional practices that are
supported or prohibited by those discourses (Foucault, 1965, 1977). Without the
deconstruction of knowledge, educators miss the fact that we operate within
particular historical practices that “are constructed and generate action”
(Popkewitz, 1998, p. 30). By focusing on discourses we can search for the amalgamations
of social technologies, such as discursive relationships among dominant
discourses, institutional organizations, and individual practices “that when taken
together generate, sustain, and inscribe a given rational system” (Fendler, 1999,
p. 174). This focus allows us to see how educators come to understand the
complexity of knowledge, knowledge that often has contradictory outcomes to
the intended goal(s).
While a teacher’s goal of knowing if students know can seem like a simple
function, its deconstruction reveals multiple layers of questions and uncertainties.
Teachers “rarely question the adequacy of their knowledge tradition. They
tend to remain committed to their practices and discourses because, lacking a
residue of recalcitrant anomalies, they assume that they are valid and objective,
and thus they serve the best interests of their students and of society” (Skrtic,
1995, p. 40). If we are dedicated to knowing what students know, then we must
be dedicated to the mission of seeking out recalcitrant anomalies. Such a commitment
will not provide definition but rather will position what we know, as
“historically contingent and therefore changeable” (Fendler, 1999, p. 185). We
propose that claims to “know what our students know” through particular instiinterior_
davis2.interior_indd main:216 7/8/2009 10:17:09 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 217
tutional and/or individual practices deny the politics of knowledge and produce
“regimes of truth” (Foucault, 1980). Regimes of truth normalize and habituate
the current conceptions and practices therefore, reinforcing the structures that
support them. By revealing this process, we can then set the groundwork toward
seeing, feeling, acting, thinking, and talking about knowledge in alternate
ways.
How Do We Know We Know?
Educators’ question should not be “what do people know?” but rather “what and
how do we know what we know? In the following section we explore two avenues
for teachers’ assessment of their own knowledge—knowledge of the subject
matter and practical wisdom—to point out how they are socially constructed
and are theoretically contested and complex.
Knowledge of subject matter
Appropriately, and not surprisingly, educators value knowing what it is they
are teaching. However, emphasis is placed upon implementation, training and
developing of the subject matter into the curriculum rather than on the underlying
construction of the subject matter. To problematize the knowing of subject
matter we must first recognize that knowledge is socially constructed and influenced
by political, social, and historical forces. Such an acknowledgment helps
prevent the subject matter from becoming normalized and thus unquestioned.
Second, the increasing institutional practices of standardization and bureaucratization
of the teacher education curriculum (e.g., through SPA accreditation)
must be deconstructed to illuminate the efforts to normalize the knowledge of
the subject matter. For example, the Association for Childhood Education
International (ACEI) evaluates teacher education programs on their worthiness
to prepare teacher candidates. ACEI has developed a standard that addresses

the need for teacher candidates to adapt to diverse students by stating,
Candidates understand and can identify differences in approaches to learning and
performance, including different learning styles, and ways students demonstrate
learning. They understand how elementary students’ learning is influenced by individual
experiences, talents, disabilities, and prior learning, as well as language, culture,
family, and community values. Candidates know how to seek assistance and guidance
from specialists and other resources to address elementary students’ exceptional
learning needs and understand the importance of collaboration with specialists and
families. They identify and design instruction appropriate to K-6 students’ levels of
development, learning styles, strengths, and needs, using teaching approaches that
are sensitive to the multiple experiences of students. Candidates plan instructional
interior_davis2.indd main:217 7/8/2009 10:17:09 PM
218 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
tasks and activities appropriate to the needs of students who are culturally diverse
and those with exceptional learning needs in elementary schools. They are able to
apply knowledge of the richness of contributions from diverse cultures to each content
area studied by elementary students. (http://www.acei.org/acei.org/Sourcedocs3.
htm)
There are many indicators of knowledge based on functionalism. The functionalist
approach in education is characterized by using scientific principles
and an objective view of knowledge with the aim of determining the proper roles
of schools. Its historical context references back to the early 1900s. Such a theoretical
view posits that a standardized formula for teaching can be devised in
order to achieve maximum efficiency and achievement. So once one knows the
“different learning styles,” “levels of development,” and “the needs of students
who are culturally diverse and those with exceptional learning needs” then
appropriate instructional opportunities can be provided. However, this standard
does not question the knowledge of these functional principles, providing for
educators a rather large epistemological gap. For example, we must wonder who
are the “students who are culturally diverse.” There is an assumption of knowledge
because it has become normalized to define culturally diverse in a certain
way. Whom does this represent? Whom does it marginalize? How are learning
opportunities then developed based on the answers?
This standard also functionalizes knowledge by alluding that certain kinds
of knowledge are only for specialists. Skrtic (1995) claims that in education, “a
division of labor in professional bureaucracies is achieved through specialization,
a situation in which clients are distributed among the workers, each of whom
specializes in the knowledge and skills presumed to be necessary to serve clients
with a particular constellation of needs” (p. 199). Theoretically, such a bureaucracy
promotes workers to know the theory and practice behind their work.
Practically, however, such a bureaucracy within the educational system of today
decreases the need to “know” what others know. The bureaucracy infers that
knowledge can be compartmentalized. The knowledge of others would not be
questioned while one concentrates on building the repertoire of knowledge
deemed necessary for one’s own specialization, thus decreasing the likelihood
of anomalies being illuminated. How then do educators determine who needs
to know what, and moreover, who decides and why?
When knowledge is scientifically postured, it has great potential of going
unquestioned. An unquestioning nature can lead to implementation of standardization
and/or specialization of the knowledge needed. It becomes clear that
one’s personal practices and beliefs are in a discursive relationship with institutional
practices that further normalize the current status of knowing.
interior_davis2.indd main:218 7/8/2009 10:17:09 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 219

Practical Wisdom
Educators’ claims to knowledge are often based on personal experience in
and out of the classroom. Similar to the knowledge of the subject matter, practical
wisdom can also allow for an unquestioning approach to what it is we know.
If we see our experiences as the base for our knowledge, then the ambiguity
needed to question what we know diminishes. Consequently, teachers’ claims
of knowledge, when centered solely on their own experiences are limited and
limiting—knowledge exists far beyond any individual teacher’s repertoire of
experiences, and thus as authors of this chapter we are particularly critical of
programs, developments, and teacher training based solely in experience-laden
knowledge claims.2 The theory of learning by doing values accruing knowledge
through practical experiences, and thus teachers may limit their understanding
of knowledge to just those experiences, claiming that they know because they
have been doing it (teaching) for so long. However, Skrtic (1995) raised the issue
of teachers reducing the inevitable ambiguity in teaching by reifying their knowledge
gained through learning by doing. “Ambiguity in under organized systems
is reduced when actors incorporate—rightly or wrongly—into their paradigms
an inference about cause and effect. What they act on is the inference as if it
was true, a previously loose relationship between cause and effect becomes
tightened and the uncertainty surrounding the effect is reduced” (Skrtic, 1995,
p. 209). When an educator links their claim to knowing with a personal experience,
a cause and effect relationship is formed. Ambiguity is diminished.
Additionally, the context and social construction of this knowledge remain
unquestioned, making it unlikely the re-evaluation will be needed (Kuhn, 1970).
Delpit (1995) states, “we all interpret behaviors, information, and situations
through our own cultural lenses; these lenses operate involuntarily, below the
level of conscious awareness, making it seem that our own view is simply ‘the
way it is” (p. 151). In order to avoid reifying practical wisdom, educators need to
connect their knowing to historical, social and political discourses that normalize
certain ways of knowing. In essence educators are better served through connected
ways of knowing as opposed to separate, self-indulgent, and ego-centered
operating practices that serve as a camouflage to knowledge (Belenky, Clinchy,
Goldberger, Tarule, 1996).
The pursuit of knowledge should not include any illusion of an end point
but rather it should include the acknowledgment that influence and manipulation
of discourses that inform what knowledge is, are unavoidable and in fact,
must be embraced. Focus must be less on how teachers teach through their own
particularized knowledge and more on an interrogation of how a teacher’s “supposed
knowledge” became the knowledge to be known.
interior_davis2.indd main:219 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
220 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
How Educators Frame
the Knowledge of Their Students
Our premise is that, as long as conditions exist to categorize, marginalize and
demonize each from the other, educators will continue to fail to know how successful
they are at creating socially just future educators. But what do we know?
What do we trust is the foundational base that gives instructors a chance to
build new lenses so that our students might entertain multiple perspectives?
How can we know that the base once built will leave students with sustainable,
self-regulating filters that consistently alter pre-judgments that lead to racism,
sexism, ageism, ethnocentrism, classism, prejudicial regionalism and exclusion?

Is there any way for those of us who teach “the diversity courses” to know whether
students, who today pledge to be active participants in creating a more socially
just future, actually will do so?
Grounding students in their own social
and racial identity development
Teacher education candidates, share with all humans a set of social identities
that motivate thought and behavior. The identities are derived from at least four
distinct perspectives. For the purposes of this foundational construct, these
perspectives will be represented by a four-quadrant schematic originally described
by Luft and Ingham as Johari’s Window (1955). The first or open window contains
aspects of ourselves that we reveal to others consciously. The open window
reveals portions of our identity known to us and to others equally. We are aware
of what we are sharing with society and what others know about us. The size of
this window is dependent on the length of time we have known others and our
“openness” about sharing with others about ourselves. A view through the window
often identifies physical attributes, feelings, wishes, and desires, aspirations,
attitudes and beliefs, opinions, achievements…the list is finite, but extensive.
The second or hidden window contains aspects of ourselves that we choose
not to reveal to others and, thereby, is known to us, but consciously kept from
others. The size of this window is also dependent on the length of time we have
known others and our “reluctance” about sharing with others about ourselves.
The opaque character of this window owes much to personality, past experience
and current situations. Like the first or open window, it is a result of personal,
familial, societal, cultural and political dynamics and is as much anthropologic
as idiosyncratic. The window can obscure most, but not all of the same identifying
characteristics that an open window can reveal. Individual success at hiding
identities is dependent on personal ingenuity, social context, political control
and economic resources to name a few.
interior_davis2.indd main:220 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 221
The third or blind window contains public aspects of ourselves that we do
not control. These identifying characteristics are not in our conscious sense of
who we are. However, because others can perceive them, they can be made
available to us. This portion of our identity is a potentially contentious aspect of
our identity, because others attach value to these characteristics, and we have
much less control over this aspect of ourselves. Unless the view others have from
the blind window is brought to our attention, it goes undetected by us. Like the
open window, it frames how others perceive us, but it is not within our locus of
control. It influences our actions, because, as social beings, we seek to know
how others perceive us. A wide spectrum of personal behaviors can be attributed
to our desire to know how others perceive us. The opaque character of this
window owes much to the degree of investment we have in soliciting others’
perceptions of us, reading social cues and our intelligence in understanding
interpersonal signals, cultural signifiers, micro-messages (Young, 2006) and our
ability to reflect intra-personally on our own behaviors in social situations
(Gardner, 1993) . Like the first or open window, it is a result of personal, familial,
societal, cultural and political dynamics and is as much anthropologic as idiosyncratic.
The view through the blind window has an infinite set of perspectives
and is as complex as the number of social and cultural lenses used by humans
to know others.
The fourth or unknown window contains aspects of self identity that we are

not conscious of nor are others. Although this source may motivate some or many
of our behaviors, it is not accessible to conscious thought nor external perception.
Much has been theorized about the unknown portion of personal identity, but
it eludes sensory investigation.
Teacher preparation strives to broaden candidates’ self-understanding while
simultaneously deepening their vision to notice or anticipate how others perceive
them. We rely on signifiers that indicate growth toward more self-aware and
socially active dispositions that prepare candidates to resist the hegemonic
structures of white supremacist schooling.
The Course Purpose
Before moving to the ways in which each of the chapter authors looks to mark
knowledge and understand knowledge from the teacher candidates we work
with, it is important to briefly orient you to the course that is offered at our
institution. The three authors of this chapter teach a single course at the graduate
and/or undergraduate levels that addresses issues of diversity, social justice,
and multiculturalism. The course is taught by several faculty members all of
whom are regarded as having specified knowledge and training related to issues
interior_davis2.indd main:221 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
222 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
of race, class, gender, sexuality, and identity.3 At both the graduate and undergraduate
level the course is one semester in length and involves a variety of
pedagogical activities centered on and around central issues of identity. The
course is intended to provide an in-depth exploration of the theory and practice
of teaching and learning in a diverse and pluralistic society, where candidates
actively explore the ways in which educational and socio-cultural practices, as
well as ideologies, have worked to undermine learning opportunities for students.
Thus, a presumption that orients the class is the notion and acceptance that
schooling in the context of the United States has been principled, in large part,
in the racist, classist, (hetero)sexist history of the United States.
A foundation of the course, in terms of building an understanding of contemporary
issues of diversity, is the agreement among professors instructing the
course that candidates will explore the ways in which culture and experience
influence the construction and deconstruction of knowledge at the societal,
institutional, and individual level; this exploration is furthermore intended to
problematize teacher candidates’ own role in the construction and maintenance
of a hegemonic ‘landscape.’ Throughout the course candidates are expected to
interrogate issues related to social (in)justice, with particular emphasis on the
investigation of the ideologies and discourses that create inequity in schools and
society, resulting in oppression of peoples and the creation/maintenance of
oppressors. The ultimate lens for this exploration is the discursive operationalization
of “isms” in the oppression/hegemony cycle. Throughout the course, teacher
candidates are expected to examine (frame)works that support effective teaching
and learning—particularly helping candidates locate themselves within a paradigm
of self-critique and examination of privilege.
To explore the possibility that we can build such a foundational base, let us
assume that a set of instructional practices exists that is theoretically sound and
meets with consistent student agreement that their perceptions have changed
as a result. Furthermore, we look to practices that candidates turned teachers
point to learning from their classes on diversity/social justice education that lead
them to be socially active teachers. What would such a base be comprised of?
The following concepts may prove to be a fruitful start:

1. Grounding each candidate in their own social and racial identity
development.
2. Raising candidate awareness of how privilege and power operate in
American society.
3. Reading, observing and discussing the ways that historically excluded
groups have been deculturalized and marginalized through overt, official
political and social policies.
interior_davis2.indd main:222 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 223
4. Generating opportunities for authentic work and/or study that creates
a more socially just environment or serves to disrupt socially unjust
practices.
Michelle comments: I am not getting why we are posturing here—we
go through and say all this stuff and then we go ahead and give a list of
what we think should be done—I’m just not comfortable.
Kenny says: I agree…I keep going back and forth mentally. We are saying
we do not know and cannot know, but still we are offering what we
believe. So even though we cannot “know,” we do end up believing
in something and that seems to be our point. Maybe we just leave a
couple of these comment bubbles in to give deference to the fact that
this section is a bit uncomfortable for us to have consensus. Also perhaps
we need to ensure we are not assuming that these are positions
that anyone is comfortable with.
Beyond these orientations individual professors have other orientations and
frameworks that help shape the particular offering for a section of the course.
Emphasis and focus in the class range from ability through gender, language
and literacy practices, and notions of citizenry and community. Regardless of
individual instructor’s orientations the offering of the courses is intended to be
framed within the mission of the school of education which “is to provide a
quality educational experience that prepares candidates for distinguished careers
in their chosen profession and for leadership roles in a diverse, rapidly changing,
and increasingly technological society.” The mission of the school of education,
steeped in foundation of diversity, achievement, comparison, knowledge, and
service is well aligned with the intentions of the course.
A Cruel Necessity
The course, as a standalone requirement of the program, presents an inherently
problematic structure. While issues of social justice and diversity provide a
conceptual framework to the school of education mission, it is difficult to ascertain
to what degree issues of social justice, diversity, and multiculturalism are
addressed in other courses. Consequently, for many professors at our institution,
and certainly for those teaching the course, we often view the offering of the
course as a cruel necessity. While we would like to see the issues of multiculturalism,
diversity, and social justice incorporated into the program across courses,
and be the fundamental guiding scope of all courses, we are cognizant of the
fact that issues of multiculturalism, diversity, and social justice may not be taken
interior_davis2.indd main:223 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
224 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
up adequately in a consistent and programmatic way given the nature of the
program including the sequence and types of courses offered.
Michelle comments: I’m not totally comfortable saying that it’s the faculty
but I’d rather say it is how the program has been structured to ensure
diversity outcomes.
Kenny says: Does this help?

Michelle comments: Thus the course in isolation at least ensures that
these issues are taken up at some point in a candidate’s program.
Jim says: And, besides, integrating the outcomes throughout the program
just disperses the presumption of knowing without confronting it
meaningfully. At least the ambiguity of certainty can be expressed in a
stand-alone course more consistently.
So What’s a Diversity Professor to Do?
Now that we have explored the theoretical underpinnings of epistemology as
well as how educators frame their own and students’ knowledge, we must admit
to the practices we have embraced within each of our diversity course sections.
As we developed our thoughts for this chapter, repeating questions were, do we
really believe that we do not “know”?; if we do not “know,” then why are we
teaching the way we do?
Jim says: Or, more pointedly, even teaching the course at all. We are
making a knowledge claim when we sign up to teach the course.
It became very clear to us that whether we professed any knowledge at all
to our students in an explicit way made little difference to student perception
of our knowledge given the hierarchical structure of our traditional school system.
We came to realize that our acting on pedagogical decision making was in fact
informing others of what we think we know.
This was unsettling given our philosophical and political stances toward
knowing. Yet, we all were able to articulate one particular goal for our students
throughout the semester. We began to problematize how we could profess our
“not knowing,” yet we repeated particular practices that we must believe give us
some sort of information: Could that “information” be categorized as
knowledge?
Kenny says: I think this is a very important statement, and may actually
help clarify some of the tone that may appear to be present in the
interior_davis2.indd main:224 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 225
bulleted list earlier – its not really that we want to say these are the
principles, but because we are perceived as the “knower’s” and that our
decisions come to be an understanding that we do know, we need to
have (or do have) a set of guiding principles with which to operate.
We came to the understanding that IF we are to know anything, it could
only be about ourselves. So we then identified what it is that we have set as a
goal for the candidates in the course and positioned that within our own set of
experiences. Given this position, in the following section, we will share our
insights as we explore the goals and the pedagogical practices that we engage in
to convince us that the goals have been met.
Michelle: Knowledge Is Multiple Truths
My experience as a special educator in an urban district has led me to continually
question why teachers do, think, feel and say the things they do. My experience
as a researcher/academic has led me to continually ask what influences
each of us to do, think, feel and say the things we do. This questioning has led
me to believe that knowing oneself on both an intra- and inter-level will lead
toward the goal of a more inclusive community. I do enter my courses assuming
that my primarily white, female and middle class pre-service teachers perceive
that they have had little, if any, experience of a social nature with persons not
like themselves. I also assume that they believe that they have not lived multicultural
lives. In addition, I assume that they have been taught to see themselves
as the norm. And finally, based on these assumptions, I assume that they need

to examine their own perceptions, beliefs and learning. This examination is
needed both on a personal level but also how these perceptions, beliefs and
learning are situated within a greater social context. Therefore, I provide my
candidates with readings and assignments that may challenge their current way
of doing, thinking, feeling and talking with the hope not to change how they
think but rather to help them clearly identify why they think a certain way
through the use of a reflective journal. While this activity allows them to identify
experiences that have led those to their own conclusions, it would fall short of
my goal if it stopped there. I then ask my candidates to identify how another
person may have come to different conclusions and how they may be just as
“right.” Based on Belenky’s et al. (1996) connected knowing, I ask each candidate
to imagine another person who is just as intelligent as they are and then imagine
what experiences that person may have had that would lead them to a conclusion
different from the one they have expressed. Specifically, after each reading/
assignment they must answer the following questions:
How has this reading affected y

and general election interesting and frustrating when I would hear a
variety of people (both in my professional and personal life) claim “Wow, we
have really overcome racism and genderism now that Barack and Hillary can
interior_davis2.indd main:226 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 227
run for president.” Not that having a man of color and a woman as potential
presidential candidates was not historical and exciting, but it seems like no real
treat that it took 500 years of white male domination for such a possibility to
occur, and that even with Obama as president we still have far more work to
achieve relative to race; thus to that extent the Obama presidency represents no
“overcoming” of isms for the United States just more movement in the right
direction coupled with a continued necessity for more forward movement.
Important to note is that I have strictly taught the graduate version of this
course. I desire to push past awareness of “isms” and their consequences, and
more toward an action based pedagogy that asks, “Now that you know, what you
must do?” Given my orientation to the course I tend to present candidates with
a spectrum of reading throughout the course, fiction as well as non-fiction, book
length as well as article length, in order to reinforce what candidates may already
think they know, but more importantly to expose candidates to both theoretical
and pragmatic orientations, through a depth and breadth of scholarship, that
will help candidates work through developing a theoretical toolkit to assist them
in their journey to taking socially just community-based action. Assignments in
the course are structured so that candidates have the opportunity to experience
the reality of isms within the communities they live, drawing to candidates’
attention the way community resources often work against citizens based on
race, class, gender, sexuality, ability, etc.
Jim says: Is the “reality of isms” grounded in a theoretical ism construction
framework as well? If so, this is one more way that we claim to
know. By establishing the “reality” of isms, we are stating that we know
that isms exist locally and, I presume, everywhere. Is that right?
Candidates, for example, are asked to approach several local movie theaters
as someone with impaired hearing and request services, perform grocery shopping
using the metric of 3 feet 5 inches for purchasing to experience the struggles
that grocery stores present for little people, to explore the way race, gender, class,
and sexuality are portrayed in commercials, and to use public transportation to
move among three separate locations in both the urban and suburban areas of
Rochester, exposing the way in which public transportation in the Rochester
area forces extended waits in between buses for transfers, offers a limited and
confusing schedule, and exposes those who use the bus to weather elements
that can put their health in jeopardy (extreme heat, rain, snow, ice) while waiting
for buses. A surface goal of these assignments is for candidates to experience,
hopefully with a different lens that viewed before, what they may take for granted
such as shopping, watching TV and movies, listening to the radio, and moving
around the community. A deeper goal however relates to a belief about action.
If candidates experience in vivo the “isms” that prevent equity from being the
interior_davis2.indd main:227 7/8/2009 10:17:10 PM
228 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
operating practice of the United States, candidates may be motivated and called
to action, challenging the both their participation in the reification of isms, and
challenging the community resources and agencies that not only reify isms but
who at times stand to profit from the reification of isms. At minimum candidates
can no longer pretend that privileges extended to them as predominately white

Master of Science candidates are not privileges, and that communities are not
still struggling with race, gender, sexuality, and ability. As a professor, when I
have students write an unsolicited email telling me that they have written the
newspaper, called an agency or community resource, challenged discourse they
hear in the community that frames people using “ismistic” language, and begun
to take on local governmental and private sector organizations to bring attention
to unfair labor and social practices while fighting for changes that benefit the
community, I feel as though some of the knowledge from the toolkit has been
learned and put into action.
As we have attempted to establish in this chapter, as an instructor I will
never know what my students know, as that level of metaepistemological understanding
seems beyond my grasp. I am hopeful however, that when action is
present movement is being made and perhaps my students know something that
they did not before. My marker of knowledge, that knowledge is concurrent with
action, is of course but one view of knowledge, but it is certainly the marker that
I feel indicates growth and knowledge. Questions I must ask myself include:
Is a student only “pursuing” action to please

candidates in their life-long journey toward increased self-actualization
in ways I know, think I know and don’t know at all. The challenge for me, as for
the candidates in my classes, is to attempt to analyze my “knowing” in ways that
can inform our future teaching. Classes designed to enhance this journey, start
with efforts to increase each candidate’s intra-personal and inter-personal understanding.
It is essential to begin by having students become familiar with social
racial identity theory. Helms (1990) has established a theory of staged development
that predicts states of understanding and social behavior within the
framework of racial self-development. While it is potentially dangerous to overrely
on one theory to explain the myriad possibilities represented by candidates’
behaviors, I find it helpful for candidates to become familiar with social development
and racial development theory to deepen their understanding of how their
“windows” of identity may develop.
Since culture is a significant factor in our sense of identity, it is critical for
candidates to become familiar with definitions of culture and with their own
cultural influences. Candidates are to create culture wheels for class sharing
after they read about culture. The next step is to explain to others their decisionmaking
process for weighing themselves in various categories. To broaden and
deepen self, candidates are asked, using their cultural pie if they choose, to
create a list of characteristics of identity that shape who they perceive themselves
to be. Such a task brings with it the complexity of identifying “who they are”
and through whose lens this self-analysis should be conducted. Candidates are
interior_davis2.indd main:229 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
230 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
encouraged to reflect on which of Johari’s quadrants they are using as a lens for
self-analysis.
The first step then is to create a list of identity characteristics sub-divided
into two columns. One column is for those identities perceived as dominant
characteristics in American society. These identities are perceived by them and/
or others to bestow power and privilege in American culture. In the other column,
candidates indicate their excluded identity characteristics. These are aspects of
their identity that they feel have served to limit their access to the full benefits
of American society and/or caused them to feel vulnerable, to experience pain,
to endure hardship. Candidates share their identity lists publicly in class and
can explain their choices. Classmates are encouraged to ask clarifying and
deepening questions. It is often the case that candidates place one characteristic
in both columns. For example, Tammy may say; “I put female in dominant
because I have accrued benefits in school from being a female and I put female
in excluded, because I have been stereotyped in my part-time job by not being
allowed to do certain physical tasks.” On occasion, female candidates may explain
that they placed female in excluded, because their mobility in emotionally safe
spaces is curtailed by the high rate of violence against women in American
society and that they put female in dominant, because schools traditionally honor
high verbal acuity and compliant behavior for which they have been socialized
to excel by a patriarchal political hierarchy.
Diversity classes that intend to have candidates initially feel their own pain,
anger and vulnerability in social contexts and in their own developmental process
increase the chances that those candidates will be more able to establish affinity
with other sub-sets of excluded identity characteristics that their classmates and
fellow society members experience.
Michelle says: Could this be a claim of knowledge? Do we know that

our candidates do not already have an affi nity with “excluded identity
characteristics?”
Kenny says: To what degree does this further exploit minority groups
—whites learn what it’s like to be “…” as opposed to critically working
at tearing down the societal structures that create inequity targeted at
groups because of race, class, gender, sexuality, ability, etc.? I am very
uncomfortable with the idea that our goal be to develop affi nity with as
if we get to further use the experience of excluded identities to valorize
the experience—for example as a gay male I cannot use my experience
with sexuality to trump one’s racialized experience—my race and gender
still privilege me in a far more privileged way than my excluded identity
of sexuality revokes privilege. I cannot use my sexuality to align as being
just like “…” group.
interior_davis2.indd main:230 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 231
The foundation for diversity knowledge has for one of its essential structures
the habit of self-reflection about personal exclusion simultaneous to insight into
personal identities that are bestowed with privilege and power.
Excluded identities are much easier to perceive and accept by candidates
(and most people) than dominant identities. As Johnson (2006) indicates people
tend to deny and resist the notion that their power and privilege status even
exists. In Diversity classes, it is imperative that candidates not only acquire the
capacity to reflect upon, identify and analyze their excluded identities, but, also,
those dominant identities that give them power over others. This is particularly
difficult for candidates to acknowledge when the power that has accrued to them
has been an unearned result of their birthright (i.e., they are born with “light
colored” skin to middle class parents and are perceived by others as “white”).
The duality of identity, seen through multiple perspectives, is a particularly difficult
and necessary concept to explore. A fluid, multi-dimensional life-long
reflection on personal identity development is crucial to multicultural pedagogy.
As an instructor, I rely on self-disclosure through writings and oral presentations
about the personal growth process each student follows. I respond to their conceptualization
with questions about how their self-analysis frames their place
in a socially dynamic process of dominant and excluded identity formation. Along
the way, I consistently offer a self-analysis of my continuing identity formation
with each student in interactive responses to their work. My hope for each of
us is that the collective and individual process of self-reflection in a critical
environment becomes habituated as an antidote to the normalized hegemonic
dominant discourse found in most schools within which they will teach.
Concluding Thoughts
It is our concern to develop a more paradigmatic approach to our work, and more
on point to this chapter, an approach that self-implicates our own histories,
actions, and privileges in the greater context of educational research about issues
of multiculturalism, diversity, and social justice. By more paradigmatic, we wish
not to apply a firm and rigid framework that itself becomes a self-hegemonizing
act, nor do we wish to imply that we somehow are capable of “creating a paradigm.”
Rather we propose that all educational practitioners are ‘already always’
within a paradigm whether or not the paradigm is partially or fully recognized
by the educator herself. More ‘fully paradigmatic’ therefore has greater implications
of attending to the paradigm wholly, recognizing that paradigmatic honesty
necessitates attention to epistemology, methodology, and ontology in tandem.
Multicultural education thinking has a responsibility to move beyond and

deconstruct white able-bodied, monolinguistic, middle to upper class, heterointerior_
davis2.interior_indd main:231 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
232 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
sexual male, privileged, Christian orientations to pedagogy that have been
pervasive in teaching. Historically “othered” and “over-researched groups (indigenous
peoples, people of color, people of low-socioeconomic status) do not need
to become further eclipsed by the gaze of a ‘new’ multiculturalist, perhaps better
informed yet self-indulgent in attempting to reframe the research to continue
privileging white ways of knowing. For this to happen pedagogical praxis must
continually seek to challenge the traditions that have negotiated and defended
whiteness’ ability to “…perpetrate domination . . .” (Gopnik, 1999, p. 66) in a
dance where practitioners “…pretend to study the manners and customs of all
people” (Halliburton, 1999, p. 793) in the attempt to write the history of white
peoples, for white peoples, and by white peoples and claim to know what others
know about the knowledge of their knowing.
Thus, our conclusion is to offer as a beginning, an invitation to a different
more complicated, vexing dance where ideas keep time and rhythm and where
tough questions take the lead; this dance is a challenge to past practice. We
agree that the dance never ends, and we can only approximate the steps even
for ourselves let alone those who we teach. We know that we do not know who
will continue to dance or, if continued, what the steps will be. We can continue
to dance ourselves and reflect on the tempo and form of those rhythms. We can
then, in turn, demonstrate those moves to others in a transparent attempt to
share the dance. In the dance lies a simultaneous self-consciousness and abandon
that opens the possibility of becoming a more self-aware human being who might
become a more adept teacher.
References
Asante, M.K. (1987). The Afrocentric idea. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Belenky, M.F., Clinchy, B.M., Golderger, N.R. & Tarule, J.M. (1996). Women’s ways of knowing.
New York, NY: Basic Books.
Bell, D. (1995). Racial realism. In K. Crenshaw, N. Gotanda, G. Peller, K. Thomas (Eds.)
Critical race theory: The key writings that formed the movement (pp. 302–314). New York,
NY: The New Press.
Collins, P.H. (1992). Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of
empowerment. New York, NY: Routledge.
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York, NY: The
New Press.
Dixson, A. D. (2003). “Let’s do this!:” Black women teachers’ politics and pedagogy. Urban
Education, 38(2), 217–235.
Dixson, A. D. (2005). Extending the metaphor: Notions of jazz in portraiture. Qualitative
Inquiry, 11(1), 106–137.
interior_davis2.indd main:232 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 233
Dixson, A.D. (2006). What’s race got to do with it?: Race, racial identity development and
teacher preparation. In E. Watbe Riss & H. Richard Milner’s (Eds.) Race, ethnicity, and
education: The influences of racial and ethnic identity in education, Vol. 3.
Dixson, A.D. (2008). Taming the beast: Race, discourse and identity in a middle school classroom.
In S. Greene’s (Ed.) Literacy as a civil right: Reclaiming social justice in literacy
teaching and learning. New York, NY: Peter Lang Publishers.
Dixson, A.D. & Fasching-Varner, K. (2008). What not to do: Culturally relevant pedagogy in
the classroom. In Compton-Lily’s (Ed.) Breaking the silence: Recognizing and valuing the
social and cultural knowledge of children. Newark, DE: International Reading Association
Publications.
Donmoyer, R. (2001). Paradigm talk reconsidered. In V. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of research
on teaching (pp. 174–190). Washington, DC: American Educational Research
Association.
Fendler, L. (1999). Making trouble: Prediction, agency, and critical intellectuals. In T. S.

Popkewitz & L. Fendler (Eds.) Critical theories in education: Changing terrains of knowledge
and politics (pp. 169–188). New York, NY: Routledge.
Fine, M. (1997). Witnessing whiteness. In M. Fine, L. Powell, L. Weiss & L. Mum Wong (Eds.)
Off white readings on race, power, and society (pp. 57–65). New York, NY: Routledge.
Flax, J. (1981). Why epistemology matters: A reply to Kress. The Journal of Politics, 43(4),
1006–1024.
Foucault, M. (1965). Madness and civilization: A historic insanity in the age of reason. (R. Howard,
Translator). New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Foucault, M. (1980). Truth and power. In C. Gordon’s (Ed.) Power.knowledge: Selected interviews
and other writings 1972–1997. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory into practice. New York: Basic Books.
Geertz, C. (1977). The interpretation of cultures. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gopnik, A. (1999) Noel contendere. The New Yorker, January 4, pp. 61–67.
Gordon, B. M. (1995). Knowledge construction, competing critical theories, and education. In
J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.) Handbook of research on multicultural education (184–199).
New York: Macmillan Library Reference.
Halliburton, M. (2004). Gandhi or Gramsci? The use of authoritative sources in anthropology.
Anthropological Quarterly, 77, 793–817.
hooks, b. (2000). Feminist theory: From margin to center. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Johnson, A.G. (2006). Privilege, power, and difference, 2nd Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill.
Jones, J.M. (1972). Prejudice and racism. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishers.
Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago
Press.
Ladson-Billings, G.J. (1995). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American students.
San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
interior_davis2.indd main:233 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
234 What’s Knowledge Got to Do with It?
Ladson-Billings, G.J. (2003). Racialized discourses and ethnic epistemologies. In N.K. Denzin
& Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.) The landscape of qualitative research (pp. 398–432). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Educational Review, 56(3), 179–199.
Lather, P. (1992). Critical frames in educational research: Feminist and post-structural perspectives.
Theory into Practice, 31(2), 87–99.
Lincoln, Y.S. & Guba, E.G. (1990). Let whoever is without dogma cast the first stone. Educational
Researcher, 18(2), 22.
Luft, J. and Ingham, H. (1955). The Johari window, a graphic model of interpersonal awareness,
Proceedings of the Western Training Laboratory in group development. Los Angeles, CA::
UCLA Extension Office.
Mazama, A. (2001). The Afrocentric paradigm: Contours and definitions. Journal of Black
Studies, 31(4), 387–405.
Mills, C.W. (1997). The racial contract. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Peshkin, A. (1988). In search of subjectivity—One’s own. Educational Researcher, 17(7),
17–21.
Popkewitz, T.S. (1998). Struggling for the soul: The politics of schooling and the construction of
the teacher. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Scheurich, J.J. (1997). Coloring epistemologies: Are our research epistemologies racially biased?
Educational Researcher, 26(4), 4–16.
Smith, L.T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Dunedin,
NZ: University of Otago Press.
Taylor, W. (1987). Metaphors of educational discourse. In W. Taylor (Ed.), Metaphors of education
(pp. 4–20). London, UK: Heinemann Educational.
Tyson, C.A. (1998). A response to “Coloring epistemologies: Are our qualitative research epistemologies
racially biased?” Educational Researcher, 27(9), 21–22.
Vidich, A.J., Lynman, S.M. (2000). Qualitative methods: Their history in sociology and anthropology.
In N.J. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln’s (Eds.) Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 37–84.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Young, S. (2006). Micromessaging: Why great leadership is beyond words. New York: McGraw-
Hill Publishers.
Endnotes
1. According to the National Center for Education Information it is estimated that over the
last 20 years it is estimated that 92% to 85% of the teaching force is white and 82% of

teachers are female.
2. For example, we are critical of Ruby Payne’s A Framework for Poverty as Payne suggests
that one’s knowledge of class and/or socio-economic status be concurrent with a set of
experiences that Payne offers as truth claims (such as you are poor if you have ever…. You
are wealthy if you have ever…. ).
interior_davis2.indd main:234 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM
Kenneth J. Fasching-Varner, Michelle Erklenz-Watts and Jim Wood 235
3. While each faculty member who teaches the course is regarded as qualified to teach the
course, each professor brings a variety of unique specializations—thus candidates’ experience
in one section are most often different than the candidates’ experiences in other
sections of the course.
interior_davis2.indd main:235 7/8/2009 10:17:11 PM