Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities - Division on ...

mental retardation, also po<strong>in</strong>ts out that carefully
designed <strong>and</strong> executed <strong>in</strong>structions for
students with disabilities can be beneficial for
all the students <strong>in</strong>volved (S. Lee, 2004; Mc-
Donnell et al., 1997; O’Connor & Jenk<strong>in</strong>s,
1996).
Specifically, exact awareness of lesson objectives
<strong>and</strong> regular self-evaluation through the
rubric might make a positive impact on the
achievement of lesson objectives by all participants.
This result demonstrates that appropriate
progress monitor<strong>in</strong>g by students based on
their awareness of learn<strong>in</strong>g goals is closely
related with enhanc<strong>in</strong>g academic achievement
(Deno, 2003; Fuchs & Fuchs, 1986), <strong>and</strong>
extends the suggestion that <strong>in</strong>structional rubrics,
especially with self-evaluation of performance,
can function as a stepp<strong>in</strong>g stone that
assists students to self-regulate over learn<strong>in</strong>g
activities (Andrade & Boulay, 2003; Saddler &
Andrade, 2004; Shepard, 2000). In addition,
<strong>in</strong>dividual support for students with disabilities
to successfully participate <strong>in</strong> an <strong>in</strong>clusive
assessment was specified <strong>in</strong> this study. For example,
the participants received extra tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g
for self-monitor<strong>in</strong>g/evaluation to utilize <strong>in</strong>structional
rubrics before the <strong>in</strong>tervention <strong>in</strong>
addition to the regular tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g for all participants.
Dur<strong>in</strong>g the <strong>in</strong>tervention, <strong>in</strong>structional
accommodations <strong>in</strong> objectives, materials/activities,
<strong>and</strong> scor<strong>in</strong>g system were provided
along with an aid for performance monitor<strong>in</strong>g
<strong>and</strong> feedback on the result us<strong>in</strong>g an application
form. Consider<strong>in</strong>g the need for ‘special
support’ for students with disabilities to
achieve mean<strong>in</strong>gful progress <strong>in</strong> the general
curriculum even <strong>in</strong> cases when a universal
design of lean<strong>in</strong>g is employed (McGuire,
Scott, & Shaw, 2006; Wehmeyer et al., 2003),
these additional tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> support employed
for the participants can be suggested as
necessary elements to consider <strong>in</strong> utiliz<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>structional
rubrics as an <strong>in</strong>clusive assessment
for diverse learners.
There are some limitations to be noted <strong>in</strong>
the study. First, the participants were students
with mild mental retardation <strong>and</strong> their typical
peers <strong>in</strong> elementary grades. Thus, the results
of the study might not be generalized to other
students with different disabilities <strong>and</strong> their
peers or those from different age groups. Second,
this study employed the participants’ selfevaluation
on their own performance level
<strong>and</strong> it may not exclude the possibility that the
result of self-evaluation might not be the same
as the real performance level of the participants.
Despite the limitations, this study presents
several implications for future research <strong>and</strong>
practice. It suggests the utility of <strong>in</strong>structional
rubrics not only as an <strong>in</strong>clusive class-wide assessment
tool, but also as an <strong>in</strong>structional
strategy that systematically assists students with
disabilities to make mean<strong>in</strong>gful progress <strong>in</strong>
the general curriculum. Specific considerations
to address <strong>in</strong>dividual needs of students
with disabilities demonstrated <strong>in</strong> the study will
guide practitioners to design <strong>and</strong> implement
an <strong>in</strong>clusive assessment for diverse learners to
successfully participate <strong>in</strong> with appropriate
support. In the future, research is needed to
implement an <strong>in</strong>structional rubric on students
with various disabilities <strong>and</strong> from different age
groups. Additionally, employ<strong>in</strong>g a control
group for comparison would make an elaborate
analysis of the effects of an <strong>in</strong>structional
rubric on the achievement of certa<strong>in</strong> objectives
possible.
References
406 / <strong>Education</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g</strong> <strong>in</strong> <strong>Developmental</strong> <strong>Disabilities</strong>-September 2009
Andrade, H. G. (2005). Teach<strong>in</strong>g with rubrics: The
good, the bad, <strong>and</strong> the ugly. College Teach<strong>in</strong>g,
53(1), 27–30.
Andrade, H. G., & Boulay, B. A. (2003). Role of
rubric-referenced self-assessment <strong>in</strong> learn<strong>in</strong>g to
write. The Journal of <strong>Education</strong>al Research, 97(1),
21–34.
Barry, L. M., & Moore IV, W. E. (2004). Students
with specific learn<strong>in</strong>g disabilities can pass state
competency exams: Systematic strategy <strong>in</strong>struction
makes a difference. Prevent<strong>in</strong>g School Failure,
48(3), 10–15.
Byan, Y., & Hyan, E. (2005). Development of a
rubric for assess<strong>in</strong>g creativity of young children <strong>in</strong>
an art program us<strong>in</strong>g children’ books. Journal of
<strong>Education</strong> for Young Children. 25, 272–301
Cha, S. (2002). Effects of different strategies for enhanc<strong>in</strong>g
attitudes of typical students <strong>in</strong> elementary grades
towards students with disabilities. Unpublished master’s
dissertation, Ewha Womans University,
Seoul.
Clayton, J., Burdge, M., Denham, A., Kle<strong>in</strong>ert, H. L.,
& Kearns, J. (2006). A four-step process for access<strong>in</strong>g
the general curriculum for students with
significant cognitive disabilities. TEACHING Exceptional
Children, 38(5), 20–27.
Copel<strong>and</strong>, S. R., & Hughes, C. (2002). Effects of