Use of Time by Teachers of Behaviorally Disordered Students: A Replication.

To help evaluate the operation of the least restrictive environment mandate, the use of time by resource teachers and self-contained classroom teachers of behaviorally disordered students was examined. Teachers from three states were asked how much time they typically spend each week in teaching, evaluation, preparation and planning, consultation and indirect services, and other activities. Data for the two groups were compared with one another and with data collected 5 years earlier. No significant differences were found between resource and self contained classroom teachers, and no changes were apparent in their use of time between 1980 and 1985. Interpretations for the absence of differences between the two delivery models include inadequate preparation of teachers to serve in different roles, administrative barriers, and preferred teaching roles of teachers of the behaviorally disordered. Suggestions for addressing these factors are offered. A requirement of The Education of All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94-142) is that special education services for handicapped children be provided in the least restrictive environment (LRE). Special programs are to be provided on the basis of their appropriateness for meeting the individual needs of each identified handicapped child as determined by a multidisciplinary assessment team. An underlying assumption of that mandate isthat it is preferable to educate children in more normalized, socially integrated educational settings than in more segregated settings. The traditional model for the delivery of special educational services is the continuum of services, or cascade, model (Deno, 1970; Reynolds, 1962). The major characteristic of this model is a sequence of levels of educational placements distinguished according to their relative restrictiveness, or distance, from regular educational programs. There are several additional features of the continuum of services model. One isthat level of educational placement should be related to severity of student handicap. More severely handicapped students generally require more specialized, more intensive, and "more restrictive" placements than more mildly handicapped students. Another feature of the model is the relationship between level of service delivery and amount of student integration into regular education programs. Students in less restrictive placements are to be more integrated into regular classrooms than students in more restrictive placements. A related feature of the special education cascade is that teachers' roles differ according to the nature and intensity of special services they provide. A teacher in a self-contained classroom, for example, is primarily in a direct service role providing instruction to handicapped students; a resource teacher provides direct instruction, but also performs other indirect services. Based upon these characteristics of the continuum of services model, teachers serving in different delivery models would be expected to perform different roles. Reynolds and Birch (1982) and Wood and Smith (1985) have argued that educational placement options should not be considered physical settings, but differences in the nature and intensity of special services that will enable identified handicapped students to benefit from education. According to this view, levels of the cascade represent variations in special services rather than places where students receive services. Additional professional opinions support the expectation of different teacher roles for different service delivery models. For example, Wiederholt, Hammill, and Brown (1983) have outlined the three basic resource teacher roles as (a) assessing educational needs, (b) preparing and implementing instructional programs, and (c) consulting with teachers, Behavioral Disorders February 1988 [Vol.13 No. 2 89-97] 89 This content downloaded from 207.46.13.158 on Sun, 10 Apr 2016 04:28:59 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms parents, and others. Considerable attention has been given to the consultant role of the resource teacher (Evans, 1980; Friend & McNutt, 1984; Larsen, 1976; Lilly & Givens-Ogle, 1981; Speece & Mandell, 1980). In a recent study of the perceptions of the resource teacher role involving public school teachers, resource teachers, and teacher trainers, 18 functions were examined (Dugoff, Ives, &Shotel, 1985). While assessment, instruction, and consulta tion overlapped in some of these functions, nearly all of them included some form of consultation with others, particularly regular classroom teachers. Based on data from a similar analysis, Friend (1984) found that educators believe "that a wide variety of skills typically associated with consultation should be part of the resource teacher's repertoire." Clearly, indirect services to students, provided primarily through consultation, are consi dered major responsibilities of resource teachers. It is primarily the indirect service function that differentiates the role of the resource teacher from that of the self-contained classroom