Graduate Studies Reports Access

Graduate Course Proposal Form Submission Detail - EEX7346
Tracking Number - 2640

Edit function not enabled for this course.

Current Status: Approved by SCNS - 2012-06-15
Campus: Tampa
Submission Type: New
Course Change Information (for course changes only):
Comments: to GC 4/2/12; to USF Syst 4/5/12; to GC 4/16/12; to SCNS 4/16/12. Apprd eff 6/1/12. Nmbr sub 7254; approved 7346

Detail Information

  1. Date & Time Submitted: 2011-10-11
  2. Department: Special Education
  3. College: ED
  4. Budget Account Number: 172800
  5. Contact Person: David Allsopp
  6. Phone: 8139743274
  7. Email: Dallsopp@usf.edu
  8. Prefix: EEX
  9. Number: 7346
  10. Full Title: Crit. Analysis Theories & Research on Instructional Practices
  11. Credit Hours: 3
  12. Section Type: D - Discussion (Primarily)
  13. Is the course title variable?: N
  14. Is a permit required for registration?: N
  15. Are the credit hours variable?: N
  16. Is this course repeatable?:
  17. If repeatable, how many times?: 0
  18. Abbreviated Title (30 characters maximum): Research on Inst. Practices
  19. Course Online?: C - Face-to-face (0% online)
  20. Percentage Online: 0
  21. Grading Option: R - Regular
  22. Prerequisites: none
  23. Corequisites: none
  24. Course Description: This course provides doctoral students with an opportunity to critically examine the research base in SPED instructional practice and make connections to related theories and educational policy.

  25. Please briefly explain why it is necessary and/or desirable to add this course: Needed for program/concentration/certificate change
  26. What is the need or demand for this course? (Indicate if this course is part of a required sequence in the major.) What other programs would this course service? This course is required as part of the special education major. All students in the special education doctoral program take this course.
  27. Has this course been offered as Selected Topics/Experimental Topics course? If yes, how many times? No
  28. What qualifications for training and/or experience are necessary to teach this course? (List minimum qualifications for the instructor.) Doctorate
  29. Objectives: 1. Examine special education practice in schools/classrooms, and relate these instructional practices to relevant educational theories and research (e.g., one current topic to explore and unpack could include the impact of RTI on disproportionate representation in special education and identification of students with SLD and/or EBD).

    2. Study the benefits and challenges of different service delivery models and instructional practices based on a critical analysis of the research literature.

    3. Explore the literature to understand causes for and remedies to the research to practice gap in special education.

    4. Examine the foci and types of research methodologies used to develop and validate the effectiveness of instructional practices for students with disabilities.

    5. Critically evaluate the research methodologies used to measure the impact of these instructional practices on student learning outcomes.

    6. Evaluate what the current research base allows the field to conclude about the effectiveness of different instructional practices generally and their effect on individual disability-related student learning needs.

    7. Understand how intervention research in special education is conducted, including its strengths and weaknesses, for the purpose of supporting students’ future development and implementation of research related to effective instructional practices for students with disabilities.

  30. Learning Outcomes: Students will demonstrate knowledge in the following areas:

    1. Examine special education practice in schools/classrooms, and relate these instructional practices to relevant educational theories and research (e.g., one current topic to explore and unpack could include the impact of RTI on disproportionate representation in special education and identification of students with SLD and/or EBD).

    2. Study the benefits and challenges of different service delivery models and instructional practices based on a critical analysis of the research literature.

    3. Explore the literature to understand causes for and remedies to the research to practice gap in special education.

    4. Examine the foci and types of research methodologies used to develop and validate the effectiveness of instructional practices for students with disabilities.

    5. Critically evaluate the research methodologies used to measure the impact of these instructional practices on student learning outcomes.

    6. Evaluate what the current research base allows the field to conclude about the effectiveness of different instructional practices generally and their effect on individual disability-related student learning needs.

    7. Understand how intervention research in special education is conducted, including its strengths and weaknesses, for the purpose of supporting students’ future development and implementation of research related to effective instructional practices for students with disabilities.

  31. Major Topics: Content Outline

    a) Course overview

    a. Seminar introduction

    b) History of Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. Pre P.L. 94-142 (Before 1975)

    b. The Regular Education Initiative, Mainstreaming, & Inclusion

    c. Reform efforts including Response to Instruction/Intervention

    c) Who’s Perspective is Right?: Debates on Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. The “Process Product” Perspective

    b. The “Constructivist” Perspective

    c. The Reading and Mathematics Wars

    d. Diversity, Multiculturalism, and Culturally Responsive Pedagogy

    e. Is There and Should There Be A Middle Ground?: Integrating Multiple Perspectives

    d) A Critical Analysis of Research Methodologies In the Special Education Instructional Practice Research Base

    a. What are the Strengths?

    b. What are the Weaknesses?

    e) How Does Policy Affect Research and Practice in Special Education?

    a. Law & Litigation

    b. The Political and Social Climate

    c. Funding

    f) What Do We Know and What Do We Not Know?

    a. Evidence Based and Research Supported Practices

    b. Service Delivery Models and Student Outcomes

    g) The Current Context and Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. Accountability and High Stakes Testing

    b. Response to Instruction/Intervention

    c. Content vs. Pedagogical Expertise

    h) The Research to Practice Gap in Special Education

    a. Causes

    b. Bridging the Gap

    c. Forecasting the Future

    i) Developing a Research Agenda for Instructional Practice for Student With/At Risk for Identification of Disabilities

    a. What are Areas of Research Needed in Order to Advance the Field?

    b. Identifying Pertinent Areas of Interest

  32. Textbooks:
  33. Course Readings, Online Resources, and Other Purchases: Additional Course Readings

    Ainscow, M. (2000). The Ron Gulliford lecture: The next step for special education: Sspporting the development of inclusive practices. British Journal of Special Education, 27, 76–80.

    Blanchette, W. (2006). Disproportionate representation of african american students in special education: Acknowledging the role of white privilege and racism. Educational Researcher, 35, 24-28.

    Boudah, D. J., Lenz, B. K., Schumaker, J. B., & Deshler, D. D. (2008). Teaching in the face of academic diversity: Unit planning and instruction by secondary teachers to enhance learning in inclusive classes. Journal of Curriculum and Instruction, 2(2), 74-91.

    Carnine, D. (1999). Perspective: Campaigns for moving research into practice.

    Remedial and Special Education, 20, 2-6.

    Christensen, C.A., and Dorn, S (1997). Competing notions of social justice and contradictions in special education reform. The Journal of Special Education, 31(2), 181-198.

    Coutinho, M.J. (2000). Disproportionate representation in special education: A synthesis and recommendations. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 9, 135-156.

    Deshler, D. D., Lenz, B. K., Bulgren, J, Schumaker, J. B., Davis, B., Grossen, B., & Marquis, J. (2004). Adolescents with disabilities in high school settings: Student characteristics and setting dynamics. Learning Disabilities Contemporary Journal, 1, 30-48.

    Faggella-Luby, M., & Deshler, D. D. (2008). Reading comprehension in adolescents with LD: What we know, what we need to know. Learning Disability Research and Practice, 23, 70-78.

    Fisher, A.C. (2007). Creating a discourse of difference. Education, Citizenship, and Social Justice, 2, 159-192.

    Englert, C.S., Tarrant, K.L., Mariage, T.V. (1992). Defining and redefining instructional practice in special education: Perspectives on good teaching. Teacher Education and Special Education, 15, 62-86

    Fitch, F. (2003). Inclusion, exclusion, and ideology: Special education students' changing sense of self. The Urban Review, 35, 233-252.

    Forness, S.R. (1997). Mega-analysis of Meta-analyses: What Works in Special Education and Related Services. Teaching Exceptional Children, 29, 4-9.

    Forness, S.R. (2001). Special education and related services: What have we learned from meta-analysis? Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 9, 185–197.

    Freeman, S.F.N., & Alkin, M.C. (2000). Academic and social attainments of children with mental retardation in general education and special education settings. Remedial and Special Education, 21(1), 3-26.

    Fuchs, D. & Deshler, D. D. (2007). What we need to know about responsiveness-to-intervention (and shouldn’t be afraid to ask). Learning disability research and practice,22, 129-136.

    Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (1994). Inclusive schools movement and the radicalization of special education reform. Exceptional Children, 60(4), 294-309.Introduction to Response to Intervention: What, why, and how valid is it?

    Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2006). Introduction to response to intervention: What, why, and how valid is it? Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 93-99.

    Fuchs, D., Mock, D., & Morgan, P.L (2003). Responsiveness‐to‐Intervention: Definitions, evidence, and implications for the learning disabilities construct. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18, 157–171.

    Gay, F. (2002). Culturally responsive teaching in special education for ethnically diverse students: Setting the stage. Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15, 613–630.

    Gersten, R. (1990). Rethinking the Regular Education Initiative. Remedial and Special Education, 11, 7-16.

    Gersten, R. (1996). The quest to translate research into classroom practice: The emerging knowledge base. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 67-74.

    Gersten, R. (2006). RTI (response to intervention): Rethinking special education for students with reading difficulties (yet again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41, 99-108.

    Greenwood, C.R., & Abbott, M. (2001). The research to practice gap in special education. Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 276-289.

    Hanushek, E.A., Kain, J.F., & Rivkin, S.G. (2002). Inferring program effects for special education populations: Does special education raise achievement for students with disabilities? The Review of Economics and Statistics, 84, 584–599.

    Heward, W.L. (2003). Ten faulty notions about teaching and learning that hinder the effectiveness of special education. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 186-205.

    Hoagwood, BJ Burns, L Kise, L., Ringeisen, H., and Schoenwald, S.K. (2001). Evidence-based practice in child and adolescent mental health services. Psychiatric Services, 52, 1179-1189.

    Hockenbury, J.C., and Kauffman, J.M. (2000)… What is right about special education.

    Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 8, 3-11.

    Kauffman, J.M. (1996). Research to practice issues. Behavioral Disorders, 22(1), 55-60.

    Kavale, K.A., & Forness, S.R. (2000). History, rhetoric, and reality: Analysis of the inclusion debate. Remedial and Special Education, 21(5), 279-296.

    Klingner, J. K., Artiles, A. J., Kozleski, E., Harry, B., Zion, S., Tate, W., Durán,

    G. Z., & Riley, D. (2005). Addressing the disproportionate representation of culturally andlinguistically diverse students in special education through culturally responsive educational systems. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 13(38). Retrieved [date] from http://epaa.asu.edu/epaa/v13n38/.

    Kroesbergen, E.H. (2003). Mathematics interventions for children with special educational needs: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education 24, 97-114.

    Landrum, T.J., and Tankersley, M. (2003). What is special about special education for Students with emotional or behavioral disorders? Journal of Special Education, 37, 148-156.

    Lee, J.S., & Anderson, K.T. (2009). Negotiating linguistic and cultural identities: Theorizing and constructing opportunities and risks in education. Review of Research in Education, 33, 181-211.

    Lindsay, G. (2003). Inclusive education: a critical perspective. British Journal of Special Education, 30, 3–12.

    Malouf, D.B., and Schiller, E.P. (1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61, 414-424.

    Mercer, C. D., Jordan, S. L., Allsopp, D. H., Lane, H. B., & Eisele, M. (1996). Empowering teachers and students with instructional choices in inclusive settings. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 226-236.

    Mooney, P., Epstein, M.H., Reid, R. (2000). Status of and trends in academic intervention research for students with emotional disturbance. Remedial and Special Education 24, 273-287.

    Mostert, M.P. (2000). Reclaiming the history of special education for more effective practice.

    Exceptionality: A Special Education Journal, 8, 133–143.

    Nougaret, A.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2005). Does teacher education produce better special education teachers? Exceptional Children, 71, 217-229.

    Odom, S.L., & Wolery, M. (2003). A unified theory of practice in early intervention/early childhood special education: Evidence-based practices. Journal of Special Education, 37, 164-173.

    O’Sullivan, P.J. Ysseldyke, J.E., and Christenson, S.L. (1990). Mildly handicapped elementary students' opportunity to learn during reading instruction in mainstream and special education settings. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 131-146.

    Patton (1998). The disproportionate representation of African Americans in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 32, 25-31.

    Pugach, M.C. (2001). The stories we choose to tell: Fulfilling the promise of qualitative research in special education. Exceptional Children, 67, 439-453.

    Reid, R., Gonzalez, J.E., Nordness, P.D., Trout, A., and Eptein, M.H. (2004). A meta-analysis of the academic status of students with emotional/behavioral disturbance. The Journal of Special Education, 38, 130-143.

    Simpson, R.L., de Boer-Ott, S.R., and Smith-Myles, B. (2003). Inclusion of learners with autism spectrum disorders in general education settings. Topics in Language Disorders, 23, 116-133.

    Sindelar, P., and Brownell, M.T. (2001). Research to practice dissemination, scale, and context: We can do it, but can we afford it? Teacher Education and Special Education, 24, 348-355.

    Slavin, R.E. (2002). Evidence based educational policies: Transforming educational research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31, 15-21.

    Smith, A. (2006). Access, participation, and progress in the general education curriculum in the least restrictive environment for students with significant cognitive disabilities. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 331-337.

    Spillane, J.P.P. (2002). Policy Implementation and cognition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational Research, 72, 387-432.

    Stanovich, P.H. (1997). Research into practice in special education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 30, 477-481.

    Stayton, V.D., and McCollum, J. (2002). Unifying general and special education: What does the research tell us? Teacher Education and Special Education, 25, 211-218.

    Swanson, H.L. (2003). Research on interventions for adolescents with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of outcomes related to higher-order processing. The Elementary School Journal, 101, 331-348.

    Swanson, H. L., & Deshler, D. D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: Converting meta-analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 124-135.d

    Swanson, H.L, and Hoskyn, M. (2001). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: A component and composite analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16, 109–119.

    Vaughn, S., and Lilan-Thompson, S. (2003). What is special about special education for students with learning disabilities? Journal of Special Education, 37, 140-147.

    Vaughn, S., and Levy, S. (2002). Reading instruction for students with LD and EBD

    A synthesis of observation studies. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 2-13.

    Will, M.C. (1986). Educating children with learning problems: A shared responsibility.

    Zhou, M. (2003). Urban education: Challenges in educating culturally diverse children. Teachers College Record, 105, 208-225.

    Zigmond, N., Jenkins, J., Fuchs, L., Deno, S., Fuchs, D, Baker, J.N., Jenkins, L., and Couthino, M. (1995). Special education in restructured schools: Findings from three multi-year studies. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 531-540.

    Zigmond, N. (2003). Where should students with disabilities receive special education services? The Journal of Special Education, 37, 193-199.

    Internet Resources

    Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS) - http://www.seels.net/grindex.html

    National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 - http://www.nlts2.org/

    The Center for Comprehensive School Reform and Improvement - http://www.centerforcsri.org/

    Center on Instruction - http://www.centeroninstruction.org/

    Institute for Educational Sciences - http://ies.ed.gov/

    What Works Clearinghouse - http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

    The Best Evidence Encyclopedia - http://www.bestevidence.org/

    The Campbell Collaboration - http://www.campbellcollaboration.org/

    National Center on Special Education Research - http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/

  34. Student Expectations/Requirements and Grading Policy: Grades will be based on the following:

    1. Critical Analysis of Research on Instructional Practices in Special Education

    2. Critical Analysis Paper Presentation and Scholarly Discussion

    3. Creative Display of Learning

    4. Class Participation/Preparedness/Contribution to Collaborative Learning

    Letter grades will be assigned in the following way:

    A = 90-100 points

    B = 80-89 points

    C = 70-79 points

  35. Assignments, Exams and Tests: Content Outline

    a) Course overview

    a. Seminar introduction

    b) History of Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. Pre P.L. 94-142 (Before 1975)

    b. The Regular Education Initiative, Mainstreaming, & Inclusion

    c. Reform efforts including Response to Instruction/Intervention

    c) Who’s Perspective is Right?: Debates on Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. The “Process Product” Perspective

    b. The “Constructivist” Perspective

    c. The Reading and Mathematics Wars

    d. Diversity, Multiculturalism, and Culturally Responsive Pedagogy

    e. Is There and Should There Be A Middle Ground?: Integrating Multiple Perspectives

    d) A Critical Analysis of Research Methodologies In the Special Education Instructional Practice Research Base

    a. What are the Strengths?

    b. What are the Weaknesses?

    e) How Does Policy Affect Research and Practice in Special Education?

    a. Law & Litigation

    b. The Political and Social Climate

    c. Funding

    f) What Do We Know and What Do We Not Know?

    a. Evidence Based and Research Supported Practices

    b. Service Delivery Models and Student Outcomes

    g) The Current Context and Instructional Practice in Special Education

    a. Accountability and High Stakes Testing

    b. Response to Instruction/Intervention

    c. Content vs. Pedagogical Expertise

    h) The Research to Practice Gap in Special Education

    a. Causes

    b. Bridging the Gap

    c. Forecasting the Future

    i) Developing a Research Agenda for Instructional Practice for Student With/At Risk for Identification of Disabilities

    a. What are Areas of Research Needed in Order to Advance the Field?

    b. Identifying Pertinent Areas of Interest

    Assignments, exams, and tests:

    1. Critical Analysis of Research on Instructional Practices in Special Education

    2. Critical Analysis Paper Presentation and Scholarly Discussion

    3. Creative Display of Learning

    4. Class Participation/Preparedness/Contribution to Collaborative Learning

  36. Attendance Policy: Course Attendance at First Class Meeting – Policy for Graduate Students: For structured courses, 6000 and above, the College/Campus Dean will set the first-day class attendance requirement. Check with the College for specific information. This policy is not applicable to courses in the following categories: Educational Outreach, Open University (TV), FEEDS Program, Community Experiential Learning (CEL), Cooperative Education Training, and courses that do not have regularly scheduled meeting days/times (such as, directed reading/research or study, individual research, thesis, dissertation, internship, practica, etc.). Students are responsible for dropping undesired courses in these categories by the 5th day of classes to avoid fee liability and academic penalty. (See USF Regulation – Registration - 4.0101,

    http://usfweb2.usf.edu/usfgc/ogc%20web/currentreg.htm)

    Attendance Policy for the Observance of Religious Days by Students: In accordance with Sections 1006.53 and 1001.74(10)(g) Florida Statutes and Board of Governors Regulation 6C-6.0115, the University of South Florida (University/USF) has established the following policy regarding religious observances: (http://usfweb2.usf.edu/usfgc/gc_pp/acadaf/gc10-045.htm)

    In the event of an emergency, it may be necessary for USF to suspend normal operations. During this time, USF may opt to continue delivery of instruction through methods that include but are not limited to: Blackboard, Elluminate, Skype, and email messaging and/or an alternate schedule. It’s the responsibility of the student to monitor Blackboard site for each class for course specific communication, and the main USF, College, and department websites, emails, and MoBull messages for important general information.

  37. Policy on Make-up Work: All assignments are expected to be completed by the assigned due date. In cases of emergency, it is the student’s responsibility to contact the instructor to see if alternative arrangements may be made.

    Academic Dishonesty:

    Plagiarism is defined as "literary theft" and consists of the unattributed quotation of the exact words of a published text or the unattributed borrowing of original ideas by paraphrase from a published text. On written papers for which the student employs information gathered from books, articles, or oral sources, each direct quotation, as well as ideas and facts that are not generally known to the public-at-large, must be attributed to its author by means of the appropriate citation procedure. Citations may be made in footnotes or within the body of the text. Plagiarism also consists of passing off as ones own, segments or the total of another persons work.

    Punishment for academic dishonesty will depend on the seriousness of the offense and may include receipt of an "F" with a numerical value of zero on the item submitted, and the "F" shall be used to determine the final course grade. It is the option of the instructor to assign the student a grade of "F" of "FF" (the latter indicating dishonesty) in the course.

    Detection of plagiarism: It is very important to state in your syllabus that you plan to submit student assignments to SafeAssignment.com in order to detect plagiarism. This will give you the legal right to submit student assignments to SafeAssignment.com. If you plan to submit to Safe Assignment, use the statement below:

    The University of South Florida has an account with an automated plagiarism detection service which allows instructors to submit student assignments to be checked for plagiarism. I reserve the right to 1) request that assignments be submitted to me as electronic files and 2) electronically submit to SafeAssignment.com, or 3) ask students to submit their assignments to SafeAssignment.com through myUSF. Assignments are compared automatically with a database of journal articles, web articles, and previously submitted papers. The instructor receives a report showing exactly how a student’s paper was plagiarized.

  38. Program This Course Supports: PH.D. Program Curriculum and Instruction-Special Education
  39. Course Concurrence Information: This course does not service other programs.


- if you have questions about any of these fields, please contact chinescobb@grad.usf.edu or joe@grad.usf.edu.