National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal 27(1&2) 2014, Laura Baylot Case4y, Robert L. Williamson, Thomas Black, Cort Casey - NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS ((Founded 1982), Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief - www.nationalforum.com

NATIONAL FORUM OF APPLIED EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH JOURNAL
VOLUME 27, NUMBERS 1 & 2, 2014
45
Teaching Written Expression in the Inclusive High School
Classroom: Strategies to Assist Students with Disabilities
Laura Baylot Casey, PhD, BCBA-D
Associate Professor
University of Memphis
Robert L. Williamson, EdD
Assistant Professor
University of Memphis
Thomas Black, PhD
Assistant Professor
Middle Tennessee State University
Cort Casey, EdD
Assistant Professor
Christian Brothers University
Abstract
During this study, researchers developed and examined the results of an online survey to better
understand teachers’ perceptions related to the teaching of written expression in an inclusive
classroom environment. Participants included over five hundred secondary English teachers from
across the United States. Findings revealed that the majority of the teachers surveyed indicated
that they struggled with the teaching of written expression most when teaching students with
autism, emotional/behavior disorders, and/or attention deficit, hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
Discussion includes descriptions of general methodologies for teaching written expression that
emphasize specific strategies for teaching this content to students with ADHD, autism spectrum
disorders (including Asperger’s syndrome), and students with emotional/behavioral disorders.
Keywords: writing, disability, autism, emotional/behavioral disorders, inclusion, special
education
Only within the past three decades has writing become a viable area of research with
regard to teaching writing skills to students with and without disabilities (Hooper, et al., 2002).
Despite twenty years of research, it was not until 2003 that the National Commission on Writing
called for reform with regard to how writing was being taught in U.S. schools. The commission
acknowledged that teachers typically received minimal instruction on teaching writing skills, and
only a few states required specific courses to obtain certification in the teaching of writing. The
limited number of course offerings led to many teachers not being adequately prepared to teach

LAURA BAYLOT CASEY, ROBERT L. WILLIAMSON, THOMAS BLACK,
and CORT CASEY
46
students appropriate skills and techniques related to becoming strong writers. Kiuhara, Graham,
and Hawken (2009) conducted a national survey, which indicated that 71% of high school
teachers reported receiving no preparation or minimal preparation to teach writing during their
college teacher preparation program. Within the same study, almost half reported that their in-
service trainings related to teaching writing were inadequate. Thus, there remains a need for
increased attention on how to effectively teach writing skills during teacher preparation programs
and/or at teacher in-service trainings.
At the secondary level, writing skills evolve from simply acquiring and displaying basic
writing skills to creating original and expository essays. Further, at the secondary level, students
are expected to be able to synthesize research in order to create meaningful connections from
multiple sources of literature. This change in the nature of writing between primary and
secondary educational settings often results in the adolescent struggling as they often experience
more difficulties with regard to writing tasks as compared to those they experienced within their
primary schools (Fitzgerald & Shanahan 2000; Graham & Perrin, 2007). Successful transition
from the writing expectations of primary grades to that required within the secondary school
environment may require direct instruction from the classroom teacher. Not only might this be a
trying time for many adolescents as they progress to the next stage of writing, but it may also
represent a trying time for teachers as they find themselves in a high school class of many
students who are in need of personal writing instruction at varying levels. In other words, the
heterogeneous classroom leaves the inadequately prepared secondary English teacher faced with
the daunting task of teaching writing skills that he or she may not be adequately trained to teach.
The implications of an underprepared teacher may become multiplied in an underperforming
school, a school with limited resources, or a school rich with cultural, linguistic or ability
diversity.
The goals of this manuscript were to analyze survey responses provided by current
secondary English educators in an effort to target classroom strategies that best assist such
teachers to teach writing to students within their secondary classrooms. Researchers targeted
English teachers due to the emphasis placed on writing instruction within that content area.
Method
Participants
Five hundred and eleven secondary English teachers from across the United States
responded to a survey posted on the Internet. Participation in the survey was voluntary. The
majority of the respondents were female (70%). Furthermore, the majority reported having a
Bachelor’s degree (84%) with at least 6 years of teaching experience (89%). Table 1 outlines the
participant information in more detail.

and CORT CASEY
47
Table 1
Mean Years of Teaching Experience, Degree, and Gender of Teacher Participants
Degree (n) Gender (n)
Years of
Teaching
Experience N BS MS MS +hours M F*
1-5 178 153 23 2 12 66
6-10 212 189 17 6 31 181
11-15 109 82 19 8 58 101
16 or more 12 6 5 1 52 10
Total 511 430 64 17 153 474
*2008 UNICEF Education Statistics for the United States reports in 2005, 88.6 % of teachers in
primary schools and 62.5% of teachers in secondary schools nationwide were female
Instrument
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 (Sec. 602 (3) (A)
(i), which is public law signed under President Bush (Pub. L. 108-446), outlines the range of
exceptionalities eligible for special education services. Categories of exceptionality include
students with learning disabilities (LD); emotional/behavioral disorders (EBD); autism spectrum
disorders (ASD); mental retardation (MR); speech or language impairments (SL); hearing
impairments (HI); visual impairments (VI); orthopedic impairments (OI); other health
impairments (OHI) which generally includes students with attention deficit, hyperactivity
disorder (ADHD), and traumatic brain injury (TBI; U.S. Department of Education, 2005).
ResearchQuestions
Survey questions posed for this study were based on these IDEA 2004 disability
categories. Survey items allowed respondents to indicate agreement or disagreement with posed
statements and the survey was available through an online survey provider over a six-month
period. The survey included items relevant to answering the primary research question: “Which
disability category, according to IDEA, did respondents perceive that they struggled with the
most in terms of teaching writing?” In an effort to answer this research question, the survey
utilized the IDEA categories and paired each category with the introductory phrase, “I struggle
teaching children diagnosed with…” (See Table 2)

and CORT CASEY
48
Table 2
Teachers’ Current Needs Based on IDEA’s Disability Categories
Item Agree Disagree
n % n %
___
I struggle teaching children
diagnosed with autism to write 435 85.2 76 14.8
effectively in my inclusive
classroom.
I struggle teaching
children diagnosed with
deafness-blindness to write 14 2.8 497 97.2
classroom.
diagnosed as deaf to write 25 4.9 486 95.1
effectively in my
inclusive classroom.
diagnosed with emotional disturbance 368 72.1 143 27.9
to write effectively in my inclusive
classroom
diagnosed with hearing impairment 51 10.0 460 90.0
classroom.
diagnosed with mental retardation 37 7.2 474 92.8
classroom.
diagnosed with multiple disabilities
to write effectively in my inclusive 43 8.5 468 91.5
classroom.

and CORT CASEY
49
diagnosed with orthopedic impairment 53 10.3 458 89.7
classroom.
diagnosed with other health
impairment including ADHD
to write 352 68.9 159 31.1
classroom
diagnosed 246 48 265 52
with specific learning disabilities to
write effectively in my inclusive
classroom.
diagnosed with speech and language 230 45 281 55
impairments to write effectively
in my inclusive classroom
diagnosed with traumatic brain injury
to write effectively in my inclusive 27 5.2 484 94.8
classroom.
diagnosed with visual impairment 63 12.4 448 87.6
classroom.
__________________________________________________________________________
Results
Based on the survey, the majority of respondents reported struggling with students with
autism (85.2%); emotional / behavioral disorders (72.1%); and other health impairments (e.g.,
ADHD) (68.9%). Results were mixed with regard to teaching students with learning disabilities
as well as speech and language impairments with 48% and 45% reporting struggling with these
learners respectively. The majority of teachers reported that they did not struggle with teaching
writing skills to students who were deaf (95.1%); deaf-blind (97.2%); with hearing impairments
(90%); visual impairments (87.6%); orthopedic impairments (89.7%); mental retardation
(92.8%); multiple disabilities (91.5%); or traumatic brain injury (94.8%, refer to table 2).

and CORT CASEY
50
Discussion
The majority of the teachers surveyed indicated that they struggled to teach writing to
students with three particular disabilities: autism; emotional / behavioral disorders; and ADHD.
Therefore, in an effort to answer the needs expressed by the English teachers who responded to
the survey, the remainder of this article provides general strategies for teaching writing within
the secondary English classroom, as well as providing specific suggestions for written expression
for students with disabilities, specifically the three categories cited as areas of need by the
majority of respondents: other health impairments (primarily ADHD), autism spectrum disorders
(including Asperger’s syndrome), and emotional / behavioral disorders.
General Strategies for Written Expression in the Inclusive Classroom
Graham, Harris, and Larsen (2001) list six principles for teachers to implement that can
assist students within an inclusive classroom setting. They are as follows:
… (a) provide effective writing instruction; (b) tailor writing instruction to meet the
individual needs of children with LD; (c) intervene early, providing a coherent and
sustained effort to improve the writing skills of children with LD; (d) expect that each
child will learn to write; (e) identify and address academic and nonacademic roadblocks
to writing and school success; and (f) employ technological tools that improve writing
performance. (p. 75)
These authors stress the need to find balance between teaching methods, direct and
indirect learning opportunities, and differentiation of instruction. According to Graham et al.
(2001), the teacher should vary his or her approach to teaching as it applies to content, process,
and product. Some basic suggestions for writing include individualized instruction, such as
knowing which children need more time, shortening tasks, and providing instructions using
multiple modalities (verbal, visual, etc.). In addition to the above the general guidelines for
supporting writing, there is a multi-stage strategy that has been well supported in the field of
learning disabilities and backed by the Council for Exceptional Children, CEC, as being an
empirically validated strategy for struggling writers. The strategy is known as the Self Regulated
Strategy Development or SRSD (Harris, & Graham, 1992). This intervention focuses on three
basic areas: writing instruction, self-monitoring, and self-efficacy and consists of six stages that
assist from the beginning phase of planning to the final phase of revising. SRSD utilizes multiple
mnemonic devices to assist the writer with the entire writing process, self-management, and self-
confidence. In the text below, specific components of the SRSD are discussed within the context
of studies that utilized SRSD to assist with written expression across a variety of populations.
Other Health Impaired: ADHD
According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual fourth edition text-revised (DSM-IV
TR; APA, 2000), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is broken down into three
subtypes: (a) ADHD, Combined Type: Hyperactive and Inattentive; (b) ADHD, Predominantly
Inattentive Type; and (c) ADHD, Predominantly Hyperactive-Impulsive Type. Children with
ADHD often emit chronic, high-intensity behaviors (i.e., inattention and/or hyperactivity) that

and CORT CASEY
51
interfere with their academic progress. Also according to the DSM-IV TR, approximately 3-7%
of school age children are diagnosed with ADHD. According to the National Institute on Mental
Health, approximately one-third of all children with ADHD also have learning disabilities
(NIMH, 1999). Most students with ADHD are educated in a general education classroom.
Children with ADHD typically find themselves in less restrictive settings than other special
education categories, except speech and language impairments. Most general education classes
contain one to three students diagnosed with ADHD, with some others exhibiting similar
behavioral characteristics at the sub-clinical level (McLeskey, Rosenberg, & Westling, 2010).
Thus, equipping the general education teacher with strategies to support the student with ADHD
is critical to the success of all students rather than just those categorized under the IDEA defined
other health impaired (OHI) label. When working with students diagnosed with ADHD in the
classroom, some environmental manipulations may be necessary. For example, it is not
recommended to seat a child who is easily distracted by a window, door, or high traffic area.
Conversely, a study carrel may need to be created for the individual’s desk to assist that the
student to focus.
There are several specific behavioral strategies that should be directly applied to the
writing process. Behavioral strategies are an excellent choice for students exhibiting ADHD,
since the hallmark characteristics are behavioral in nature. One strategy, known as task analysis,
is helpful when directly applied to writing. Task analysis is the process of breaking down a
complex behavior (a chain of simple behaviors that follow one another) into its component parts
to make the task less cumbersome and more manageable. This allows small gains to be made and
rewards to be given along the way (Cooper, Heron, & Heward, 2007). An example of a task
analysis for writing would involve breaking down a paper into paragraphs, then into sentences,
then into words.
Another behavioral technique, called chaining, has potential to also be successful with
this population. Chaining is a technique used for children who have difficulty organizing things
in an orderly sequence. There are two types of chaining: forward and backward. Forward
chaining involves teaching the skill from the beginning or initial step in the sequence whereas
backward chaining involves completing all but the last step and having the student complete the
last step on their own (Cooper et al., 2007). For example, forward chaining would be most
appropriate in the acquisition phase of writing. The steps involved might include: (a) identify the
target behavior (e.g., write a sentence); (b) task analyze the behavior to determine each
individual step – identify nouns, verbs, adjectives; (c) teach and reinforce the initial step in the
skill; (d) collect data on the acquisition of the skill and analyze it for mastery; (e) when the first
step is mastered, teach and reinforce the second step in conjunction with the first step; and (f) as
each successive step is mastered, add the next step in the skill series until the student is able to
demonstrate the entire skill without adult support.
Backward chaining would also be appropriate to assist with the writing process.
Backward chaining begins by identifying the pieces needed to complete the story. These include
the main characters, the plot, the challenge, the resolution of the challenge, and the end of the
story. To begin, the teacher performs all of the steps, except the last. Thus, the teacher writes the
story, leaving off the end, and the student reads the story and completes the last step. Once the
student is successful with this part, the teacher then completes all steps except the last two. This
process continues until the student successfully works his or her way back to the beginning and
is able to create a story from the beginning to the end.
A new study found success using self-regulated strategy development (SRSD), described

and CORT CASEY
52
above, to improve the essay-writing abilities of students with ADHD (De La Paz, 2001). The
strategy utilized two acronyms, PLAN and WRITE, to help students keep in mind their goals
while writing. The steps are:
(a) Pay attention to the prompt; (b) List main ideas; (c) Add supporting ideas; (d) Number
your ideas; (e) Work from your plan to develop your thesis statement; (f) Remember your
goals; (g) Include transition words; (h) Try to use different kinds of sentences, and (i)
Exciting, interesting, $100,000 words. (De La Paz, 2001, p.40)
Students were taught these steps during classroom instruction, then wrote these acronyms,
PLAN and WRITE, on their scratch paper while planning an essay. The length and complexity
of their essays were found to improve significantly against the baseline data, and the
improvement remained when tested four months after instruction had ceased.
Autism Spectrum Disorder
Autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is a set of behavioral characteristics often involving
impaired social interactions, impaired communication, and repetitive and stereotypical patterns
of behavior that manifest before the age of three (APA, 2000). According to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention (2012), ASD has risen to 1 in every 88 American children. Also,
according to McLeskey et al. (2010), 27% percent of students with ASD spend 79% of the day in
the general education classroom. McLeskey et al. also indicate that 44% of students with ASD
spend 40% of the day in the general education classroom. These statistics reveal that ASD is
prevalent in the inclusive classroom, with almost 50% of the students diagnosed with ASD
spending close to half of their day in an inclusive setting.
With ASD being considered a spectrum disorder with varying degrees of symptoms,
writing may come easily for some children diagnosed with ASD, while others may struggle. The
primary concern here is with the inability to read social cues. Students with ASD, being very
literal in interpretation, generally have a concrete outlook on the world and tend to exhibit undue
attention to details. For example, the inability to read social cues plays a role in a child’s ability
to write creatively, with a sense of humor, or in an abstract manner, which may stifle that type of
writing process.
Being overly attentive to detail also contributes to the child with ASD being overly
concerned with mechanics and unable to focus on the story line. Devoting time to the mechanics
of writing halts the developmental progression required for fluent writing because the individual
student has expended all of his mental effort focusing on the mechanics, while leaving very little
cognitive energy for generating unique thoughts and prose. Graham (1982) lists several reasons
why attending to the mechanics of writing may hinder the overall writing process and create a
disruption in the planning process. These reasons include: (a) forgetting one's thoughts, (b)
limited complexity, and (c) a decrease in motivation and self- confidence.
The self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) approach described above has also
been found in a recent study to be extremely effective for students with ASD (Asaro-Saddler &
Saddler, 2010). The self-regulated strategy development (SRSD) approach described above has
also been found in a recent study to be extremely effective for students with ASD (Asaro-Saddler
& Saddler, 2010). In this study, the students’ writing improved in length, clarity, and complexity
after being taught to plan and write stories using two mnemonic devices: “POW” and “WWW,

and CORT CASEY
53
What = 2; H = 2.” The acronym POW stands for “… (1) Pick my ideas; (2) Organize my notes
and (3) Write and say more.” The acronym, WWW, What =2 and H=2, reminds the students to
make notes addressing seven key questions: “…(1) Who are the main characters? (2) When does
the story take place? (3) Where does the story take place? (4) What do the main characters want
to do? (5) What happens when the main characters try to do it? (6) How does the story end? (7)
How do the main characters feel? (Asaro-Saddler & Saddler, 2010, p.114). This approach to
teaching writing has been used and shown to be successful with students with ASD, as
demonstrated in the 2010 study, as well as other groups of students.
Emotional and Behavioral Disorders
IDEA 2004, Pub. L. 108-446, defines emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) as
a condition exhibiting one or more of the following characteristics that adversely affect a
student’s educational performance over a long period of time and to a marked degree; (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. (U.S.
Department of Education, 2005, section 300.8 of Pub. L. 108-446)
It is noted by McLeskey et al. (2010) that only 0.69% of school-age children and 7.6% of
students with a disability are identified with EBD, and 80% of students with EBD are educated
in inclusive general education classes 40% of the day. While, statistically speaking, the
prevalence of EBD is not alarmingly high, the associated features of the disability make this
disorder a high priority to treat when it does occur.
Several research studies have been conducted in past years related to written expression
and children with EBD. One reason for the increased attention to this category of individuals and
writing is the connection between the therapeutic aspects of expressing oneself through prose.
The use of dialogue journals has been found to improve writing and enhance positive social
skills among students with EBD (Regan, Mastropieri, & Scruggs, 2005). In these journals,
students respond to a prompt that has been written in their journal by the teacher. After school,
the teacher responds to the student’s journal entry, asking for clarification and answering
questions where necessary. The same topic can be explored for several days, and the ongoing
dialogue between teacher and student can also touch on personal issues that the student may feel
more comfortable writing about, rather than verbalizing. In addition to the emotional outlet this
provides, the dialogue journal format has been found to improve attention to task, clarity, and
length of writing samples.
Progress in assistive technology may also offer help for students with EBD (Parette,
Crowley, & Wojcik, 2007). Many of these students can become overwhelmed and frustrated with
the physical tasks necessary for writing. Assistive technology, such as talking word processors,
graphic organizers, and speech recognition software, can help clear physical hurdles so that
students can more easily focus on the flow of their ideas (Parette et al., 2007). Talking word
processors allow the student to hear what is being typed as he progresses, which can help
increase word count. Computer-based graphic organizers can be a great drafting tool for helping

and CORT CASEY
54
students organize their ideas and clarify the relationships between their points. The frustrations
of typing or writing can be greatly minimized by using speech recognition software in
combination with a word processor. Finally, self-regulated strategy development, SRSD, as
described above in the section on ADHD and referenced in the ASD section, has also been found
very effective for students with EBD (Mastropieri et al., 2009).
Additional Assistance
Even with all of the above strategies in place, some students may still struggle with a
markedly limited vocabulary, errors in tense, difficulty recalling words or producing sentences
with developmentally appropriate length or complexity, general difficulty expressing ideas, and
difficulty understanding words, sentences, or specific types of words. When this occurs, there are
more strategies to help, such as focusing on vocabulary enhancement, syntax, word maps, self-
monitoring, and goal setting. Suggestions for increasing vocabulary can be as simple as having
the student find new words in the newspaper, using flash cards, making semantic webs, or using
a word wall (Reutzel & Cooter, 2007). Some additional online references on written expression
and/or teaching written expression to individuals with exceptionalities include the following:
(a) http://www.specialconnections.ku.edu, (b)http://interventioncentral.org, (c)www.ldonline.org,
and (d) http://www.creative-writingsolutions.com.
Future Research/Limitations
One primary limitation is that the participants provided limited demographic information.
Therefore, a breakdown based on region or school setting (urban/rural, size of school/district)
could not be analyzed. This information could have provided insight into regional or district-
related concerns unique to any specific location. Future research may investigate region as an
independent variable. A second limitation was that the survey consisted entirely of
agree/disagree questions and did not utilize a Likert scale or any open-ended questions for
qualitative analyses. The agree/disagree nature of the survey provided great results, but a Likert
scale would have enabled a better breakdown of the responses.
Another limitation exists in the survey’s lack of an ability to understand the nature of the
students each respondent had taught. For example, a respondent may have indicated that he or
she did not struggle with teaching students with deaf-blindness perhaps because they never
experienced a student with that particular disability. Future research should make available, a
way for respondents to indicate the level of experience they had regarding each IDEA 2004
defined category of student disability and link this information to their answers as posed within
the survey instrument used within this study.
Summary
Understanding the most effective way to impart writing instruction to a diverse classroom
has proven to be a challenge for most teachers in the inclusive classroom. Understanding the
individual needs of the children that make up each classroom and being able to diversify the
instructional strategies for teaching written expression are pedagogical skills that need to become

and CORT CASEY
55
part of each secondary English teacher’s repertoire. As teachers embrace various strategies,
from behavioral techniques like chaining and shaping to self-regulated strategy development and
assistive technology, the instruction portion of writing will prove to be advantageous for both
teachers and students as performance outcomes improve in class assignments, as well as on high
stakes tests.
References
American Psychiatric Association (APA). (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders (4th ed., text rev.). Washington, DC: Author.
Asaro-Saddler, K., & Saddler, B. (2010). Planning instruction and self-regulation training:
Effects on writers with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 7(1), 107-124.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2012, March 30). Prevalence of autism spectrum
disorders and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring Network, 14 sites, United States,
2008. Morbidity and Mortality Report, 61(No.SS03), 1–19.
Cooper, J.O., Heron, T.E., & Heward, W.L. (2007). Applied behavior analysis (2nd ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
De La Paz, S. (2001). Teaching writing to students with attention deficit disorders and specific
language impairment. The Journal of Educational Research, 95(1), 37-47.
Fitzgerald, J. & Shanahan, T. (2000). Reading and writing relations and their development.
Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 39-50.
Graham, S. (1982). Measurement of handwriting skills: A critical review. Diagnostique, 8, 32-
42.
Graham, S., Harris, K., & Larsen, L. (2001). Prevention and intervention of writing difficulties
for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2),
74-84.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). “Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of
adolescents in middle and high school.” A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED517367
Harris, K. R., & Graham, S. (1992). Helping young writers master the craft: Strategy
instruction and self-regulation in the writing process. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.
Hooper, S.R., Swartz, C., Montgomery, J., Reed, M.S., Brown, T., Wasileski, T., & Levine,
M.D. (2002). Prevalence of writing problems across three middle school samples. School
Psychology Review, 22, 608-620.
Kiuhara, S.A., Graham, S., & Mason, L. (2009). Teaching writing to high school students: A
national survey. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 136-160.
Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs,T.E., Mills, S., Cerar, N.I., Cuenca-Sanchez, Y., Allen-Bronaugh,
D., …, & Regan, K. (2009). Persuading students with emotional disabilities to write
fluently. Behavioral Disorders, 35(1), 19-40.
McLeskey, J., Rosenberg, M.S., & Westling, D.L. (2010). Inclusion: Effective practices for all
students. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). (1999). Questions and answers. NIMH Multimodal
Treatment Study of Children With ADHD. Bethesda, MD: Author.
Parette, Jr., H.E., Crowley, P., & Wojcik, B. (2007). Reducing overload in students with learning
and behavioral disorders: The role of assistive technology. Teaching Exceptional
Children Plus, 4(1), 1-12.

and CORT CASEY
56
Regan, K.S., Mastropieri, M.A., & Scruggs, T.E. (2005). Promoting expressive writing among
students with emotional and behavioral disturbance via dialogue journals. Behavioral
Disorders, 31(1), 33-50.
Reutzel, D.R., & Cooter, R.B. (2007), Strategies for reading assessment and instruction (3rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
U. S. Department of Education. (2005). 27th annual report to Congress on the implementation of
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 2004. Washington, DC: Author.
Authors
Laura Baylot Casey, PhD, BCBA-D is Associate Professor of Special Education, College of
Education, Department of Instruction and Curriculum Leadership, University of Memphis.
Robert L. Williamson, EdD is Assistant Professor of Special Education, College of Education,
Department of Instruction and Curriculum Leadership, University of Memphis.
Thomas Black, PhD is Assistant Professor of Elementary and Special Education, Middle
Tennessee State University.
Cort Casey, EdD is Assistant Professor of Education, Christian Brothers University.

National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal 27(1&2) 2014, Laura Baylot Case4y, Robert L. Williamson, Thomas Black, Cort Casey - NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS ((Founded 1982), Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief - www.nationalforum.com

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

En vedette

En vedette (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

National FORUM of Applied Educational Research Journal 27(1&2) 2014, Laura Baylot Case4y, Robert L. Williamson, Thomas Black, Cort Casey - NATIONAL FORUM JOURNALS ((Founded 1982), Dr. William Allan Kritsonis, Editor-in-Chief - www.nationalforum.com