Online ISSN: 2325-7466
2006
Triannual
National Association of Special Education Teachers (NASET)
United States

Articles

The Perspectives and Assumptions of Pupil Appraisal Professionals in the Identification Process for Students with Behavioral Concerns

  • Janice Rutledge Janz, Ph.D (Author)
  • Mary M. Banbury, Ph.D (Author)
DOI
https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.6
Abstract
Researchers have long been disconcerted with the lack of a clear definition and objective criteria in identifying students with behavior problems (Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice, 1999; Forness & Kavale, 2000). As a safeguard, federal and state laws mandate the use of multidisciplinary teams to reduce the inappropriate and discriminatory referral and placement of students into special education (Knotek, 2003, p. 2). It is this team that makes the decisions throughout the formal identification process; no single procedure is used as the sole criterion for determining whether a student is a student with an exceptionality (Louisiana Department of Education, 2000, p. 23). However, the safeguard is not fail-safe. Tensions may arise when there are opposing viewpoints, divergent interpretations of events or circumstances, and, in particular, competing philosophical orientations among team members.
Keywords
Specialists, Behavior Problems, Emotional Disturbances, School Psychologists, Environmental Influences, Student Evaluation
References

Borland, J. (1990). Post positivistic inquiry: Implication of the New Philosophy of Science for the field of the education of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 34, 61-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629003400406

Center for Effective Collaboration and Practice (1999). Students with emotional disturbance. Retrieved February 10th, 2000, from http://www.air.org/resources/ntlagend.html

Coleman, L.J., Sanders, M.D., & Cross, T.L. (1997). Perennial debates and tacit assumptions in the education of gifted children. Gifted Child Quarterly, 41(3), 105-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/001698629704100306

Custer, R. (1996). Qualitative research methodologies. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 34(2), 3-6.

Ferguson, P.M., & Ferguson, D.L. (1995). The interpretivist view of special education and disability: The value of telling stories. In T. Skrtic (Ed.), Disability and democracy: Reconstructing (special) education for postmodernity (pp.104-121). New York: Teachers College Press.

Forness, S., & Kavale, K. (2000). Emotional or behavior disorders: Background and current status of E/BD terminology and definition. Behavior Disorders, 25(3), 264-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/019874290002500304

Glesne, C. (1998). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. New York, NY: Longman.

Guba, E. (1990). The alternative paradigm dialog. In E.G. Guba (Ed.), The paradigm Dialog (pp.17-27). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Janesick, V.J. (1998). The dance of qualitative research design: Metaphor, methodolatry, and meaning. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 35-55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Knotek, S. (2003). Bias in problem solving and the social process of student study teams. The Journal of Special Education, 37(1), 2-14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00224669030370010101

Louisiana Department of Education (2000). The pupil appraisal handbook. Louisiana Department of Education: Author.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G.B. (1989). Designing qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Maxwell, J. (1996). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Popkewitz, T. (1984). Paradigm and ideology in educational research: The social function of the intellectual. London, England: Palmer.

Shor, I., and Freire, P. (1987). A pedagogy for liberation: Dialogues on transforming education. Westport, CT: Bergin-Garvey/Greenwood.

Skrtic, T. (1991). Behind special education. Denver, CO: Love.

Skrtic, T. (1995). Special education and student disability as organizational pathologies: Toward a metatheory of school organization change. In T. Skrtic (Ed.), Disability and Democracy: Reconstructing [special] education for postmodernity (pp. 190-231). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

There are 17 references in total.
How to Cite
Janz, J. R., & Banbury, M. M. (2006). The Perspectives and Assumptions of Pupil Appraisal Professionals in the Identification Process for Students with Behavioral Concerns. Journal of the American Academy of Special Education Professionals, 1(2), 5-25. https://doi.org/10.64546/jaasep.6

Summer 2006

Article Information

  • Article Type Articles
  • Submitted April 13, 2006
  • Published June 15, 2006
  • Issue Summer 2006
  • Section Articles
  • File Downloads 0
  • Abstract Views 0
  • Altmetrics
  • Share
Download data is not yet available.