|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-04-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Accessibility (for Disabled); Disabilities; Employees; Employers; Stakeholders; Comparative Analysis; Employee Attitudes; Employer Attitudes
Abstract:
Job accommodation is a multifaceted and interactive process. Stakeholder groups (i.e., employees with disabilities, employers, and in some cases service providers) make decisions about requesting or providing job accommodations based on multiple factors in this process. An understanding of stakeholder differences in their perceptions of these factors may mitigate the myths and misconceptions about accommodations, and facilitate the accommodation process. Stakeholder perspectives on the importance of factors involved in the accommodation process are compared. How these perceptions may affect the likelihood of requesting or providing accommodations is discussed, along with the implications for rehabilitation professionals. (Contains 3 tables.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-01-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
Peer Reviewed: |
Yes |
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Safety Education; Special Education; Special Needs Students; Food Standards; Skill Analysis; Skill Development; Testing Accommodations; Accessibility (for Disabled); Best Practices; Item Analysis; Psychometrics; Nutrition Instruction; Food Service; Performance Based Assessment; Evaluation Methods; Educational Innovation; Program Effectiveness; Curriculum Evaluation
Abstract:
This article describes an innovative assessment tool designed to evaluate the effectiveness of a food safety skills curriculum for learners receiving special education services. As schools respond to the increased demand for training students with special needs about food safety, the need for effective curricula and tools is also increasing. A "Food Safety Education for High School and Transition Special Needs Students" curriculum served as the basis upon which our assessment tool was developed. The project was a collaborative effort by food safety and education professionals in Connecticut, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. This USDA-funded initiative emerged from teacher-generated data that identified critical gaps in food safety knowledge and skills among students with disabilities (SWD) receiving special education services. As an adjunct to this curriculum, a Food Safety Practices Assessment Tool was developed to: 1) conduct observations of students as they demonstrate food safety practices, and 2) use this information to design classroom-based learning activities that are aligned with students' Individual Education Plans (IEP). Pilot data suggest that the tool is valid and reliable for use in a kitchen-based setting. This is the first known tool of its kind to test food safety skills of individuals with special needs in a real-world environment. Further testing is needed to determine the usefulness of the tool for broader audiences. (Contains 3 tables and 2 figures.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
Author(s): |
Antony, Pavan John |
Source: |
Journal of International Special Needs Education, v16 n1 p5-16 2013 |
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Descriptive |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Special Education; Foreign Countries; Educational History; Accessibility (for Disabled); Educational Development; Laws; Educational Legislation; Inclusion; Special Schools; Change Strategies; Educational Policy; Politics of Education; Educational Assessment; Educational Indicators
Abstract:
Education of all children in public schools, including those with disabilities, continues to be an unresolved issue in many countries around the globe. While education of all children is mandated by law and considered a basic human right in many countries, the current status of implementation varies. India, for example, is an ancient country that adopted several laws and policies for its citizens with disabilities after gaining independence from British rule. Today, India legally requires the education of all children in schools; however, despite this, millions of children with disabilities continue to remain out of school or receive little or no education. This paper discusses the special education history, legal system, current status and future for people with disabilities in India. (Contains 1 table.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
Publisher's website
|
|
|
Pub Date: |
2013-00-00 |
Pub Type(s): |
Journal Articles; Reports - Evaluative |
Peer Reviewed: |
|
|
|
|
Descriptors:
Learning Disabilities; Eligibility; Special Education; Laws; Court Litigation; Policy Analysis; Case Studies; Case Records; Electronic Libraries; Related Services (Special Education); Content Analysis; Federal Legislation; Hearings; Accessibility (for Disabled)
Abstract:
Specific learning disability (SLD), although moderately declining in recent years, continues to be the largest of the eligibility classifications under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; NCES, 2012). The recognition of response to intervention (RTI) in the 2004 amendments of the IDEA as an approach for identifying students with SLD has generated successive changes in the 2006 IDEA regulations and in subsequent state laws (e.g., Zirkel & Thomas, 2010a, 2010b). RTI has also been a continuing subject of contention (e.g., Hale et al. 2010) and confusion (e.g., Zirkel, 2011b, 2012c). Corresponding to these developments, what has been the recent trend in litigation? Prior to the effective date of the 2006 regulations, a monograph provided a systematic analysis of the 25 years of prior case law--both at the hearing/review officer and court levels--concerning SLD eligibility (Zirkel, 2006). The major findings included that (a) the total amounted to approximately 90 pertinent cases from 1980 to 2006, with about four fifths at the hearing/review officer level; (b) the frequency of the decisions rose gradually during this period to an annual average of approximately seven during the last 6 years, with the majority arising in California (n = 20), Pennsylvania (n = 15), and New York (n = 11); and (c) school districts, typically defending the position that the child was not eligible as SLD, won approximately 80% of the cases, with the most frequent decisional factors being severe discrepancy (n = 68) or the need for special education (n = 31). An update limited to the subsequent 3.5-year period (Zirkel, 2010) found 18 decisions concerning SLD eligibility. The findings were preliminary based on the limited period. The proportion of court decisions doubled to approximately two fifths of the cases. Continuing the previous trend, California accounted for more of the decisions than any other state (n = 7), with Pennsylvania remaining in second place (n = 3). The outcome trend increased even more in favor of districts; the parents prevailed in establishing the child's eligibility in only one of the 18 cases. The primary decisional factors were severe discrepancy and, to only a slightly less frequent extent, the need for special education. Conversely, RTI was conspicuous in its absence, surfacing in just two decisions and then in only a negligible role. The purpose of this analysis is to extend the previous, preliminary update to cover a fuller, 6-year period and, thus, provide a more accurate picture of the recent trends in relation to the prior 25-year analysis. The specific questions include: (1) Have the upward slope and California and hearing/review officer predominance in frequency of decisions continued?; (2) Has the trend of district-friendly outcomes changed?; and (3) Has RTI become a major decisional factor in these cases? (Contains 1 table.)
Note:The following two links
are not-applicable for text-based browsers or screen-reading software.
Show
Hide
Full Abstract
Related Items: Show Related Items
Full-Text Availability Options:
More Info:
Help |
Tutorial
Help Finding Full Text
|
More Info:
Help
Find in a Library
|
Publisher's website
|
|