Loading…

Instructional Strategies and Educational Outcomes for Students with Developmental Disabilities in Inclusive “Multiple Intelligences” and Typical Inclusive Classrooms

Pedagogical practices based on Gardner's (1983) theory of multiple intelligences (MI) are often cited as potentially facilitative of inclusion of students with developmental disabilities (Armstrong, 1994; Eichinger & Downing, 1996; Falvey, Givner, & Kimm, 1996). However, no research to...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Research and practice for persons with severe disabilities 2002-12, Vol.27 (4), p.227-238
Main Authors: Katz, Jennifer, Mirenda, Pat, Auerbach, Stan
Format: Article
Language:English
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Pedagogical practices based on Gardner's (1983) theory of multiple intelligences (MI) are often cited as potentially facilitative of inclusion of students with developmental disabilities (Armstrong, 1994; Eichinger & Downing, 1996; Falvey, Givner, & Kimm, 1996). However, no research to date has examined this relationship. The purpose of this study was to examine the engaged behavior and social interactions of 10 students with developmental disabilities in two types of inclusive classrooms–those that ascribed to MI pedagogy, instruction, and assessment, and those that used no specific educational theory or approach to instruction. The study was intended to be exploratory in nature to generate hypotheses for future investigations. Data were collected using MS-CISSAR (Greenwood, Carta, Kamps, & Delquadri, 1997), a software program for gathering and analyzing observational data in classrooms. Results suggested that the experiences of the participants in both typical and MI-inclusive classrooms were more alike than different. Participants in both types of classrooms were engaged primarily in whole-class, independent seatwork, and traditional classroom activities, and were engaged less frequently in small groups or multiple response activities. However, participants were observed more frequently to be engaged in multiple response activities in MI classrooms, and in both noninstructional time and individual seatwork activities that were different from those of peers in typical classrooms. The participants in MI classrooms spent more time interacting with their typical peers, whereas those in typical classrooms spent more time interacting with adults during 1:1 activities that were different from those of their peers. The results are discussed in terms of their educational and research implications, limitations, and suggestions for further research.
ISSN:1540-7969
2169-2408
DOI:10.2511/rpsd.27.4.227