Supporting General Educators' Inclusive Practices in Mathematics and Science Education.
This paper describes a state-funded project at Southeastern Louisiana University that offered coursework and direct classroom assistance to general educators attempting to include students with disabilities for mathematics and science instruction. Thirty-five general educators in five parish school systems participated. A sequence of three credit courses was developed to include instruction in collaboration skills, in curricula/test accommodations, and in behavior management. The paper offers examples of how the general educator participants applied learned principles in inclusive settings including practical application of mathematics skills in a school coffee and beignet shop, mock elections, cultivating a school vegetable garden, collecting and analyzing water samples, and conducting field trips. The project was effective in dispensing information to general educators in curricular accommodations, behavior management techniques, and collaboration skills and participants were also successfully applying this information in their home classrooms. Preand post-testing indicated significant changes in attitudes toward inclusion and knowledge of special education. Twenty-three participants continued on to become certified in special education. Problems encountered included participant attrition, recruitment difficulties, and limited course options. (Contains 10 references.) (DB) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Inclusion in Science and Mathematics 1 Supporting General Educators' Inclusive Practices in Mathematics and Science Education Rita Coombs-Richardson, Ph.D. Southeastern Louisiana University rrichardson@selu.edu and Sarah E. Al-Juraid, Project Inclusion Coordinator Southeastern Louisiana University
Using a thinking skills system to guide discussions during a working conference on students with disabilities pursuing STEM fields
AbstractStudents with sensory or motor disabilities are often dissuaded from pursuing science, technology, engineering, or mathematics (STEM) careers. They are frequently underprepared to succeed in post-secondary STEM coursework because of inadequate high school preparation and limited post-secondary accommodations. A two-day working conference stimulated dialogue to improve attitudes toward, to better support, and to plan accommodations for students with physical disabilities in STEM areas. Discussion questions during the five small group dialogue sessions that followed panels of speaker presentations were based on Edward de Bono's (2000) CoRT ten Breadth thinking skills. These thinking skills broaden perception so that thinkers might see beyond the obvious, immediate, and egocentric. These ten strategies encouraged conference participants to consider all factors (CAF), rate the plus, minus, and interesting aspects of ideas (PMI), think about other people's views (OPV), generate alternatives, possibilities, and choices (APC), list aims, goals and objectives (AGO) and then prioritize them (FIP), determine rules (Rules), consider consequences and sequels of actions (C & S), make a plan (Planning), and come to decisions (Decisions) in the context of the issues addressed by the conference. The CoRT Breadth thinking skills provided a robust structure for guiding meaningful discussions and are recommended for generating discussion questions for future working conferences. The ideas that were generated during discussions are reported so that readers who are secondary or post-secondary STEM instructors might consider implementing them in their classrooms and programs.IntroductionThe Challenge of Changing Perspectives and PrioritiesProfessional development program organizers face a steep challenge in changing educators' dispositions and behaviors regarding students with disabilities (Cook, Tankersley, Cook, & Landrum, 2000; Stumbo, Hedrick, Weisman, & Martin, 2011). Students with sensory and motor disabilities have long been underprepared for pursuing science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) careers (Brownell & Thomas, 1998; Kimmel & Deek, 1999). Preservice general educators' perceptions of including students with disabilities in their classrooms are generally neutral, improving only slightly after a course in special education (Shippen, Crites, Houchins, Ramsey, & Simon, 2005). Teachers involved in inclusive school programs exhibit more positive attitudes toward students with disabilities than teachers at schools with pull-out programs-programs in which students are removed ("pulled" out) from the regular classroom to receive instruction in a resource room by a special educator (McLeskey, Waldron, So, Swanson, & Loveland, 2001). Additionally, highly effective teachers show more tolerance toward students with disabilities than typical teachers (Treder, Morse, & Ferron, 2000), indicating that much progress in this area can be made. However, teachers report that they lack the knowledge and skills to make appropriate accommodations for students with disabilities (Stefanich, Gabriele, Rogers, & Erpelding, 2005; Yuen, Westwood, & Wong, 2004), which points to the need for professional development.The ConferenceThe authors of this article organized a professional conference to deliver a two-day professional development program that actively involved secondary school and college level faculty, administrators, special educators, disability specialists, students with disabilities, and their parents in thinking about and applying ideas for supporting and accommodating students with sensory and motor disabilities in STEM fields. A well-accepted system of thinking skills was employed to guide discussion questions: the CoRT Breadth thinking skills. This article describes the ten thinking skills and shows how they were applied to stimulate thinking about students with disabilities. …
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea 1982, A Commentary
Volume VI is the sixth substantive volume to be published in the series. It deals with the work of the First Committee at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, namely the international seabed area. The volume thus embraces the deep seabed mining regime set out in Part XI of the 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea together with the 1994 Agreement on its implementation. Completion of this commentary was delayed first by the consultations and negotiations that commenced in 1990 and led to the 1994 Agreement and the entry into force of the Convention. It was further delayed until the Assembly of the International Seabed Authority approved the detailed mining regulations in 2000. Additional supplementary material can be found at UNCLOS 1982 Commentary: Supplementary Documents.