Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Protocol for the Assessment of Common Core Teaching: the Impact of Instructional Inclusion on Students with Special Needs

  • Published:
Contemporary School Psychology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The quality of instruction in the classroom is the most powerful leverage point for school improvement because it is the only thing over which educators have a significant degree of control. As student assessments change to reflect the higher expectations of Common Core State Standards (CCSS), it is important that the assessment and development of teaching correspond with those expectations. The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of student engagement in general education classrooms and then compare the engagement of individual students with special needs with the engagement of their general education peers. The goal was to determine whether or not Individual Education Plan (IEP) goals were being met when services were provided in the general education classroom. The Protocol for the Assessment of Common Core Teaching (ProACCT) is an integrated observation instrument that measures academic engagement on three dimensions: student participation, the cognitive demand of lesson tasks, and the academic language used by students when they are learning content. The protocol was adapted to measure academic engagement individually so stakeholders could understand the levels of support required to ensure students with special needs have access to effective Common Core instruction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aguirre-Muñoz, Z., Boscardin, C. K., Jones, B., Park, J. E., Chinen, M., Shin, H. S., & Benner, A. (2006). Consequences and validity of performance assessment for English language learners: integrating academic language and ELL instructional needs into opportunity to learn measures. CSE 678. National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).

  • Anderson, L., Krathwohl, D., Airasian, P., Cruikshank, K., Mayer, R., Pintrich, P., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bakhtin, M., Holquist, M., & Emerson, C. (1981). The dialogic imagination: four essays by M. M. Bakhtin. Austin: University of Texas Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boettcher, J. V. (2007). Ten core principles for designing effective learning environments: insights from brain research and pedagogical theory. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(3). http://innovateonline.info/index.php?view=article&id=54. Accessed 1 May 2013.

  • Borko, H. (2004). Professional development and teacher learning: mapping the terrain. Educational Researcher, 33(8), 3–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowen, E. R. (2003). Student engagement and its relation to quality work design: a review of the literature. Action Research Exchange, 2(1). http://teach.valdosta.edu/are/ebowenLitReview.pdf. Accessed 1 May 2013.

  • Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). How people learn: brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse: the language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., & Ball, D. L. (1999). Instruction, capacity, and improvement. Philadelphia: Consortium for Policy Research in Education, University of Pennsylvania (CPRE RR-43).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, D. K., Raudenbush, S. W., & Ball, D. (2003). Resources, instruction, and research. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis, 25(2), 119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Costa, A. L., Kallick, B., & Association for Supervision and Curriculum, D. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  • Daggett, W. R. (2004). Reforming American high schools: why, what, and how. Rexford: International Center for Leadership in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, H. A. (2006). Exploring the contexts of relationship quality between middle school students and teachers. The Elementary School Journal, 106(3), 193–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: power and pedagogy in educating other people’s children. Harvard Educational Review.

  • Dooner, A., Mandzuk, D., Obendoerfer, P., Babiuk, G., Cerqueira-Vassallo, G., Force, V., & Roy, D. (2010). Examining student engagement and authority: developing learning relationships in the middle grades. Middle School Journal, 41(4), 28–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (1996). Getting to scale with successful educational practices. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elmore, R. F. (2009). School improvement and the reduction of poverty. In M. Bane & R. Zenteno (Eds.), Poverty and poverty alleviation strategies in North America (David Rockefeller center series on Latin American studies, pp. 165–199). Cambridge: Harvard University, Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferguson, R. F. (2003). Teachers’ perceptions and expectations and the Black-White test score gap. Urban Education, 38(4), 460–507.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynt, E., & Brozo, W. G. (2009). It’s all about the teacher. Reading Teacher, 62(6), 536–538.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher, K. L. (2013). Performance assessment for quality teaching: three critical variables for measuring and improving teaching and learning (Order No. 3571185). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text. (1429525668). Retrieved from http://0-search.proquest.com.sally.sandiego.edu/docview/1429525668?accountid=14742.

  • Goe, L., Stickler, L. M., & National Comprehensive Center for Teacher, Q. (2008). Teacher quality and student achievement: making the most of recent research. TQ Research & Policy Brief. National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.

  • Graff, N. (2009). Classroom talk: co-constructing a ‘difficult student’. Educational Research, 51(4), 439–454. doi:10.1080/00131880903354782.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grossman, P. L., Stodolsky, S. S., & Knapp, M. (2004). Making subject matter part of the equation: the intersection of policy and content. Occasional paper (Document 0-04-1), Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy, University of Washington, Seattle.

  • Haberman, M. (1992). The role of the classroom teacher as a curriculum leader. NASSP Bulletin, 76(547), 11–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halliday, M. K. (1993). Towards a language-based theory of learning. Linguistics and Education: An International Research Journal, 5(2), 93–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatano, G., & Osuro, Y. (2003). Commentary: reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research. Educational Researcher, 32, 26–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiebert, J., & Grouws, D. A. (2007). The effects of classroom mathematics teaching on students’ learning. In F. K. Lester (Ed.), Second handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 371–404). Charlotte: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, H. C., Rowan, B., & Ball, D. L. (2005). Effects of teachers’ mathematical knowledge for teaching on student achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 42, 371–406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kong, S., & Hoare, P. (2011). Cognitive content engagement in content-based language teaching. Language Teaching Research, 15(3), 307–324.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krauss, S., Brunner, M., Kunter, M., Baumert, J., Neubrand, M., Blum, W., & Jordan, A. (2008). Pedagogical content knowledge and content knowledge of secondary mathematics teachers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100(3), 716–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. A. (2007). Third turn position in teacher talk: contingency and the work of teaching. Journal of Pragmatics, 39(6), 1204–1230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lounsbury, J. H., Clark, D. C., & National Association of Secondary School Principals, R. A. (1990). Inside grade eight: from apathy to excitement.

  • Matsumura, L., Garnier, H. E., Slater, S., & Boston, M. D. (2008). Toward measuring instructional interactions “at-scale”. Educational Assessment, 13(4), 267–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons: social organization in the classroom. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Milanowski, A. T. (2011). Validity research on teacher evaluation systems based on the framework for teaching. Online Submission.

  • Nasstrom, G. (2009). Interpretation of standards with bloom’s revised taxonomy: a comparison of teachers and assessment experts. International Journal of Research & Method in Education, 32(1), 39–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newmann, F. M., Marks, H. M., & Gamoran, A. (1996). Authentic pedagogy and student performance. American Journal of Education, 104, 280–312.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nystrand, M. (1997). Opening dialogue: understanding the dynamics of language and learning in the English classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (2003). Psychological theory and educational reform: how school remakes mind and society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pang, V., Stein, R., Gomez, M., Matas, A., & Shimogori, Y. (2011). Cultural competencies: essential elements of caring-centered multicultural education. Action in Teacher Education, 33(5/6), 560–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perkins, D., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). New conceptions of thinking: from ontology to education. Educational Psychologist, 28(1), 67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Picower, B. (2009). The unexamined Whiteness of teaching: how White teachers maintain and enact dominant racial ideologies. Race, Ethnicity & Education, 12(2), 197–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: uses in research and practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., & Glennan, T. K. (2002). Leadership for learning: a theory of action for urban school districts. In A. M. Hightower, M. S. Knapp, J. A. Marsh, & M. W. McLaughlin (Eds.), School districts and instructional renewal: critical issues in educational leadership (pp. 160–172). New York: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L. B., & Hall, M. W. (2001). The principles of learning: study tools for educators [CD-ROM, version 2.0]. University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, Institute for Learning.

  • Rumberger, R. W., & Lim, S. (2008). Why students drop out of school: a review of 25 years of research. Santa Barbara: California Dropout Research Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sawyer, R. (2006). Introduction: the new science of learning. In R. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of: the learning sciences (pp. 1–16). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schacter, J., & Thum, Y. M. (2004). Paying for high- and low-quality teaching. Economics of Education Review, 23, 411–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shernoff, D. J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2009). Flow in schools: cultivating engaged learners and optimal learning environments. In R. Gilman, E. Huebner, & M. J. Furlong (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology in schools (pp. 131–145). New York: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those who understand: a conception of teacher knowledge. American Educator, 10(1), 9–15. 43-44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K. S., & Geller, C. (2004). Essential principles of effective mathematics instruction: methods to reach all students. Preventing School Failure, 48(4), 22–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snow, C. E., Lawrence, J. F., & White, C. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 325–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sofo, R. (2008). Beyond NCLB and AYP: one superintendent’s experience of school district reform. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soter, A. O., Wilkinson, I. A., Murphy, P., Rudge, L., Reninger, K., & Edwards, M. (2008). What the discourse tells us: talk and indicators of high-level comprehension. International Journal of Educational Research, 47(6), 372–391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stake, R. (2004). Stake and responsive evaluation. In M. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation roots: tracing theorists’ views and influences. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (2003). What is an “expert student”? Educational Researcher, 32(8), 5–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tishman, S., Perkins, D. N., & Jay, E. (1995). The thinking classroom: learning and teaching in a culture of thinking. United States of America: Allyn & Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, K. M., & Boelter, C. M. (2008). Linking Black middle school students’ perceptions of teachers’ expectations to academic engagement and efficacy. Negro Educational Review, 59(1/2), 27–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the Development of Children, 23(3), 34–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. L. (2005). Web alignment tool. Madison: Wisconsin Center of Educational Research, University of Wisconsin. http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/WAT/index.aspx.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webb, N. L. (2007). Issues related to judging the alignment of curriculum standards and assessments. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 7–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wentzel, K. R. (1997). Student motivation in middle school: the role of perceived pedagogical caring. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89(3), 411–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westgate, D., & Hughes, M. (1997). Identifying “quality” in classroom talk: an enduring research task. Language and Education, 11(2), 125–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in this study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. San Diego Unified School District, San Diego, CA, USA

    Kathleen L. Gallagher

  2. Quadrant Four Teaching and Learning (Q4TL), San Diego, CA, USA

    Anthony Odozi

Authors
  1. Kathleen L. Gallagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anthony Odozi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kathleen L. Gallagher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gallagher, K.L., Odozi, A. Protocol for the Assessment of Common Core Teaching: the Impact of Instructional Inclusion on Students with Special Needs. Contemp School Psychol 19, 77–88 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-015-0053-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-015-0053-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation