Click on Shop Hoagies' Page before you visit your favorite on-line stores including Amazon and many more of your favorite stores.  Thanks for making Hoagies' Gifted community possible!

Donations
Your donations help keep Hoagies' Gifted Education Page on-line.

Support Hoagies' Page!

Journal articles (for example, EJ999999) are available for a fee from the originating journal (check your local college or public library), through interlibrary loan services, or from article reproduction services such as: Infotrieve: 800.422.4633, www4.infotrieve.com, service@infotrieve.com; or ingenta: 800.296.2221, www.ingenta.com, ushelp@ingenta.com.

Billingsley, Bonnie S. & others. (1993). Supporting experienced and beginning teachers of students with disabilities. In: Program Leadership for Serving Students with Disabilities. VA Dept. Of Education.
Administrative support is critical to the professional success and self-esteem of special education teachers. This chapter provides practical strategies for administrators to use to support special education teachers. J.S. House's framework is used for considering the different types of administrative support, which include emotional support, appraisal support, instrumental support, and informational support. Special support needs of beginning special education teachers are identified, and strategies for supporting them are noted.

Black, D.D. & Downs, J.C. (1993). Administrative intervention: A discipline handbook for effective school administrators. Sopris West Patrick Hyde, 1140 Boston Ave., Longmont, CO 80501.
This guide is designed to provide the basis for a teaching/learning process by which principals provide students with the social skills necessary to achieve success in life. It outlines an administrative intervention program to deal with discipline problems which focuses on de-escalating disruptive behavior, obtaining and maintaining instructional control, teaching alternative behaviors, and preparing students for classroom re-entry.

Burrello, L.C. & others. (1992). The principal as the special education instructional leader. CASE Research Committee, Indiana Univ., School of Educ., Smith Research Center-100A, 2805 East 10th St., Bloomington, IN 47405.
This paper focuses on the instructional leadership role behavior of school principals in relation to the management of special education programs. A framework is presented of the principal's role in 7 broad areas of instructional management: community, beliefs and experience, institutional context, principal's routine behaviors, instructional climate, instructional organization, and student outcomes. Results of case studies of 5 principals are examined.

Goor, M.B., Schwenn, J.O., & Boyer, L. (1997). Preparing principals for leadership in special education; Intervention in School and Clinic, 32(3), 133-141.
This article describes a comprehensive training model involving essential beliefs, knowledge, skills, and reflective behavior for school principals to make them more effective as leaders of special education programs. Also included is a format for principal preparation programs which includes 9 critical attributes for effective inservice training.

Littrell, P.C. & others. (1994). The effects of principal support on special and general educators' stress, job satisfaction, school commitment, health, and intent to stay in teaching. Remedial and Special Education, 15(5), 297-310.
A survey of 385 special and 313 general education teachers found that groups had similar perceptions of principal support. Work-related variables were better predictors of extent of perceived support than were demographic variables. Specific types of support were significant predictors of job satisfaction, school commitment, and personal health.

O'Connor, K. (1996). The best leaders. Division on Visual Handicaps Quarterly, 41(3), 12-13.
This article profiles the successful characteristics of a dozen different leaders. It highlights characteristics of effective leaders such as gaining respect, demonstrating kindness, possessing listening abilities, making eye contact, planning, and having the ability to take action.

Sires, C. & Tonnsen, S. (1993). Special education: A challenge for principals. NASSP Bulletin, 77(550), 8-11.
Special education teachers often feel frustrated because of paperwork overload, unrealistic expectations for pupil progress, perceived lack of success as teachers, ongoing contact with difficult students, and isolation from colleagues. Principals can help these teachers by streamlining paperwork, placing special education classes in the school building, and providing opportunities to mix with regular and other special education teachers.

INCLUSION/LRE:

Katsiyannis, A. & others. (1996). Students with disabilities: Inclusionary programming and the school principal. NASSP Bulletin, 80(578), 81-86.
Principals are pivotal in expanding opportunities for more inclusive programming while ensuring that students with disabilities receive carefully planned, individualized services. By allocating the necessary resources, providing inservice training, scheduling time fro collaborative planning and preparation, and designing systematic program evaluation, principals can secure educational and social benefits for all learners.

Morgan, C.R. & Demchak, M. (1996). Addressing administrative needs for successful inclusion of students with disabilities. In: Rural Goals 2000: Building Programs that Work.
As inclusion increasingly becomes the accepted model for meeting the needs of students with disabilities, administrator involvement becomes critical because the attitudes of school personnel and students toward inclusion frequently mirror those of the administrator. In rural areas, the building administrator is often isolated from other school district administrators and must make decisions based on available information. This paper provides guidelines to assist in accessing the information that principals need to support successful changes toward inclusion.

Liggett, A.M. & others (1996). Rethinking implementation of the least restrictive environment policy of the IDEA: Educational leaders in the forefront. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 7(1), 55-75.
This qualitative policy study examined the implementation of the Least Restrictive Environment provision of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) at the state and local levels. Interviews were conducted with 16- 24 individuals at each of 12 sites selected for their effectiveness in inclusion. The study concluded that, where significant change was occurring, it was primarily educational leaders/administrators who were making it happen.

REFORM:

Sage, D.D. & Burrello, L. C. (1994). Leadership in Educational Reform: An Administrator's Guide to Changes in Special Education. Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., PO Box 10624, Baltimore, MD 21285-0624.
This book is a response to the need to integrate the restructuring of educational institutions and the development of a unified educational system that includes students with special needs. It begins with a discussion of paradigms for restructuring, then proceeds to an extended discussion of several issues concerning the field of special education, including its scope and its various sources of organizational and fiscal support. The proper use of outcome-based education with students with disabilities is then examined, followed by discussions of the respective leadership roles of principals. Finally, issues of program evaluation are discussed.

TRANSITION:

O'Neill, J. & others. (1990). Supplement for Administrators and Supervisors. A Curricular Approach to Support the Transition to Adulthood of Adolescents with Visual or Dual Sensory Impairments and Cognitive Disabilities. Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Washington, DC. New York State Education Dept., Albany, Office for the Educ. of Children with Handicapping Conditions.
This handbook for administrators is part of a packet intended to facilitate the transition from school to adult life in the community for students with both cognitive disabilities and visual or dual sensory impairments. Emphasis is on preparation of students for adult lifestyles through transition planning and community-based instruction, including vocational experiences. An introduction notes the administrator role in assuming leadership at both the systems level and building level.

GIFTED:

Clasen, D.R. (1992). Changing peer stereotypes of high-achieving adolescents. NASSP Bulletin, 76(543), 95-102.
This study found that high-achieving African Americans ran the risk of both physical and verbal abuse from peers. With help from staff, principals can remove or weaken the excellence-alienation link by raising community awareness, providing opportunities for new knowledge and skills, and offering support and resources for change. Principals must also enlist family support to lessen impact of peer pressure.

Norton, M.S. & Zeilinger, E.R. (1983). A principal's handbook of programs for gifted students. NASSP Bulletin, 67(459), 102-106.
Principals supporting effective programming for gifted students should exhibit competencies listed in this article when exercising planning and leadership, developing philosophy determining goals and objectives, understanding gifted students' characteristics, identifying gifted students, financing and staffing the program, providing guidance and counseling, using community resources, communicating, and evaluating the program.

Wolfe, D.M. & others. (1992). A new vision for administrators: A facilitative paradigm for site-based management. STRATE Journal, 1(1), 51-54.
This paper examines factors which enhance teacher empowerment, noting that site-based management is often discussed concurrently with empowerment; describes successes with teacher empowerment via interdisciplinary teams of students and faculty at the Virginia Governor's School for the Gifted.

PRINCIPAL PREPARATION AND IN-SERVICE:

Cardinal, D.N. (1991). How to stay current with special education issues. NASSP Bulletin, 75(535), 71-77.
Strategies for mainstreaming students with disabilities include consultation, community-based instruction, and vocational transition. Administrators can keep current by getting involved with local colleges and universities with special education training programs, subscribing to journals, contacting state special education directors, forming advisory groups, attending conferences, reading subject-specific materials, and using available services.

Monteith, D.S. (1994). Special education training: A must for today's school leaders. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Conference of Professors of Educational Administration (48th, Indian Wells, CA, August 9-13). ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS), ED377549.
Implementing the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) and/or full inclusion philosophy creates new needs and places new demands on public school personnel. This paper presents a review of research studies that examined the extent to which administrators had knowledge of special education and the laws pertaining to it. A survey found that administrators lacked knowledge of the law and that endorsement did not require a knowledge of special education. The paper presents a suggested course of study and special education competencies to bridge the gap between theory and practice.

Sirotnik, K.A. & Kimball, K. (1994). The unspecial place of special education in programs that prepare school administrators. Journal of School Leadership, 4(6), 598-630.
A review of the literature, data from a national study involving faculty in 23 administrator preparation programs and 457 educational administration students, and interviews with 6 principals indicate that special education is treated inadequately if at all, in programs designed to prepare school administrators.

LEGAL ASPECTS/504/ADA

Katsiyannis, A. (1994). Individuals with disabilities: The school principal and section 504, NASSP Bulletin, 78(565), 6-10.
Given principals' responsibility to ensure that all their students are appropriately educate, they are obligated to provide adequate leadership for developing the knowledge base and competence to secure Section 504 compliance and avoid unnecessary penalties. Section 504 applies to all students with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder who do not qualify under IDEA to receive necessary services.

McKinney, J.R. (1992). Post-facilities and program accessibility: Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Educational Facility Planner, 30(3). 23-26.
Both Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) are intended to promote the removal of the physical barriers that deny individuals with disabilities access to educational programs and activities. This paper addresses the relationship between the ADA and Section 504 along with the responsibilities of educational administrators.

MISCELLANEOUS

Brownlow, R. (1993). LMSS: Illusion or control? British Journal of Special Education, 20(3), 89-90.
Local management of special schools (LMSS) in England is designed to increase school autonomy concerning staffing and resource allocation. However, special schools are constrained by the National Curriculum requirements, children's statements of special educational needs, compliance with governmental models for staffing levels, and the high proportion of salary costs in special school budgets.

Burrello, L.C. & others. (1991). Principal's Training Simulator in Special Education: Instructor's Packet. CASE Research Committee, Indiana University, School of Education, Smith Research Center-100A, 2805 E. 10th St., Bloomington, IN 47405.
This packet on collaborative leadership development in special education is designed to provide an orientation to typical situations facing local school district administrators, consideration of major issues in programming for exceptional children, practice in actual problem-solving activities, and a chance for both instructor and student to test and analyze the student's decision-making behavior.

Scott, L. (1993). Confused and ill equipped? British Journal of Special Education, 20(4), 120-122.
A survey of 50 local education authorities in England and Wales found that support and training available to governing bodies of mainstream schools in the area of special education needs are minimal or nonexistent, that governing bodies and governors are confused about their role in this area, and that school policy making was left to teaching staff.

Top of Page   Back to ERIC Menu   Back to Hoagies' Gifted Education Page

---

copyright © 1998
ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education