. - . ' 4 . -. 4n , _. . 3r“ r ‘ ‘ M} I'M-1.444;- '[ ) {Pan}: 1 ‘I I" r III. . \Hv‘N-Iluc' " M.‘ ""e4vf‘x-4...‘ :42 ”FEW“ Q1“ fa :..‘ 41W (:94. :4 16,2. "‘I‘”, J'4'I" "JPM ‘g‘K ‘3’?“‘4. I'm/‘45, o‘ét? I’I r' I IIIOIIIIIflI,:I,I'.I04 M “II III r439 1‘44». I314; ”Uh-I “Va: IAivI‘III 9* {:1 0% 'F‘4 I-II 44 4. I444" :4‘.‘ 4, '1- I" ‘4'- £417.13“ :4 "4‘41 443- 344-41441. I'JI""$4‘4..4 [44.45424 4" : \§';. 4 .23: VI. £144 .44 , I '.I 24‘ IrIIImRII. 4:1)..IsI .t. i} fis’ 'j.‘\’:4 k’t'h“: :I'II‘W“ 'szIuI‘k ‘. . .‘ “4‘43... 1'74. (415433} '4‘4“%4., 154.4“: 5444“ . 4441 IIIIIIII;:!;$5'{ 1143411,, \ § «fl 4. M4”Il ' 4443:4444 19%; :5714‘1t4fi?«5{ ":19‘ HI . ' 411:4. L ' @524” 4;» 44.4.4453; 4. 4 4 .4 J “1,4 vt’m r .gé 5%,? I~.4.{3,,4.3¢.§£5 I .I_( v :’ :hc' \ 754A 444 "5‘3.“ .II.’I“:.‘:': \ . MFU I I a? LIL) III 41": II“; j. 4,45: o I“?! fi '4 .95 _o o #332: : £9 a , ‘w— 1" -4L£1e‘ - .UF» N‘a' f 41:. DIE“: ".4 )(.I )3}! .4 F4 W3." . f‘- _. . 4. r. . ’. .Ifi’fiu m . N "9"? NH»!!! 4".- t. L::4"Q g-fl,;. ~4‘ 4} 94:53.? 4:37:44 4‘4‘~v£;:;=.:fi.1.. ".4 434' ., . L If: " ' ‘ 4 . 4'; .-. “TIP, A. 'fi [“ 4' 333;; I‘ h-II w 4 , . I '4‘; 4' I. 444‘} ." 17'“:qu 42.34“ i'" 4 l- 4 v . . 4. . .c‘ ' , i U ' "if: I “”44 4‘7"} 4' ..:'-'¢I"~“L V. "'J‘Hfixv‘ ‘r' W . :IjII 4' 7 a .. '.'.I‘“‘.‘~1;'5}\~.~v."¢:s 4 '. 4 . r” - 4; .141; . . ”.34, :33 11:44 Ivfiy 4‘». $424.1“? 1 £13343?“ (Live) .gIg-QRML'X 4*"? 4' . 4 “IL”; 4;"!sz 4'4I’fiI'41‘C-Yé‘ cl‘ ‘ ”’4' N535’II1 ac:\~ "L a; Ll'v I144 ..4I'4I' ..‘I._L~JI3-LL ‘ 'I‘ 41‘4“*“1'-r -r "- ‘4 "“ '-‘ ' ' ‘j ' , .4... W24 4 ~L- $4 4444.44 4444*: 4 «'4‘434 .4] I‘I 4 4 . .44 (W‘IpfiaIN‘ '.’.’., 1‘ a? , 45x7:- ‘. ” 4 r.— V >1 A 4.4“” 4 . V" 4 . . , ... ', - lb I. 4‘; 4. .I(-_.‘r ‘4 4 2““ 4 1. . F . I. . §‘ I_nI 44' 4 g ("I ‘1 ~v‘ ’ .-:;4 453'}??? " ‘ ‘ 4- "~44. 44,- ‘l 352' .1” I 4:. (-4,; 334144 ‘. .4' I ,' .‘Z'.4"TV.I" .4.’ HIP .1” " ; .444 4. 442- 4 -'4 ‘4 434-44.“. I 4"- 4| 4! {Iv . t' 4. :4' 4.4.3:; 4 4 I 4 -_cI 1 4 4 4 34 l ..: ',4 4,; 4'4 4 ‘4‘ ”424‘ H 4 4" L 'L-‘ 4 ‘ Ed ‘ 44 I .4 4 I 4 4,4,4. . 4H: “I .. II’, . .44. "4' t i ‘ I '4 ' II I“; 544 44‘ .v I- ‘4 4 4. ‘4‘ ‘ I 444‘ I I II III I I ' ‘4 . 4 1 :4 4" :4 '1 44 “.4 I“ ‘ J... III ‘4‘ . 4 ‘ ’1‘.‘ .' 4 4 4 C' ‘l i 1.” QU‘I' "'3‘ 4 ”4' ‘ ‘.’I flan :"".‘ ..« .44 444‘44‘4 \ ' 1, I24 "4 4 I U > .4 .4 .P ‘1 , '4 4. ‘3 II 44441 I I): ‘I 1 I I I . J- : 4 ' 444‘“ {'1‘.l‘;r.'.l II'IIJ #4, Pfl!’ 'I This is to certify that the thesis entitled MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD INTERACTION WITH SPECIFIC HANDICAPPED STUDENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 94-142 presented by Beth Marie Nelson has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for MASTER degree in MUSIC wort/€54“ Mfimummuuu Date June 16, 1980 0-7639 fi— 4“...— ~ 3? . 3 -‘ - lily. _ xqw‘fififlfll'7,, ‘ mum-v mt: ummmY , .p -~-—‘ A M ,--—7 "247$;- FE?2243 120,15 OVERDUE FINES: 25¢ per day per item RETURNING LIBRARY MATERIALS: Place in book return to remove charge from circulation records MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD INTERACTION WITH SPECIFIC HANDICAPPED STUDENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 94-142 By Beth Marie Nelson A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF MUSIC Department of Music 1980 ABSTRACT MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD INTERACTION WITH SPECIFIC HANDICAPPED STUDENTS IN COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC LAW 94-142 By Beth Marie Nelson Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate music educators' attitudes regarding their work with handicapped students. Procedure A sample population of music educators viewed videotaped recordings of handicapped children participating individually in musical activities. Responses were recorded regarding extent of reaction with the following: 1. Interaction with handicapped individuals. 2. Willingness to work professionally with handicapped individuals. 3. Training to work professionally with handicapped individuals. 4. Willingness to actively pursue in-service training and professional development with handicapped individuals. Conclusions After viewing the videotapes, educators expressed low comfort levels toward interacting with handicapped students except those described as educable mentally retarded. They indicated little willingness to work professionally with handi— capped students except the educable mentally retarded. They indicated strongly that their training had not prepared them to work professionally with handicapped students; and they expressed little willingness to pursue professional development to work with handicapped students, except with learning disabled and educable mentally retarded. The writer wishes to dedicate this thesis to her loving family, from whom she received the love of music, the necessity of hard work, and the joy of giving to people in need. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge the members of her master's committee, Dr. Robert Erbes, chairman, Dr. Melanie Stuart, Professor Robert Unkefer, Dr. David Liptak, and Dr. Paul Osterhout who gave of their time and energy to further her pursuit of educational growth. A special thank- you to Dr. Stuart for her continual encouragement and insight throughout the entire project is noted. The writer also acknowledges Lee County Special Educa- tion, Eldena, Illinois; Clint Conway, Director; Jim Ferolo, Assistant Director; and the schools of St. Vincent and St. Francis, Freeport, Illinois; Mary Ellen Wylie, RMT. The writer gratefully acknowledges Regional Education Media Instructional Services, REMIS, Lee County, Dixon, Illinois; and thanks Mary Ann Ferolo, RMT, Lee County Special Education, for the support and inspiration of professional growth. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF APPENDICES Chapter I. THE PROBLEM . Introduction Need for the Study Definition of Terms II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE. Summary III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY . Procedures Data Analysis Procedures Summary IV. PRESENTATION OF DATA. Review of Procedure Discussion of Data Summary V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary Conclusions Discussion Recommendations for Further Research APPENDICES BIBLIOGRAPHY . iv Page vii 23 31 54 59 77 Table 3.1 4.1 4.2c 4.3 LIST OF TABLES Categorization of Final Videotaped Examples of Handicapped Students Music Educators' Mean Scores of Reaction to Videotaped Handicapped Students and Statement I. . . . . . . Statement I and the Learning Disabled Student: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating. . . . Statement I and the Physically Impaired Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating. Statement I and the Autistic Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . . . Music Educators' Mean Scores of Reaction to Videotaped Handicapped Students and Statement I. . . . . . . . . Statement II and the Learning Disabled Student: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating. . . . . . Statement II and the Trainable Mentally Retarded Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . Statement II and the Emotionally Impaired Student: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating. . . . . . Statement II and the Autistic Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . . . . . . . . . . Music Educators' Mean Scores of Reaction to Videotaped Handicapped Students and Statement III. . . . . . . Page 27 33 34 35 36 38 39 4O 41 42 43 Table Page 4.3a Statement III and the Trainable Mentally Retarded Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . . . . . . . . 44 4.4 Music Educators' Mean Scores of Reaction to Videotaped Handicapped Students and Statement IV . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.4a Statement IV and the Educable Mentally Retarded Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . . . . . . . . 47 4.4b Statement IV and the Autistic Students: Graph of Music Educators' Attitude Rating . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 4.5 Learning Disabled Student and Music Educators' Attitudes to the Four Statements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4.6 Physically Handicapped Students and Scores from the Music Educators on the Four Statements. . . . . . . . . . . . 50 vi Appendix A. LIST OF APPENDICES Notated Rhythms and Song Used with Handicapped Students During Video— taping Procedures . . . . Musical Interaction Scale--Judges' Instructions and Thurstone Scale. Selected Videotape Samples of Handicapped Individuals Instructions and Likert Scale for Music Educator Test Sample. Graphs of Handicap Categories and Educators' Ratings of Attitude with Four Statements. . vii Page 59 6O 63 64 66 CHAPTER ONE THE PROBLEM Introduction The Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public Law 94- 142)1 legislates full service provisions, individual educa- tion program requirements and least restrictive environments for all children in public education in the United States. PL 94-142 requires identifying the handicapped children in our society and involving these children in the "mainstream" of education and regular classroom activities. Effective schooling for the handicapped requires: (1) maximum teacher involvement; (2) a learning environment that helps the handi- capped and the regular student; (3) planning and implementa- tion of programs; (4) adequate in-service education of staff; (5) class-size modifications; and (6) adequate funding pro- visions.2 Maximum teacher involvement requires the full acceptance of handicapped students within the regular class- room as well as effective teaching techniques. Legislation of such broad scope will of necessity lU.S. President, Proclamation, "The Federal Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Public Law 94-142," Federal Register 33 no. 98, 18 January 1975, 394—425. 2National Education Association, "NBA Demands Better Education for Handicapped Children," National Education Reporter 18 (April 1979): 13. generate change in classroom structure, teaching behavior and curriculum for the music educator. Three frequent questions arise: (1) Are educators, (in particular music educators), willing to work with handicapped individuals?; (2) Do music educators believe that they are trained and capable of interacting with the handicapped student in a musical situation?; and (3) Will music teachers pursue professional development to improve their ability to work with handicapped students? Need for Study "Teachers want to know practical ways to teach I handicapped students,‘ says Georgia Gibson, director of the New Jersey chapter of the National Education Associa- tion.3 Since the passage of PL 94-142, many educators have expressed questions and reservations about a law that promises full and equal education for the handicapped child. Ingrid Benke, chairperson for the Mainstreaming Committee of the Durand, Michigan school district states, "Mbst of the handicapped children placed in classes are emotionally or learning disabled." She adds, "Teachers haven't received any training; they feel they're not qualified."4 Mainstreaming is an important part of the effort to 3 4 NBA, "Better Education for Handicapped Children," p. 13. NEA, "Better Education for Handicapped Children," p. 14. integrate handicapped people more fully into the whole of society by beginning the process directly from an early age. This is true in terms of helping the handicapped people learn to function within society as well as helping other people learn to understand and help them. One of the most consistent areas addressed in the literature and various in—service programs is that of teacher attitude toward integrating the handicapped student into the regular classroom setting. Susan Wallach issued a statement before the New York State Senate Select Committee on Mental and Physical Handicapped in 1974 before PL 94-142 became effective in 1975. Before our children can enter the mainstream we try to prepare them in every way possible. But, we must also prepare the mainstream it- self, lest our handicapped children be mis- treated and come to harm 1n 1t. Joan Dirkson6 pointed out that the complex human and legal issues surrounding mainstreaming have created confusion and disagreement among teachers. The confusion surrounds the issues of teacher biases and the ability of untrained teachers to work properly with handicapped children. Educators' attitudes are important because, in terms 5Susan Wallach, Statement read before the New York State Senate Select Committee on Mental and Physical Handi- capped, 21 November, 1974 cited by Shirley Cohen, "Improving Attitudes toward the Handicapped," Educational Forum 42(Novem- ber 1977): 10. 6Joan Dirkson, "Teachers Prepare for Regular Class Placement of Handicapped Students," paper presented at annual meeting of American Educational Research Association, Washing- ton D.C. 1 July 1978. of the focus of this study, their attitudes influence their perceptions of their own ability to work with handicapped children; their attitudes and perceptions actually do influence their ability to work effectively with handicapped students and their attitudes influence their willingness to pursue further professional training to better work with handicapped students. It is therefore necessary to attempt some assessment of these attitudes in order to determine how educators perceive their weaknesses. Also, it is necessary for educators to indicate their needs in overcoming these weaknesses so that handicapped students might receive the full benefits of a quality education. The need for this study is to assist in determining the attitudes of music educators toward working within the integrated classroom for the handicapped. The results of this study can increase the awareness of those involved with educational settings that require music educators to work with the handicapped student. Furthermore, it should identify the needs of music educators who seek the services of the professionally trained music therapist. The purpose of this research is to develop a technique to measure music educators' attitudes toward working with handicapped students. The purpose will be accomplished by determining: l. the attitudes of music educators towards inter- action with the handicapped student; 2. the attitudes of music educators in perceiving their own capability in working with the handicapped student; 3. the willingness of music educators to change their teaching methods through additional professional training in order to work with the handicapped student. The population participating in this study was a sample limited to experienced professional music educators enrolled in graduate music education courses at Michigan State Univer- sity. Results represent regiOnal responses only and do not apply necessarily to other regions. Definition of Terms follows: For the purpose of this study, terms are defined as 7 vision impairment - reduction in the ability to perceive objects and/or light or mobility to focus; partially sighted or blind. hearing impariment - reduction in the ability to perceive sound; reduced auditory sensitivity. learning disabled — inability to organize and acquire knowledge or skill through traditional methods. mentally retarded - subaverage general intellec- tual function which originates during the developmental period and is associated with impairment in adaptive behavior. 1. educable mentally retarded - mildly retarded 2. trainable mentally retarded — severely retarded l3ll. 7Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 23rd ed. pp. 143- emotional impairment - abnormal drives or unrest evidenced in both behavior and psychological change. physical impairment - abnormal body functioning caused by genetic malformation or by injury or accident. confining apparatus - equipment or collection of instruments adapted for a special purpose with boundaries or limitations, for example, a wheel- chair. autistic - a tendency toward morbid self-absroption at the expense of regulation by outward reality. CHAPTER TWO REVIEW OF LITERATURE The following review of literature will encompass an overview of the development of laws mandating the integra- tion of handicapped students into regular classroom, repre- sentative efforts at mainstreaming, the development of in- service programs and other types of training efforts for educators, and the development of attitude assessment techniques used in conjunction with mainstreaming efforts. The purpose of such a review is to show the widely recognized need for assessing and actively dealing with teacher attitudes and needs in order to develop a successful mainstreaming effort. Also, this review will discuss efforts at attitude assessment and teacher training within the field of music education. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 initiated a changing trend in public education in America. The provisions of this act, PL 93-112, Section 504, do not exclude handicapped children from any services or programs offered to non-handi— capped children. No otherwise qualified handicapped individual shall, solely, by reason of his/her handicap, be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial a331stance. Few schools had started mainstreaming previous to the 1973 Act. The Bureau of Education for the Handicapped sponsored consulting teacher programs for regular classroom teachers who provided services for handicapped students in Burlington, Vermont. The in-service programs based on behavior modification training, programming, consulting, and research skills are discussed in the annual reports for 1969,2 1970,3 4 and 1971. In addition, special education services for the seventy-nine handicapped students in regular elementary classrooms are reviewed. Teachers developed methods to measure the educational and social deficits of these handicapped children on a daily basis. The deficits, as identified by teachers and parents, were ameliorated through applications of behavior modification. Marilyn 1U.S., President, Proclamation, "Regulation for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973," Federal Register 42, no. 86, 4 May 1977, 3109-11. 2Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, 1968-1969 Yearly Report of the Consulting Teacher Program: Volume I (Washington D.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped [1969]), pp. 33-45. 3Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, 1969-1970 Yearly Report: Consulting Team Program (WashingtonD.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, [1970]), pp. 18-28. 4Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, 1970-1971 Yearly Report: Consulting Teacher Program: Burlington School District (Hashington D.C.: Bureau ofIEducation for the Handicapped, [1971]). PP. 15-32. Cleveland5 and Ann Egner6 report on similar in-service programs at Essex Junction, Vermont, in which consultants assisted regular and special classroom teachers in individualizing instruction of handicapped elementary students. Program objectives were identified as the retrainingof regular classroom teachers in special educational services and the establishment of referral, parental involvement, and follow- up systems. A study at the Child Study Center, Steamboat Springs, Colorado, also reported the following assumptions to eliminate the need for segregated classes of handicapped children. . . if the regular classroom teacher is (1) supported by a staff of specially trained resource personnel and (2) offered in- service training to aid in recognizing and meeting the special needs of the physiologically and psychologically handicapped student, the needs of these children can be met more efficiently and more effectively within the context of the regular classroom. Acting on studies similar to these, certain universities and colleges began to provide instructional service programs to assist educators with the integration of children with 5Marilyn Cleveland, The 1969-1970 Report of the Consulting Teacher Program in the Chittenden Central School DistrictITWashington D. C. Bureau of Education for the Hand1capped, [1970]), pp. 22-8. 6Ann Egner, EPDA 1970-71 Yearly Report: Chittenden School District (Washington D.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, [1971]). PP..20447. 7 Child Study Center, Report on Learning Analysis: A PACE Project (Steamboat Springs, ColoradE? Routt County SChool Districts, [1969]), p. 22. 10 special needs into regular classroom environments. Examples of such programs include those at California State University, Boston University, Pennsylvania State University, and Utah State University.8 In addition, in- service teacher training programs included college curriculum supplements9 or textbooks to accompany in-service training as at the Oregon College of Education.10 Further studies included research of the potential positive effects of mainstreamed classrooms. These studies 11 12 indicated the by Samuel Meisels and Anthony Tutalo importance of parental and family participation in building successful training programs for educators. The potential for such participation was demonstrated throughout this 8Molly Gorelick, Report on Developmental Teacher Competency Checklist (Northridge, Ca.: California State University, [19741); Boston University: New England Special Education Instructional Materials Center. "Descriptions of Innovative Training Programs" paper presented at Conference on Educational Programs for Exceptional Children, Plymouth, Mass., 3 October 1972; Marjorie Ward and Ralph Peabody, Education of Visually Handicapped Children (University Park, Pa.: PennsyIVania State University, 1972); Jean Pugmire and Kenneth Farrar, Director's Annual Progress Report (Logan, Utah: Utah State University [1971]). 9Ruben Gentry, The Mini Course: A Delivery Approach for Training Inservice Personnel in the Education of the Handicapped (Dallas: Council for Exceptional Children, 1977). 10Ken Kosko, TeachingyChildren Who Learn Differently (Monmouth, Ore.: Oregon College of Education, 1978). 11Samuel Meisels, Project LINC: Learning in Integrated Classrooms: Final Report (Medford, Ma.: Tufts University, [1978]). PP. 248-319. 12 Anthony Tutalo, "Staff Development Program: Maxi I Practicum" (Ph.D. dissertation, Nova University, 1975), p. 68. 11 time by parent advocate groups for handicapped students, special interest groups, and various educational personnel who supported and lobbied with increasing intensity for the handicapped individuals' rights to full service provisions. In January 1978, the Handicapped Children Act of 1975, PL 94-142 became law. The enactment of this law enabled regular classroom teachers to draw upon in-service training packages, courses, modules, and other types of materials in order to adapt their activities more effectively to the needs of handicapped children. Many materials and resources have evolved from vocational and occupation in-service programs designed to meet the needs of handicapped employees. Some of those programs were in effect for over ten years before the enactment of PL 94-142. A comprehensive program from.the American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences contains seven modules "developed to improve the knowledge and skills of vocational educators who are involved in the instruction of handicapped students in regular vocational "13 These modules are the classes and technical schools. basis for much of the current research being conducted to develop training programs for regular classroom educators. 13Robert Weisberger, Mainstreaming the Handicapped in Vocational Education (Palo Alto: American Institutes for Research in the Behavioral Sciences, [1977]), p. 49. 12 Also responding to PL 94-142, the National Education Association has utilized multimedia training packages, or modules, in ten programs. The modules contain information on the "mainstreaming" law for teachers, administrators, and parents, and demonstrate techniques that may be used in specific categories of handicapped students.14 Some educators and researchers, in their in-service training programs, have developed mainstreaming procedures in specialized areas. Early child development personnel and special educators are developing programs and outreach training sessions for handicapped children of preschool age.15 Educators in this field indicate that early identifi- cation of handicapped children can facilitate mainstreaming processes and thereby benefit the educational needs of these children. In another study the learning theories of Jean Piaget were applied to the retraining of regular teachers working with the handicapped. This three-year project in Texas' Special Education Region was called "Changing Curriculum for Exceptional Children." The goal within this project was to train educators in the cognitive developmental 14National Education Association, Project on Utiliza- tion of Inservice Education (Washington D.C.: National Institute of Education, [1977] ). 15 Celeste Meyers, Live Oak Curriculum: Preschool Planning in the Heterogeneous Classroom (Redmont, Ca: Alpha Plus Corporation, [1977]). l3 theory of Piaget's clinical model.16 In maximizing time efficiency, Keith Brownsmithl7 initiated a training package to stimulate further mainstreaming procedures and activities in a "three-hour only" workshop format. Though teachers favored this format of in-service training because of its short duration, the long-range teacher effectiveness in dealing with handicapped students in the classrooms has not been determined. The University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee developed a series of videotaped training modules for pre- service educators or those within school in-service programs. The program expanded to include videotaped modules for administrators, school board parents, and the community, in hopes of making all those involved aware of the educa- tional needs of handicapped individuals.18 Music education has long been involved with elementary and secondary school curricula. The law that incorporates music education within a regular school curriculum came with the congressionally-mandated arts education program for states and local educational agencies in the form of the Educational Amendment, PL 93-380. Section 409 of that law 16Richard Smith, Meeting Inservice Teacher Education Needs Pro'ect CCEC (Austin Texas: Council for Exceptional Children, [I976I). 17Keith Brownsmith, Description and Evaluation of the Mainstreaming Modules: Final Report (Bloomington: [Indiana University, 11976]). 18Susan Gruber, I'm Alot Like You (Milwaukee: Univer- sity of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, 1978). 14 states, An arts education program means a program in which the arts are an integrated part . 19 of elementary and secondary school curricula. An important question at this point is if an arts education program is needed in a handicapped child's education. From the legal standpoint a statement from a portion of Senate report number 94-168 on the Handicapped Children Act, PL 94-142, under "related services," Section 121 at 13 indicates: The list of related services is not exhaus- tive and may include other developmental, corrective, and supportive services (such as artistic and cultural programs, and art, music, and dance therapy), if they are required to assist a handicapped child to benefit from special education. Under Section 121 a. 304, -- the full educational oppor- tunity goal -- further clarification is provided. Each state educational agency should in- sure that each public agency establishes and implements a goal of providing a full educational opportunity to all handicapped childrea in the area served by the public agency. 1 In addition, Senate Report 94—168 states, The use of the arts as a teaching tool for the handicapped has long been 19Educational Amendments of 1974, Statutes at Large 88, sec. 404, 93-380 (1974). 20U.S. President, Proclamation, Implementation of Part B of Education of the Handicapped Act, Federal Register 42, no. 163, 23 August 1977, 6801-2. 21U.S. President, Proclamation, Implementation of Part B of Education of the Handicapped Act, Federal Register 42, no. 163, 23 August 1977, 6801-2. 15 recognized as a viable, effective way not only of teaching special skills, but also of reaching youngsters who had otherwise been unteachable. Such a program could cover both appreciation of the arts by the handicapped youngsters and the utilizaEion of the arts as a teaching tool per se. From a practical standpoint, aesthetic musical experiences can assist in mainstreaming children within regular class groups. Music education and music therapy can help the handicapped child overcome new classroom situations that require multiple levels of conceptual thinking and sensory awareness in aesthetic endeavors as well as adjust to the atmosphere of a normal classroom experience. At the Lapham School in Madison, Wisconsin, initial integration of handicapped children began in music classes where non-handicapped primary and intermediate students served as aides in the music classes for the handicapped under the MAZE project. Madison's Alternative for Zero Exclusion of handicapped students was instituted at Lapham to . guarantee children, many of them formerly institutionalized, the right to develop their highest potential in public education. This music classroom involvement of normal children with several classes of orthopedic children became an impetus for 22Educational Amendments of 1974, Statutes at Large, 88, sec. 404, 93-380 (1974). 23Ruth Anne Dykman, "In Step with 94-142, Two by Two," Music Educators Journal 65, no. 5, (January 1979), p. 58. 16 a total school program. Teachers of art and physical education adopted the plan and offered children from the regular program experiences in assisting handicapped students. In 1978, seventy-seven of the one hundred and twenty-five children in intermediate grades volunteered to aid the handicapped students within special education music classes.24 Schools like Lapham offer tremendous hope for the possibilities of such efforts but many music educators need assistance for their roles in implementing PL 94-142 music programs. Traditionally, special education teachers have taught many of the handicapped children living in our society. These educators usually taught at special locations designed specifically for handicapped individuals. Many of these educational settings, institutions and programs offered quality education and vocational opportunities for handicapped individuals. However, all handicapped children did not receive quality instruction or an opportunity for education. As a result, concerned advocate groups pressured legislators to pass PL 94-142 -- an act that requires full service provisions for handicapped students. Regular classroom teachers, including music educators, lack the knowledge and training necessary to deal effectively 24Dykman, "Two by Two," p. 62. 17 with handicapped individuals. Under individual education program requirements, the law requires music education for handicapped children if their needs can be met through music. Few teachers are trained adequately to instruct handicapped students in music. Special educators are trained to instruct handicapped students, but, like regular classroom teachers, they do not receive sufficient instruc- tion in teaching music skills or in adapting music curricula for handicapped individuals. Music educators study music and music teaching techniques extensively, but they usually are not trained to instruct the handicapped. In addition, the existing music curricula guidelines for traditional music textbooks and music courses do not include adaptations of materials for the handicapped children as defined by PL 94-142. The law defines handicapped children as those who are mentally retarded, hearing impaired, deaf, speech impaired, visually impaired, other health impaired, deaf- blind, multiply handicapped, learning disabled, or who need special education and related services. There are no adaptations of music curricula for all the handicap areas designated by PL 94-142, though single specific areas are 25 addressed in supplemental handbooks or texts. However, as a result of in-depth training and 25Kay Hardesty, Silver Burdett for Special Education. (Morristown, N.J.: Silver Burdett Company, 1979), includes adaptations of song and instructional material for learning disabled and mentally retarded students in pages 1-65. 18 in-service supervision, regular classroom teachers seem to be relating to handicapped children with a more positive attitude.26 Andrea Carroll and Joseph Purdy describe the develop- ment of simulation-based materials designed to alter the attitudes of regular elementary teachers toward handicapped children in a positive direction. Results of a test upon teacher attitude indicate that comprehensively-trained teachers scored significantly higher than a control group on a measure of teacher response to mainstreaming.27 In addition to materials, teachers need direct assistance from specialists. The specialist within the field of music is the music therapist who acquires special teaching skills to instruct the handicapped student and is trained to maintain the functioning of a handicapped individual at the highest level possible. The music therapist has an arts background, has acquired specific training in disability areas, and has developed specific methods for 26Douglas Gill, Cross-training Vocational and Special Educators: Report of a workshgp (Statestro, Ca.: Georgia Southern College, 1978); Lana Pipes, Teachers Talk: PL 94- 142 Reaches the Classroom (Washington D.C.: National Insti- tute of Education, 1978); Petra Harris, Report on Operation Mainstream: A Practicum (Fort Lauderdale, Nova University, 1976)? Stanley Chow, Report on Effects of a Mediated Training Course on Teachers and Students in Mainstreaming Programs (San Francisco: Far West Laboratories fOr Educational Research and Development, 1976). 27Andrea Carroll and Joseph Purdy, Reports on Inservice Prggram Development to Assist Teachers to Effectively Service Students with Exceptional Needs in the Mainstream (Go1eta, Ca: Santa Barbara Schools, 1978). l9 diminishing the dependencies of handicapped individuals.28 Music therapists, also, receive training in adapting standard music curricula for the handicapped student "mainstreamed" or integrated into the regular classroom. The music therapist within the education system.might serve as a specialized music teacher within the classroom setting or might work within a school district or region as a consul- tant to the music educator. In research performed at Culver City, California, the role of the resource specialist was described as one of increasing the positive attitudes among educators who interact with individuals demanding special attention in the classroom. The final report details a study in which two teacher training methods--workshop and direct assistance in the classroom--were examined for their effectiveness in increasing positive attitudes of elementary teachers toward the mainstreaming of learning disabled and emotionally disturbed children. A resource specialist aided two groups of teachers in actual classroom situations, while a third group participated in a workshop series conducted by resource specialists. The results indicated that the group receiving direct assistance demonstrated significant, positive 28The National Association of Music Therapy issues the requirements for membership as a Registered Music Therapist in A Career in Music Therapy (Lawrence, Kansas: NAMT, 1978), as a bachelors degree in music therapy or equivalency thereof, and completion of a six-month clinical internship at accredited facility under the supervision of a Registered Music Therapist. 20 changes in attitude, while the workshop group demonstrated no significant change in attitude toward mainstreaming.29 In the fields of home economics,30 art,31 and 32 attitude testing and specific in-serv- physical education, ice training are being developed for the specialized teacher as well as the regular classroom teacher. In music education the teacher's attitude measurement is limited to a published study by Gilbert and Stuart with preservice music education, music therapists and dual majors at the University of Kansas. Subjects viewed videotaped recordings of handicapped individuals that were divided into three behavioral categories. Handicapped individuals were classified as mildly, moderately, or severely handi- capped. For each behavioral category tested, music therapy majors indicated greater ease in interacting with such individuals in social and professional situations than did either dual or music education majors. In addition, the 29Karin Singleton, Report on the Role of the Resource Specialist in Increasing Positive Attitudes Towarleaving Individuals with Special Needs Enrolled in the Regular Class- room (Culver City, Ca: Culver City Unified Scbbbl District, ). 30Betty Martin, Determination of Missouri Home Economics Teachers' TrainingyNeeds Related to the Instruction of Handi- capped Students: Final Report (Columbia, Mo.: Missouri University, 1975). 31 Gary Barlow, "Group Reports: Instruction and Curric- ulum: Group A," Art Education 28 (December 1975): 13-14. 32Paul Jansma, "Get Ready for Mainstreaming," Journal of Physical Education and Recreation 48 (September 1977): 15-16. 21 difference of scores among the groups increased as the disability categories of the handicapped individual became more severe.33 While there is a need for training to help music educators interact more confidently and effectively with handicapped persons, there are few in-service programs for music educators utilizing professional resource specialists as aides in the classroom. In July, 1979, twenty-eight music education and music therapy professionals, selected nation- wide, participated in the Institute for College and University Music Educators: Music Education for Handicapped Children at the University of Kansas, funded by the U.S. Office of Education of Bureau for the Handicapped. The institute prepared participants to conduct workshops concerned with the implementation of PL 94-142 in adapting music curricula, music materials, and equipment to assist the handicapped child in classroom music and performance groups grades K-12. The institute at Kansas has initiated in-service training for music educators toward instructing handicapped children. In assessing the needs of these educators and the many other music educators in the country, research conducted in this field must indicate whether or not additional resource personnel and programs are necessary to expand music education for all children in the United States. 33Janet Gilbert and Melanie Stuart, "A Videotape Procedure for Assessing Attitude toward Disabled Clientele: Procedural Development and Initial Results," Journal of Music Therapy 14(Fall 1977): 116-125. 22 Summary Based on literature reviewed the following conclusions can be made: (1) the Federal law providing full educational opportunities for handicapped children is in effect; (2) various types of in-service training for regular classroom teachers are currently being conducted nationwide; (3) of these various training programs, teachers aided directly in the classroom have indicated significant, positive changes in attitude toward the handicapped student; (4) music educa- tors need similar assistance in changing their educational role to aid handicapped students mainstreamed into their classrooms; (5) music therapists have acquired the training and experiences necessary to aid the music educator in the mainstreamed classrooms; and (6) a thorough needs assessment and attitude test for the music educator is necessary to compile descriptive data so that it may be used to initiate, continue, or expand existent programs and that will aid the music educator/music therapist in instructing handicapped children. CHAPTER THREE DESIGN OF STUDY Procedures Videotaped recordings portraying handicapped individ- uals involved in musical activities were used as the test stimulus. The activities involved the imitation of dictated rhythms onto a drum and the singing of a familiar song. The videotaped recording (VTR) presented a clear, realistic stimulus. The videotaped recording used in this study provided a stimulus not contained in traditional attitude inventories. Written attitude assessment normally relies on individualized mental images of subject matter (in the case of this study--handicapped individuals) acquired by members of the sample population over a span of time. A reliance on the sample population's ability to recall accu- rately these mental images of handicapped individuals can elicit images that are biased or diverse in nature. Television, the field of athletics, and student supervision are but a few areas in which tape recorders and videotaped recordings are used to provide replication of events for assessment or inventory. An example of attitude assessment for music educators using videotaped recordings was a study among undergraduate music education and music 23 24 therapy majors. Music students indicated their attitudes in response to videotapes of handicapped clientele. Mbdeled after that procedure, the test sample in this study observed the common, visual and auditory stimuli of handicapped students in reproduction of real events from educational settings through videotaped recordings. The videotape for this study was developed in educational settings which included handicapped individuals. The educational systems involved in this study included a public education school setting, Lee County Public Schools, Eldena, Illinois, and a parochial school setting, the schools of St. Vincents' and St. Francis', Freeport, Illinois. Both educational systems employed registered music therapists within their music education programs. The videotape portrayed handicapped individuals at the elementary school levels K-8 in the following handicapped areas: visual impairment, hearing impairment, learning disability, mentally retardation at educable and trainable levels, emotional impairment, physical impairment and autism. Music therapists chose the handicapped students portrayed on the videotape on the basis that these students were representative of handicapped behavior and would freely participate in musical activities after their normal fashion during videotaping procedures, because of previous videotape or camera exposure. All students were videotaped in a familiar setting of the music room or office within their respective schools. 25 After a one-minute practice session in front of the camera, actual recording proceded with the handicapped student participating individually with this researcher in musical activity. Each individual was taped for approximately 50 seconds, during which time the child was involved in two forms of musical activity. The researcher dictated simple quarter-note and eighth-note rhythm patterns to each.' child who was then asked to imitate the patterns by beating a drum.with a stick or by hand. The second form of musical activity was singing a familiar song. The song, "Row, row, H row your boat, was chosen for its brevity, its limited range and its familiarity. All rhythms and the song are notated in Appendix A. A Panasonic Videorecorder, Model VHS, was used to record the activities of twenty-two handicapped students onto a color RCA VR 250 video cassette tape. A panel of judges viewed the videotaped examples on a Sony VHF monitor to choose valid examples for use in the final test tape. The panel of judges consisted of three music therapy professionals, two employed as faculty members in the music therapy department at Michigan State University, and the third enrolled in the advanced degree program there. All three panel members were Registered Music Therapists. They were instructed to indicate the amount of musical functioning portrayed in each individually—taped segment of the recording on an ll-point Thurstone Scale.1 The panel 1L. Thurstone and E. Chave, The Measurement of Attitude, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1929), P. 34. 26 rated each example with a check mark indicating typical, moderately atypical, or extremely atypical musical partici- pation of the example within the limits of commonly occurring behavior for the prescribed handicapped category. In addition, each judge indicated whether or not the stimulus was a clear typical example and occurred within an appropriate time sequence to make a reliable assessment. Instructions for the panel and the Thurstone Scale model may be found in Appendix B. The Thurstone scores were used to establish usable examples of handicapped students portraying typical musical functioning in their designated handicapped area for the final test tape. A numerical scale was assigned to the 11-point Thurstone Scale. Those fourteen examples obtaining a cumulative score of 15 or below from the panel of judges were considered valid examples of handicapped behavior. A nonparametric measure, the Kendall Coefficient of Concordance (W).2 Thurstone scale in determining an index of internal consist- was used to treat the cumulative scores from the ency. Upon testing the significance of W, it was found significant of the probability at the pfiéiOOI level. It can be concluded that the agreement between the three members of the panel is higher than it would be by chance. Appendix C contains the three judges ratings of the fourteen selected 2Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York: MCGraw-Hill Book Cbmpany, 1956). p. 229. 27 examples. Table 3.1 lists the categorization of handicaps established for the final test tape. Hearing impairment was not included as a category in the final tape presenta- tion as none of the original examples in this area were considered clear, typical representations of hearing impaired behavior. The mentally retarded category contained a larger number of examples than the other groupings due to the higher numbers of mentally retarded individuals found typi- cally in the general population. TABLE 3.1 CATEGORIZATION OF FINAL VIDEOTAPED EXAMPLES OF HANDICAPPED STUDENTS Number of Examples in Handicap Final Tape Presentation Visual Impairment 1 Learning Disabled 1 Mentally Retarded Educable Trainable Emotional Impairment Physical Impairment NWl-‘DN Autistic l4 Individuals Eight music educators enrolled in a graduate music education course at Michigan State University participated in the attitude assessment phase of the study. Five of these 28 educators indicated five or fewer years of teaching experi- ence, two indicated between five and ten years, and one indicated over ten years of teaching experience. Three educators also indicated having teaching experience involved with mainstreamed students. At the start of the test, the instructions found in Appendix D were read to the sample population of music educators. Respondents were instructed to view a videotape and react to four statements of attitude. After a practice segment the sample population viewed fourteen videotaped examples of handicapped individuals involved in two forms of musical activity. After viewing each example of a handi- capped student, the respondents indicated agreement or disagreement with each of the four following statements of attitude: (A) I would feel comfortable interacting with this individual. (B) I feel capable of working professionally with this individual. (C) I have been trained to work professionally with this individual. (D) I would actively pursue in-service training and professional development to work with this individual. Responses were recorded on a six-point Likert scale ranging 29 3 from (1) strongly agree to (6) strongly disagree. A six- point rather than seven-point scale was chosen to determine agreement or disagreement with the attitude statements. A six-point scale rating displayed either agreement or dis- agreement with no possible median number to indicate a neutral reaction. Data Analysis Procedures The mean was computed for each statement of attitude for the fourteen videotape recorded examples used in the final tape. The mean was calculated again for the categories of handicapped behavior containing more than one example. Graphs were plotted showing each educator's response for the statements and handicap category. Summary Videotaped recordings were used to determine the attitudes of music educators toward musical participation with handicapped students. The videotaped recordings were used because they provided a clear realistic stimulus for the test population. The attitude assessment involved the educators indicating on a six-point Likert scale their agree- ment or disagreement with four attitude statements. The attitude statements assessed participation, capability, and teaching flexibility towards interaction with handicapped 3R. Likert, "A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes," Archives of Psychology 140 (1932): 44-53. 30 students. A secondary aim of this study was to develop video- taped recordings as a useful testing instrument for testing the kinds of attitudes under study. The following chapter presents the descriptive data collected and discusses the attitudes rated by the sample population. CHAPTER FOUR PRESENTATION OF DATA Review of Procedure This study determined an index of attitude regarding music educator involvement with specific handicapped students. Videotaped recordings provided the stimulus for which music educators rated their agree- ment or disagreement with four statements of attitude. The development of the method to determine teacher attitude was essential to this study. A panel of judges evaluated the videotaped presentation using an eleven-point Thurstone scale. Upon measuring the ratings from the judges using the Kendall Coefficient of Concordance (W), W was found significant at the peéaOOI level of the probability that the judges ratings were in accordance. The judges concurred on fourteen taped examples indicating that these examples constituted clear, realistic representations of specific handicapped individuals involved in musical activities. Eight music educators who were enrolled in a graduate music education course at Michigan State University partici- pated in viewing the videotape presentation of handicapped students in the spring of 1980. Reacing to each videotaped example, the sample population rated four statements 31 32 of attitude regarding agreement or disagreement on a six- point Likert Scale. The four attitude statements were as follows: (1) I feel comfortable interacting with this individual. (2) I feel capable of working professionally with this individual. (3) I have been trained to work professionally with this individual. (4) I would actively pursue in-service training and professional development to work with this individual. The mean scores were computed from the collected data in the six designated handicapped areas for each of the four attitude statements. Agreement or disagreement regarding statements one and two determined approach behaviors and initial reactions of the music educator towards interacting with handicapped students through musical activities. Reaction to the third statement indicated music educators' attitudes of their own capability toward working with the handicapped student. Statement four was included in this study to indicate attitudes of music educators regarding additional professional training to work with handicapped students. The next section will contain the data relevant to each of the four statements. 33 Data Presentation l. I would feel comfortable interacting with this individual. Table 4.1 displays the mean scores for each handicapped category showing values favoring disagreement with statement 1 except for the value 3.05 indicated in the educable mentally retarded category. This value is above the midpoint, 3.5, of the 6-point Likert scale used in the study. A hierarchy regarding agreement with state- ment 1 from music educators order the handicapped categories TABLE 41. MUSIC EDUCATORS' MEAN SCORES OF REACTION TO VIDEOTAPED HANDICAPPED STUDENTS AND STATEMENT I Handicap Meana Visually Impaired 4.6 Learning Disabled 4.1 Mentally Retarded Educable 3.05 Trainable 4.9 Emotionally Impaired 4.6 Physically Impaired Apparatus 4.4 W/out Apparatus 5.1 Autistic 4.4 a1 = strongly agree; 6 = strongly disagree according to ascending mean scores as follows: educable mentally retarded, learning disabled, physically impaired 34 with apparatus and autistic, visually impaired and emotionally impaired, trainable mentally retarded, and physically impaired without apparatus. It is interesting to note the individual reactions of the testing sample as found in Tables 4.1a - 4.1c. The responses shown in Table 4.1a indicate two different groupings of educators. TABLE 4.1a STATEMENT I AND THE LEARNING DISABLED STUDENT: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement 1 Learning Disabled Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree (+) (-) Educators l 2 3 4 5 6 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / Mean = 4.125 35 TABLE 4.1b STATEMENT I AND THE PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement I Physical Impairment SA(+) SD(-) SA(+) SD(-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Educ.1 / Educ.l / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / Example 4 / Ex. 4 / 1 2 5 / i 5 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 j 8 [ A4: 3.875 M= 5.125 1 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. l / 2 / 3 / Example 4 / 3 5 / Cumulative Mean = 4.5 6 / 7 / 8 1 /"= 4.875 36 TABLE 4.1c STATEMENT I AND THE AUTISTIC STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement I Autistic SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. l / 2 / 3 / Example 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 41 = 3.125 SA (+) SD (-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / Example 4 / Cumulative = 4.4 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / A" 5.625 37 One group of educators showed agreement with statement 1 while another group showed disagreement in rating responses to the learning disabled student. Table 4.1b, example number 2, displays uniform responses regarding disagreement with statement 1. With one exception music educators rated their reaction to this physically handicapped student as 5.0. The mean score displayed in Table 4.1 for the autistic category is 4.4, indicating disagreement with statement 1 from music educators. But when surveying the reactions to the autistic example used in this study, the mean score 3.1 for example 1 indicates agreement with statement 1 while the mean score 5.6 for example 2 indicates strong disagree- ment. Graphs for all other handicaps that show no extreme responses or multiple groupings are included in Appendix E. 2. I would be willing to work professionally with this individual. In Table 4.2 is an indication of the mean scores for all handicaps regarding agreement or disagreement of music educators with statement 2. All scores fall above the midpoint, 3.5, except for the value, 3.0, displayed in the educable mentally retarded category, indicating music educators showed disagreement with statement 2 in the remainder of the handicap categories. The hierarchy of ratings from music educators with the handicap categories regarding agreement with statement 2 in ascending order of mean scores are as follows: educable mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally impaired and autistic, physically impaired with apparatus, visually impaired, 38 TABLE 4.2 MUSIC EDUCATORS' MEAN SCORES OF REACTION TO VIDEOTAPED HANDICAPPED STUDENTS AND STATEMENT II Handicap Mean Visually Impaired 4.4 Learning Disabled 3.8 Mentally Retarded Educable 3.0 Trainable 4.7 Emotionally Impaired 4.2 Physically Impaired Apparatus 4.3 W/out Apparatus 4.6 Autistic 4.2 physically impaired without apparatus, and trainable mentally retarded. Table 4.2a indicates markings from the test population of two different groups reacting to statement 2 regarding the learning disabled student. Four educators indicate agreement and four educators indicate disagreement. Table 4.2b shows that for examples numbered 2, 3, and 4, educators indicate uniform ratings of disagreement to statement 2 regarding trainable mentally retarded students. However, example 1 brought responses from two groups of educators, one indicating agreement and the other disagreement with statement 2. Table 4.2c denotes 39 TABLE 4.2a STATEMENT 11 AND THE LEARNING DISABLED STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORSr ATTITUDE RATING Statement 11 Learning Disabled SA (+) SD (-) Educators l 2 3 4 5 6 l £4== 3.75 40 TABLE 4.2b STATEMENT II AND THE TRAINABLE MENTALLY RETARDED STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement 11 Mentally Retarded Trainable SA(+) SD(-) SA(+) SD(-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / Example3 / Example 3 l 4 / 4 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / I" = 3.6 no: 4,6 SA(+) SD(-) SA(+) SD(-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. ' 1 / l / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / Example 3 4 / EX3I2P1€4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / IH’= 5.4 fit= 5.0 Cumulative Mean 4.7 41 uniformity of educators' response regarding the emotionally impaired student in relation to statement 2. In Table 4.2d a similar reaction for the autistic handicap category found in Table 4.1c is indicated. The difference in mean score 3.0 for example 1 and 5.3 for example 2 indicate that the ratings of autistic behavior by the sample group regarding statement 2 contrasted with one another. TABLE 4.2c STATEMENT II AND THE EMOTIONALLY IMPAIRED STUDENT: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement 11 Emotional Impairment SA (+) SD (-) Educators 1 2 3 4 5 6 m\l0\U'l-[-\UJNI—' \ 42 TABLE 4.2d STATEMENT II AND THE AUTISTIC STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement 11 Autistic SA (+) SD (-) Educator l 2 3 4 5 6 1 / 2 / 3 / Example 1 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / M= 3.0 SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educator 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / Example 2 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 41= 5.375 Cumulative Mean 4.2 43 3. I have been trained to work professionally with this individual. Table 4.3 displays mean scores regarding educator attitude regarding agreement/disagreement to statement 3. All scores as indicated in Table 4.3 fall 1.2 points above the midpoint (3.5) indicating strong disagree- ment with statement 3. The highest value (5.6) is shown in the trainable mentally retarded category (see Table 4.3a for educators' strong disagreement to statement III for this handicap group). The hierarchy for the handicap cate— gories in respect to statement III in ascending order of mean scores are as follows: educable mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally impaired, autistic visually and physically impaired, and trainable mentally retarded. TABLE 4.3 STATEMENT III Handicap Mean Visually Impaired 5.4 Learning Disabled 4.8 Mentally Retarded Educable 4.7 Trainable 5.6 Emotionally Impaired 5.1 Physically Impaired Apparatus 5.4 W/out Apparatus 5.4 Autistic 5.2 44 TABLE 4.3a STATEMENT III AND THE TRAINABLE MENTALLY RETARDED STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement III Mentally Retarded Trainable SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / Example Example 1 5 / 2 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M= 5 0 M= 5.6 SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) (SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / Example Example 3 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M = 5.875 M= 5.75 Cumulative Mean - 5.6 45 4. I would actively pursue in-service professional development to work with this individual. In Table 4.4 the mean scores for the handicap categories regarding agreement/disagreement with statement 4 are displayed for the music educators. Mean scores show agreement with statement 4 in the educable mentally retarded cate- gory (for additional information see Table 4.4a) while the midpoint score (3.5) is shown in the learning disabled category, indicating neither agreement nor disagreement with statement 4. The ascending hierarchy of mean scores is indicated in Table 4.4 as follows: educable mentally retarded, learning disabled, emotionally impaired, autistic, visually impaired and physically impaired with apparatus, physically impaired without apparatus, and trainable mentally retarded. In Table 4.4b music educators' reactions to the autistic students with example 1 are reported because two groups of educators appear to indicate two reactions, one group agrees with statement IV and one group disagrees. The individual graphs not otherwise indicated in this chapter are found in Appendix F. Discussion of Data The mean scores in Tables 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, and 4.4 indicate little agreement between music educators' regarding handicap students and the four attitude state- ments. But the mean scores do not reveal all of the facts as shown in Table 4.5. Table 4.5, the learning 46 TABLE 4.4 MUSIC EDUCATORS' MEAN SCORES OF REACTION TO VIDEOTAPED HANDICAPPED STUDENTS AND STATEMENT IV Handicap Mean Visually Impaired 4.2 Learning Disabled 3.5 Mentally Retarded Educable 3.3 Trainable 4.5 Emotionally Impaired 4.0 Physically Impaired Apparatus 4.2 W/out Apparatus 4.4 Autistic 4.1 47 TABLE 4.4a STATEMENT IV AND THE EDUCABLE MENTALLY RETARDED STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement IV Mentally Retarded Educable SA (+) SD (-) Educator l 2 3 4 5 6 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / I” = 3.25 SA (+) SD (-) Educator l 2 3 4 5 6 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / I" = 3.25 Cumulative 3.25 48 TABLE 4.4b STATEMENT IV AND THE AUTISTIC STUDENTS: GRAPH OF MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDE RATING Statement IV Autistic SA (+) SD (-) Educator 1 3 4 5 6 l / 2 / 3 / Example 1 4 / 5 6 / 7 / 8 / I” = 3.375 SA (+) SD (-) Educator l 3 4 5 6 1 / 2 / 3 / Example 2 z. / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / fll= 4.75 Cumulative Mean = 4.1 49 TABLE 4.4c LEARNING DISABLED STUDENT AND MUSIC EDUCATORS' ATTITUDES TO THE FOUR STATEMENTS Statement I Learning Disabled SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M=4.125 M= 3.75 Statement IV SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6/ 7 / 7 / 8 j 8 / I” = 4.75 fit= 3.5 50 TABLE 4.6 PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED STUDENTS, AND SCORES FROM THE MUSIC EDUCATORS ON THE FOUR ATTITUDE STATEMENTS Physicall Impaired Students with confining apparatus 4.4 4.3 without confining apparatus 5.1 4.6 5.4 5.4 4.2 4.4 51 disabled student and the reactions to the four attitude statements, reveals two differing groups of music educators. One group, comprised primarily of educators numbers 2, 4, and 5, consistently agrees with the four statements with regard to the learning disabled student. Another group of educators, number 3, 7, and 8 in particu- lar, indicates disagreement with the four statements in regard to the learning disabled student. This indicates that there are other factors affecting music educator attitudes toward the handicapped child, in particular, the learning disabled student. These factors may include: handicap severity of students, music educators' exposure for specific handicapped students, or in-service training of the music educator in specific handicap categories. The mentally retarded area was divided into educable and trainable categories. In reviewing the hierarchies of mean scores for each of the four attitude statements previously stated, the educable mentally retarded category showed the lowest scores, 3.05, 3.0, 4.7, and 3.3 for each statement, while the trainable mentally retarded category showed high scores for each statement, 4.9, 4.7, 5.6 and 4.5, respectively. In Table 4.6, it is interesting to note the mean scores of the physically handicapped students across the four attitude statements. For every statement except III, scores for the physically impaired student with confining 52 apparatus are lower than for the student without apparatus. Students involved with confining apparatus, such as head- straps or wheelchairs, did not necessarily elicit a less positive attitude from music educators than the students without confining apparatus elicited. A final comment is based on the mean scores of each handicapped area with the four statements of attitude. Mean score values are high in Table 4.3, (mean scores above 4.6), indicating that music educators strongly believe that their training has not prepared them to work adequately with the handicapped students defined in this study. Summary The data presented in this chapterlunsindicated the following: (1) music educators expressed low comfort levels, (mean scores ranged above 4.0) toward interacting with handicapped students except with those students in the category of educable mentally retarded (mean score 3.05); (2) music educators expressed little willingness (mean scores ranged above 3.7) to work professionally with the handicapped except with educable mentally retarded students (mean score 3.0); (3) music educators admitted that their training has not adequately prepared them to work profession- ally with handicapped students (mean scores ranged above 4.6); and (4) music educators expressed little willingness to pursue professional development in order to work 53 professionally with handicapped students (mean scores ranged above 3.5) except with learning disabled students (mean score 3.5) and the educable mentally retarded (mean score 3.3). CHAPTER FIVE SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Summary The purposes of this study were to determine the following music educators' attitudes toward handicapped students: (1) music educator interaction with the handicapped student, (2) opinions of their capability to work with handicapped students, and (3) their willingness to pursue professional development to work with handi- capped students. An additional purpose was to develop a highly realistic method to determine the attitudes of music educators toward the handicapped student. Video- taped recordings were used for the testing stimuli in this research. A panel of judges determined the video- taped recordings used in the final phase of the testing procedure as valid examples of handicap behavior involved in musical activity typical of their designated handicap category. A test sample of music educators recorded agreement or disagreement to four attitude statements on a six-point Likert scale after viewing each example included on the final videotaped recording. The four statements of attitude include: Statement 1: I would feel comfortable interacting 54 55 with this individual. Statement II: I would be willing to work profession- ally with this individual. Statement III: I have been trained to work profession- ally with this individual. Statement IV: I would actively pursue in-service training and professional development to work with this individual. Conclusions The following conclusions from this study apply only to the sample from which the data was drawn: 1. Music educators indicated feeling uncomfort- able toward interaction with handicapped students except those students categorized as educable mentally retarded. Music educators indicated unwillingness to work professionally with handicapped individuals except those students within the educable mentally retarded category. Music educators perceived their training as not having adequately prepared them to work professionally with handicapped students. Music educators indicated unwillingness to actively pursue in-service training Or pro- fessional development to work with handicapped students, except with the educable mentally 56 retarded students. 5. Videotape recording is a suitable technique to use in providing a valid stimulus for music educators to determine attitudes regarding their interaction with handicapped students. Discussion Although the videotaped recording offered a clear, valid stimulus for measuring attitudes of music educators toward their interaction with handicapped students, more studies are needed to refine and improve the techniques that videotape recordings can provide. It is a recommenda- tion of this researcher that future attitude inventories and assessments include the use of videotaped recordings. A limitation of this study was the small sample of music educators. More test subjects are needed in future research of this type in order to extend the implications and conclusions of this study. With a larger test sample information can be analyzed and reported concerning years of teaching experience, grade levels, vocal or instrumental teaching, age, sex, and experiences with handicapped students. Music educators indicated strong needs in coping with the implications of PL 94-142. Music educators do not feel comfortable with the reality that handicapped students are entering their classrooms. Nor are they confident that their previous training has adequately 57 confident that their previous training has adequately prepared them to teach or participate with the handi- capped individual. Music educators did not express willing- ness to pursue in-service training in order to work with handicapped students. This researcher has observed the following reasons for this attitude: (1) music educators are not exposed to the handicapped students during preservice training, (2) music educators are not trained in teaching techniques applicable to handicapped students, (3) music educators are apprehensive toward any situation involving their interaction with handicapped students, including additional professional development. Finally, this researcher proposes that the music resource specialist--the professional music therapist—-provide services on which the music educator can rely for meeting the needs of handicapped students. Recommendations Based on the results of this study, this researcher recommends the following: 1. Additional attitude measurements and studies are needed to account for the needs of music educators in compliance with PL 94-142. 2. Music educators, other educators, administra- tors, parents and communities need continual assessment to provide information about the quality of education handicapped students receive. 58 quality of education handicapped students receive. Educators need preservice training in handicap awareness,teaching techniques for specific disorders of handicapped students, and specific usage of instruments handicapped students require. Music educators need in-service training from specialized resource personnel, including the music therapist, through direct assistance in the classroom, workshop programs and consultation. APPENDICES APPENDIX A Rhythms used in VTR presentation llll Iflll ml‘ll WWI—ll Song, "Row, row, row your boat," used in VTR presenta- tion ‘ 0 (low, (080 1 row W boat) he“ ““3 down N stream. Nut-“3. "‘°"""5: met-9"": N" "' ‘ “-5. M" '3 b“ a” deem; 59‘ APPENDIX B Musical Interaction Scale Each of the following examples portrays an individual involved in some form of musical participation. Your task is to rate each person according to the degree to which his behavior may be considered atypical. After making your judgement, place a checkmark on the attached scale, correla- ting to the number of the example. Shown below is a replica of the scale you will use in recording your responses. To help you in making your judgement, three scale labels are defined as follows: TYPICAL--portrays an individual whose musical functioning is within the limits of commonly occurring behavior in the prescribed population. MODERATELY ATYPICAL--portrays an individual whose musical functioning is somewhat different from commonly occurring behavior in the prescribed population. EXTREMELY ATYPICAL--portrays an individual whose musical functioning is extremely different from commonly occurring behavior in the prescribed population. I I 1 1 eg I 1 I I s- 1: 1 A B C D E F G H I J K Typical Moderately Extremely Atypical Atypical Other undefined points on the scale represent varying degrees of atypical behavior. After making your judgement of the rating of behavior, place a yes or no beside the checkmark in answer to the following questibn: ExampleI----I----I----I----I----I----I----I----I----I----I----I 100 A B c D E F G H I J K Typical Moderately Extremely Atypical Atypical 60 61 We will have one practice example before we begin the actual testing. Questions? Thanks for your help and cooperation! Musical Interaction Rating Scale Example 0 .A B C D E F G H I J K Typical Moderately Extremely Atypical Atypical [11 >4 \0 00 \l 0 U1 -]-\ 00 N l—' tr] >4 |.—-l O [11 >4 H H [11 >4 H N [11 >4 H 00 [11 >4 H ..l.\ [11 >4 H U'I ["1 >4 |._.| 0‘ [:1 >4 H \J [11 >4 H (I) ['1 >4 1" \O fr] >4 N O [:1 ’4 N t—l [11 >4 N N Task Force Number 1 APPENDIX C SELECTED VIDEOTAPE SAMPLES OF HANDICAPPED INDIVIDUALS Behavioral Examples Tape Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 ll 12 13 15 17 20 l 3 2 6 l l l l 1 2 3 l 3 3 2 2 l l l l l 2 2 l 2 l 2 2 l 4 3 3 5 4 l 2 10 2 3 l 2 10 4 9 6 10 7 6 3 5 l3 5 8 3 7 15 63 APPENDIX D ATTITUDE QUESTIONNAIRE With the implementation of Public Law 94-142, the "mainstreaming" law, which implies full service provisions, individual education program requirements, and least restrictive environments, music educators face a change in classroom structure, educational teaching behaviors and techniques. This is an attitude questionnaire. It is being administered to determine music educators' responses towards working with various handicapped students in a musical way. Instructions You will view videotaped examples of individuals inter- acting musically through rhythmic and singing activities. After each example is shown, you will answer four statements of attitude. Your answer will range from (1) strongly agree to (6) strongly disagree. You will have 25 seconds to respond before another example is shown. Please circle the number of the response you choose. We will have one trial example before we begin. Please ask any questions you have about instructions and the procedure now. Trial 1 (A) I would feel comfortable interacting with this individual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 strongly strongly agree disagree (B) I would be willing to work professionally with this individual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 strongly strongly agree disagree (C) I have been trained to work professionally with this individual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 strongly strongly agree disagree 64 65 (D) I would actively pursue inservice professional develop- ment to work with this individual. 1 2 3 4 5 6 strongly strongly agree disagree APPENDIX E GRAPHS OF HANDICAP CATEGORIES AND EDUCATORS' RATINGS OF” ATTITUDE WITH FOUR STATEMENTS Statement I Emotional Impairment Strongly Agree Strongly Disagree (+) (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educators l / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / fl! = 4.625 66 67 Statement II Vision Impairment SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 43= 4.375 Statement II Mentally Retarded Educable SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / l / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / Ex. Ex. #1 4 / #2 4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M = 3 M=3 Cumulative Mean = 3.0 68 Statement II Physical Impairment SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) Educ. l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ.1 2 3 4 5 6 l / l / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / Ex. Ex. #1 5 / #2 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 /' M = 3.75 M= 4.625 SA (+) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. l / 2 / Ex.3 / #3 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / I” = 4.875 Cumulative Mean = 4.3 for examples with apparatus 69 Statement III Vision Impairment SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / Aw== 5.375 Statement III ‘ Emotional Impairment SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / I“ = 5.125 7O Statement III Mentally Retarded Educable SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ, 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / M = 4.875 SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 1u== 4.5 Cumulative Mean = 4.7 71 Statement III Physical Impairment SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / 1 / 2 / 2 / Ex. 3 / Ex.3 / r‘1 4 / #2 4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6 / 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M = 4.875 W/out Apparatus At: 5.375 SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / Ex. 3 / #3 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / A" = 5.75 Cumulative Mean = 5.4 for examples with apparatus 72 Statement III AutiStic SA ‘(+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. l / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / AH== 4.625 SA (+) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / Al= 5.75 Cumulative Mean = 5.2 73 Statement IV Vision Impairment SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / I" = 4.25 74 Statement IV Mentally Retarded Trainable SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. l / l / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / 5 / 5 / 6 / 6/ 7 / 7 / 8 / 8 / M= 3.75 M= 4.9 SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. Educ. 1 / / 2 / 2 / 3 / 3 / 4 / 4 / S / 5 / 6 / 6V 7 / 7 / 81 / 8 / fl'= 5.0 A": 4.5 Cumulative Mean = 4.5 75 Statement IV Emotional Impairment SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 76 Statement IV ['11 CL C.‘ O mNOM-DUJNH Physical Handicapped SA (+) SD (-) SA (+) SD (-) l 2 3 4 5 6 l 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. / 11 / / 2 / / 3 / / 4 / / 5 / / 6 / / 7 / / 8 / M= 3.75 M= 4.375 W/out Apparatus SA (+) SD (-) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Educ. 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 / 6 / 7 / 8 / 44= 4.5 Cumulative Mean = 4.2 for examples with apparatus BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Gentry, Ruben. The Mini Course: A Delivery Approach for Training Inservice Personnel in the Education of the HandiCapped. Dallas: Council for Exceptional Children, 1977. Hardesty, Kay. Silver Burdett Music for Special Education. Morristown, New Jersey: Silver Burdett Company, 1979. Kosko, Ken. Teaching Children Who Learn Differently. Monmouth, Ore.: Oregon College of Education,7I978. Sidney, Siegel. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. New York: McGraw-HiIl Book Company, 1956. Stedman's Medical Dictionary, 23rd ed. 5 v. Thurstone, L. and Chave, E. The Measurement of Attitude. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1929. Ward, Marjorie, and Peabody, Ralph. Education of Visually Handicapped Children. University Park, Penn.: Pennsylvania State University, 1972. JOURNAL ARTICLES Alley, Jayne. "Music in the IEP: Therapy/Education," Journal of Music Therapy 16 (Fall, 1979): 111-27. Barlow, Gary. "Group Reports: Instruction and Curriculum: Group A," Art Education 28 (December 1975): 13-14. A Career in Music Therapy, National Association for MUsic Therapy, Inc. Laurence, Kansas, 1978. Cohen, Shirley. "Improving Attitudes Toward the Handi- capped,” Educational Forum 62 (Nov. 1977): 9-l9. DeCesare, Ruth. "Mainstreaming Benefits All," Music Power, published by the Music Educators National Conference, Vol. 7, No. 2, Jan. 1979. 77 78 Duerksen, George L. "Some Current Trends in Music Education: Implications for Music Thera y," Journal of Music Therapy 11 (Summer 1974?: 65-67. Dykman, Ruth Anne. "In Step with 94-142, Two by Two," Music Educators Journal 65 (Jan. 1979): 58-63. Gilbert, Janet. "Mainstreaming in Your Classroom: What to Expect," Music Educators Journal 63 (Feb. 1977): 64-68. Gilbert, Janet and Stuart, Melanie. "A Videotape Procedure for Assessing Attitude Toward Disabled Clientele: Procedural DevelOpment and Initial Results," Journal of Music Therapy 14 (Fall 1977): 116-125. Iansma, Paul. "Get Ready for Mainstreaming,” Journal of Physical Education and Recreation 48 (SeptemEer 1977): 15-16. Jellison, Judith. "The Music Therapist in the Educational Setting: Developing and Implementing Curriculum for the Handicapped," Journal of Music Therapy 16 (Fall 1979): 128-37. Likert, R. ”A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes," Archives of Psychology 140 (1932): 44-53. National Education Association. ”NBA Demands Better Education for Handicapped Children," National Education Reporter 18 (April 1979): 13-I5. Public Law 94-142 Music Education for the Handi- capped, Illinois State University, Normal, Illinois, 1979. Steele, Anita L. ”Directive Teaching and the Music Therapist as Consultant," Journal of Music Therapy 14 (Spring 1977): 23-29. Welsbacher, Betty. "Mainstreaming: Implications for Music Education," Kansas Music Review (March-April 1978): 10-11; Reprinted Michigan Music Educator (Sept. 1978): 7-8. PUBLIC DOCUMENTS Educational Amendments of 1974. Statutes at Large, Vol. 88 (1974). 79 VU.S. President. Proclamation. "The Federal Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975, Public Law 94- 142."‘ Federal Register 33, no. 98, 18 January 1975. 394-425. U.S. President. Proclamation. ”Regulations for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.” Federal Register 42, no. 86, 4 May 1977, 3109-11. U.S. President. Proclamation. "Implementation of Part B of Education of the Handicapped Act." Federal Register 42, no. 163, 23 August 1977, 6801-2. REPORTS (PUBLISHED) Brownsmith, Keith. Description and Evaluation of the Mainstreaming Modules: Final Report. Bloomington: Indiana University, (1976). Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. 1968-1969 Yearly Report of the Consulting Teacher Program: VOlume 1. Washington D.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handi— capped, (1969). Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. 1969-1970 Yearly Report: Consulting Teacher Program. Washington D.C.: Bureau ofiEducatiOn for the HandiCapped, (1970). Bureau of Education for the Handicapped. 1970-1971 Yearly Repgrt: Consulting Teacher Program: Burlington SEhool District. Washington DTC.: Bureau of Educa- tiOn for the Handicapped, (1971). Carroll, Andrea and Purdy, Joseph. Reports on Inservice Program Development to Assist Teachers to Effectively Service Students with Exceptional Needs in tHe Main- stream. Goleta, Ca.: Santa' Barbara Schools, (1978). Child Study Center. Report on Learning Analysis: A PACE Pro'ect. Steamboat Springs, Cdlo.: Routt County ScHooI Districts, (1969). Chow, Stanley. Report on Effects of Mediated Training Course on Teachers and Students in Mainstreaming Pro rams. San Francisco: Far West Laboratories for Educational Research and Development, (1976). Cleveland, Marilyn. The 1969-1970 Report of the Consultigg Teacher Program in the Chittenden Central School District. Washington D.CT} Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, (1970). 80 Egner, Ann. EPDA 1970-71 Yearly Report: Chittenden School District. Washington D.C.: Bureau of Education for the Handicapped, (1971). Gill, Douglas. Cross-training Vocational and Special Educators: Report of’a Workshop. Statesboro, Ca.: Georgia Southern college, (1978). Gorelick, Mblly. Report on Developmental Teacher Compe- tency Checklist. Northridge, California: Califor- nia State University, (1974). Harris, Petra. Rgport on Operation Mainstream: A Practicum. Fort Lauderdale: Nova University, Martin, Betty. Determination of Missouri Home Economics Teachers' Training Needs Related to the Instruction of Handicapped Students: Final Report. Columbia, Mo.: Missouri University, (1975). Meisels, Samuel. Project LINC: Learning in Integrated Classrooms: Final Program Report and Third Annual Interim Report. Medford, Mass.: Tufts Univeréity, (1975). Meyers, Celeste. Live Oak Curriculum: Preschool Planning in the Heterogeneous Classroom. Piedmont, Ca1if.: Alpha Plus Corporation, (1977). National Education Association, Integration of Children with Special Needs (Overview ofia Series of Ten Pro rams). Washington D.C.: National Institution 0 E ucation, (1977). Pipes, Lana. Teachers Talk: PL 94-142 Reaches the Class- room. Washington D.C.: National Institute of Education (1978). Pugmire, Jean and Farrar, Kenneth. Director's Annual Progress Report. Logan, Utah: Utah State University (1971). Singleton, Karin. Report on the Role of the Resource Specialist inllncreasing Positive Attitudes toward Iaving Individuals with Special Needs Enrolled in the Regular Classroom. Culver City, Ca.: Culver City Unified School District, (1976). Smith, Richard. Meeting Inservice Teacher Education Needs Pro‘ect CCEC. Austin, Texas: Council fOr Exceptional Children, (I976). 81 Wallach, Susan. Statement used before the New York State Senate Select Committee on Mental and Physical Handicap, New York City, 21 November, 1974 cited by S. Cohen, "Improving Attitudes Toward the Handi- capped,” Educational Forum 42 (November 1977): 10. Weisberger, Robert. Mainstreaming the Handicapped in Vocational Education. Palo Alto: American Institutes for Research, (1977). THESES AND PAPERS Boston University New England Special Education Instructional Materials Center, "Descriptions of Innovative Train- ing Programs." Paper presented at Conference on Educational Programs for Exceptional Children, Plymouth, Mass., 3 October 1972. Dirkson, Joan. "Teachers Prepare for Regular Class Place- ment of Handicapped Students,” Paper presented at Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Washington D.C. 1 July 1978. Tutalo, Anthony. "Staff-Development Program: Maxi I Practicum." Ph.D. dissertation, Nova University, 1975. VIDEOTAPE "I'm Alot Like You." Developed through Dean's Project Grant from USOE/BEH G007501229 awarded to the University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Departments of Exceptional Education and Curriculum and Instruction. Project Director, Dr. Susan Gruber, 1978. MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES m"WWW"NWIIIHWIHWWIHIIHH1| 31293104957844