Post on 05-Apr-2018
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
1/78
Teacher Preference Toward the Inclusion of Special Learnersin Elementary General Music Classroom Settings
Stephanie Ann Ransome
A document submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
James Madison University
in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements
for the degree of
Master of Music in Music Education
School of Music
Fall 2010
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
2/78
Table of Contents
List of Tables.
4
List of Figures
5
Abstract...
6
Chapter One: Introduction Statement of the
Problem 8
Research Questions.
8
Delimitations....................
.9
Limitations of
Study................. 7
Definition of Terms.
8
Chapter Two: Review of Literature
Inclusion in the Music Education
Classrooms 10
2
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
3/78
Adequate Training in Special Education for Music
Teachers... 12
Summary.
14
Chapter Three: Method
Subjects..........................
15
Survey of Teachers Attitudes toward
Inclusion... 15
Procedures.........................
16
Data Analysis......
16
Chapter Four: Results
Extent of Participation of Self-Contained Students with Disabilities
in the Music Classroom...
17
Research Question One: Extent of Involvement of General Music
Teachers in Decisions to Place Students with Disabilities
in the Music Class
20
3
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
4/78
Research Question Two: Perceptions toward Inclusion Comparing
Music Teachers Who Have Had Training in Special
Education to Those Who Have Not Had
Training.. 25
Respondents Suggestions Concerning
Inclusion 29
Summary..
32
List of References.
..................... 36
Appendices
A. Initial Contact Letter with Web Consent and Survey Link.
.. 41
B. Follow-up Contact E-mail...
41
C. Survey of Teacher Attitudes toward
Inclusion. 42
4
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
5/78
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
6/78
Table 7 Perception of special education participation with
assistance...25
Table 8 Participation in professional development
activities 26
Table 9 Comparison of Perceptions About Inclusion Concerning
Significant Changes in Classroom
Procedure...27
Table 10 Comparison of Perceptions about Inclusion Regarding
Making Recommendations for Accommodations and
Modifications... 27
Table 11 Comparison of Perceptions About Inclusion Regarding
Collaboration..
28
Table 12 Comparison of Perceptions of Whether Music Teachers Have
Sufficient Training in Special
Education.. 28
Table 13 Adapted Instructional Methods for the General Music
Classroom..29
List of Figures
6
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
7/78
Figure 1 Placement of Self-contained Students with Disabilities inGeneralMusic.
17
Figure 2 Percentages of Special Needs in a General Music
Class....19
Figure 3 Recommendations concerning
IEPs22
Figure 4 Communicating accommodations and modifications to the
IEP.22
Figure 5 Administration encouragement ofcollaboration.. 23
7
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
8/78
Abstract
The purpose of this study was to determine the preferences of
general music teachers toward the inclusion of special needs students
into general music settings, and to examine the relationship between
and roles played by the general classroom music teacher and their
special education colleagues in the process of facilitating the successful
integration of special needs students into the mainstream music
classroom. The following research questions were posed: 1. To what
extent are general music teachers involved in the decision-making
process for placing special learners in elementary music classroom
settings? 2. What differences exist between the perceptions of
elementary general music teachers who have received training in
special education compared to those who have not with respect to
teaching self-contained (i.e. DEFINE) students with disabilities?
Subjects (N = 23) were derived from three school districts:
Richmond City; Henrico County; and Hanover County in the state of
Virginia. A survey asking thirty-five questions relevant to the topic was
designed and posted on the Survey Monkey website for subjects to
8
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
9/78
access via the internet. Questions were specific to the following topics:
music teacher assignments and responsibilities; special needs student
populations and processes; music teacher and school administrator
involvement, and collaborative efforts regarding special needs students;
music teacher preparation for working with special needs students;
inclusion in the general education setting; Individualized Education
Program (IEP) issues; and the facilitating of adaptations for special
needs students in the general music classroom.
Data collected from the subjects survey responses were recorded
and analyzed using t-tests, comparison ofspecial education status, and
free response.(NOT SURE WHAT YOU MEAN?) Results suggest that: 1.
Special needs students placement into general music classrooms varies
according to school system availability. 2. General music teachers
preferences toward advocating for students to have their own adaptive
music classes are influenced by the teachers level of higher education,
and the amount of professional development specific to inclusion
received.
9
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
10/78
Chapter One
Introduction
Recent increases in the number and variety of disabilities
identified among special education students in public education settings
have brought renewed interest in studying the preferences of music
teachers toward inclusion. The combined impact of the No Child Left
Behind Act, and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004
on general music teachers in the public schools has necessitated that
10
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
11/78
music educators be trained to deal with the increasing realities of the
general music classroom specifically the realities and challenges of
making music participation available to all students, especially those
with disabilities. While one might like to think that all music teachers
should be open to the issue of inclusion for special education students,
the inherent challenges and potential lack or training in this area may
contribute to coloring music teachers perceptions about including
special students in their music classes. Therefore, the purpose of this
study will be to determine the preferences of general music teachers
toward the inclusion of special needs students into general classroom
music settings, and to examine the perceived relationship between
music and special education teachers from the perspective of the
general music teacher.
For the purposes of this study, a survey was designed to ask study
participants preliminary questions about their general music teaching
situations at the elementary school level in seventy-two Richmond
metro area public schools. In addition, subjects responses with regard
to their feelings of preparedness in the area of special education training
were examined in order to determine how the amount of training
previously received in this area affected their attitudes about inclusion.
A further intent of the study was to provide data to with those interested
in the opinions of music educators regarding inclusion, and the role
played by the use of music in special education classroom settings.
11
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
12/78
Furthermore, it was the researchers intent that special education
educators, music educators, music therapists, researchers,
administrators, parents and students use the findings of this research to
further strengthen the relationship between music specialists and
special education teachers as they continue to improve the inclusion
process for special education students in public education settings. An
additional goal of the study was to examine the need for professional
development in the area of special education, and in so doing a support
resource for music teachers in the school system included in the study.
Research Questions
Specifically, the researcher sought to answer the following research
questions specific to the schools by which subjects were employed:
1. To what extent are music teachers involved in the decision-
making process for placing special learners in the elementary
music classroom?
2. How do the perceptions of music teachers who have received
special education training differ from those who have had limited
or no training in special education with regard to the issue of
inclusion in the music classroom and with respect to teaching
students with disabilities music in self-contained settings?
12
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
13/78
Delimitations
The subject pool for this study was limited to a sample of public
school elementary general music teachers who teach inclusive music
classes in one area from the state of Virginia. Delimitations were as
follows:
1. This study was limited to music teachers in the Virginia Music
Educators Association District One area of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, specifically, Hanover County, Richmond City and
Henrico County.
2. This study examined inclusive learning practices in music
classrooms only at the elementary level.
3. The participants in this study came from both urban and rural
areas.
4. Data for the study were taken from survey responses to
questions designed to provide information specific to general
elementary music teachers perceptions about inclusion with
reference to: the support provided by their respective
administrations; how curriculum is developed and instruction
provided; instructional cycles; teachers beliefs and perceptions
about students in their music classes; and how the specific
13
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
14/78
requirements of students with special needs are served in both
general education classroom and self contained classroom
settings in the schools in which they teach.
Limitations of the Study
The following have been identified as threats to the validity
of this study by the researcher:
1. History was identified as a minimal threat to the internal
validity of this study. All of the participants in this study
responded within six weeks.
2. Maturation was identified as being a minimal threat to
the validity of the study since all respondents were
certified teachers.
3. Regression to the mean was not a threat since
participants responded only once to this survey.
4. Selection of participants could threaten the external
validity of this study. The participants were amongst a
select group of music education teachers from Hanover
County, Henrico County and Richmond City Public
Schools in Virginia. Therefore, the results from this study
cannot be generalized to the broader population of
elementary music and special education teachers in
other districts or states.
14
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
15/78
5. Mortality was a threat to internal validity. Due to the
large numbers of music teachers who did not complete
the survey (N=72), the results may not precisely
represent the intended population.
6. Statistical regression was not a threat to the internal
validity of this study because each participant responded
to the survey only once.
7. Participants may have been affected by the wording of
the survey, or they might have misread questions, thus,
instrumentation could be considered a threat to the
internal validity of this study.
Definition of Terms
(1) The Education for All Handicapped Children Actof 1975 (Public Law
94-142): In 1975, Congress passed Public Law 94-142 (the Education of
All Handicapped Children Act). The National Information Center for
Children and Youth with Disabilities (NICHCY, 1996) summarized the
major purposes of PL 94-142 as follows:
15
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
16/78
a) To guarantee that a free appropriate education, including
special education and related service programming, is available to
all children and youth with disabilities who require it.
b) To ensure that the rights of children and youth with disabilities
and their parents or guardians are protected (e.g., decision
making about special education and related services for children
and youth with disabilities).
c) To assess and ensure the effectiveness of special education at
all levels of government.
d) To financially assist the efforts of state and local governments
in providing full educational opportunities to all children and youth
with disabilities through the use of federal funds.
(2) Education of the Handicapped Act(EHA) became the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This federal law, enacted in 1990,
provides reauthorized in 1997, and revised in 2004. It protects the rights
of students with disabilities by ensuring everyone receives a free
appropriate public education and it provides the framework for special
education (United States Department of Education, 2008).
(3) Least Restrictive Environment(LRE): The definition of LRE within the
context of the Individual with Disabilities Education Act(IDEA) is: To the
maximum extent appropriate, children with disabilities, including
children in public or private institutions or other care facilities, are
educated with children who are not disabled and special classes,
16
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
17/78
separate schooling or other removal of children with disabilities from the
regular educational environment occurs only when the nature or
severity of the disability of a child is such that education in regular
classes with the use of supplementary aids and services cannot be
achieved satisfactorily (United States Department of Education, 2008).
(4) Free Appropriate Public Education (FAPE): The definition of FAPE in
relation to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) states
that educational experiences for individuals with disabilities: Must be
based on each childs identified special education and related service
needs, guarantees parents that special education services will be
provided at no cost to them and is determined by the childs unique
needs, not what is assumed by the special education category the
childs been assigned to. It ensures that there are no delays in
implementing a childs individualized education plan, once it has been
developed (Smith, 2004).
(5) Special Education: Individualized education for children and youth
with special needs (e.g. learning differences, giftedness or specific
disabilities).
(6) Inclusive Education: Educational inclusion is about equal
opportunities for all learners, especially the inclusion of special needs
students in general classrooms.
(7) Individualized education program or IEP means a written statement
for a child with a disability that is developed, reviewed, and revised in
17
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
18/78
accordance with 300.320 through 300.324. (National Dissemination
Center for Children with Disabilities, 1999).
(8) VMEA: Virginia Music Educators Association is the Virginia section of
the Music Educators National Conference.
Chapter 2: Review of Literature
Since the passage of Public Law 94-142 in 1975, special education
has relied on the music education classroom as an accepted and
appropriate educational placement for students with disabilities. Public
Law 94-142 demands full service in the education of students with
disabilities. Students with special needs have as much right to
experience the aesthetic responsiveness offered by the classroom music
setting as students without disabilities do (Forsythe and Jellison, 1977).
With the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(Public Law 101-476) in 1990 and 2004 (revised), the number of
students placed into the music classroom has increased. As a direct
result of the implementation of PL 101-476, special needs students may
receive as many necessary supplementary aides and services as
possible in the general music classroom setting. In addition, students
with special needs may be removed from the general music classroom
to receive any adaptations and accommodations that cannot be
provided in that setting (Hammel, 2004).
18
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
19/78
Inclusion Specific to Music Classroom Settings
Participation in music classes can provide a significant curriculum
component for students with disabilities. Consequently, music teachers
should be aware of the potential benefits of music instruction for special
learners, as well as understanding the strengths of diverse learners
when they plan, teach and evaluate their lessons. Participation in music
classes provides sources of stimulation for all students in the areas of
aural, cognitive, and visual skill. According to research, schools need to
give positive and clear guidance on how best to incorporate inclusive
music programs into mainstream classrooms (Nordlund, 2006).
Decisions regarding the placement of special needs students into
music classes are made by committees comprised of a combination of
special education teachers, general educators, principals, guidance
counselors, special education supervisors, and parents. In many
situations the professionals responsible for general education activities
including the music teacherhave been offered little or no input into
the decision-making process (Darrow, 1990; Hawkins, 1991; Thompson,
1990; Hock, Hasazi, & Patten, 1990). An all too common situation may
be that, after placement decisions have been made, the music specialist
is informed that a student with disabilities will be included into their
music classroom. Frequently placement decisions are based on
considerations not directly relevant to the ability of the disabled student
to participate meaningfully in the music classroom experience. While the
19
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
20/78
music specialist should be committed to providing music learning
opportunities for each child, non-inclusion in the placement process can
add to the music educators concern and confusion as to how to select
appropriate materials and adapt instructional strategies to meet the
need of students with special needs while also meeting the music
learning needs of other students in the class.
The inclusion of students with special needs into school music
programs requires that music educators be prepared to create a
learning environment that varies with the needs and abilities of their
students. The learning environment must also foster positive
relationships among all students. In accordance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act, music educators must explore methods through which
they can promote the musical and personal growth of all students in an
inclusive environment.
According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA),
music educators have several rights and responsibilities related to
students with disabilities who attend their music classes. Firstly,
teachers have the right to see the Individual Education Plan (IEP) of
students in their music classes. Secondly, music teachers have the right
and the responsibility to attend IEP meetings for each student and to
provide input about each individual students music education. This
includes any information relevant to special goals, objectives,
accommodations, modifications, and support services that will have a
20
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
21/78
direct impact on the music class in which a special needs student is
being targeted for placement within. As the only music expert in their
school, only the music teacher can legitimately define and adapt
appropriate music goals for students with disabilities (Walter, 2006).
A number of studies have investigated the impact of teachers
preferences regarding inclusion. These studies have examined the
attitudes of both general education teachers and specialist teachers;
specifically, those in the subject areas of art, music, and physical
education. Gilbert and Asmus (1981) found that the general classroom
teachers whom they studied felt insufficiently trained to work with
special needs students, and that they often had negative attitudes about
inclusion that sometimes (whether directly or indirectly) resulted in the
special needs students in their classes feeling isolated and stigmatized
by others. Darrow (1990) found a positive correlation between perceived
success in music mainstreaming and the extent of administrative and
instructional support. Wilson and McCrarys (1996) study found that
more experience with lesson planning and implementation of
adaptations for special needs students was needed by teachers of
performance-based classes who are concerned that special-needs
learners negatively influence the experiences of other learners in their
ensembles.
Adequate Training in Special Education for Music Teachers
21
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
22/78
Stone (1980) studied general education and specialty area
teachers preferences to determine how their attitudes might influence
the educational quality of students with disabilities. Seventy-eight
percent of the teachers reported insufficient preparation to teach
students with special needs. Teachers who had previously taken several
courses in special education as students were more positive than those
who had taken no special education classes during their college or
university studies. Positive attitudes were also strongly related to the
increased age and experience of the teachers studied. A further finding
of the study was that teachers with masters or specialists degrees
tended to be more positive than teachers with only a bachelors degree.
One finding of the study that perhaps should be cause for concern was
that the secondary level music and art teachers who were surveyed
expressed more negative attitudes toward the idea of working with
students with special needs than their general classroom secondary
school colleagues.
Hock, Hasazi & Patton (1990) found that while the music
educators they studied reported being cognizant of their responsibility
to their students with disabilities, they did not feel that they had been
adequately prepared to meet the challenges posed by the inclusion
process. Results further suggested that the teachers surveyed perceived
that students with special needs demanded excessive amounts of
teacher time, could impede the progress of other students and might
22
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
23/78
often fall further behind other students in their classes without the
services provided in the special education classroom.
Massie (1993) investigated the effectiveness of having student
teachers collaborate with special needs trained resource teachers in the
modification of instruction for students with disabilities. The purpose of
this study was to improve student teachers positive perceptions of their
ability to adapt their instruction to ensure that the needs of special
students were successfully met and integrated into the context of the
regular classroom. Results suggested that student teachers perceptions
of their competency in adapting instruction for students improved
significantly during the course of the study. Specifically, student
teachers reported that they felt that planning with a resource teacher
and incorporating their suggestions for adapting lessons was
empowering. The student teachers also stated that training in lesson
plan modification should have been included in the content of their
undergraduate curriculum prior to student teaching.
Results from Colwell & Thompsons (2000) study suggest that
while many colleges and universities include mainstreaming course work
within their curriculum, further investigation of the nature of this course
work, including the influence of field-based experiences on student
teachers perceptions regarding inclusion should be undertaken. Kaiser
and Johnson (2000) examined the effect of an interactive experience on
music majors perceptions of how they might successfully go about
23
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
24/78
integrating music for students who are deaf into their teaching. The
Kaiser and Johnson study gave music education and performance majors
an experience interacting with students with special needs. The music
majors were given the opportunity to work with the children only once.
They were not allowed to practice planning or teach the activities to the
children prior to interacting with them. Van Weelden and Whipple
(2005) examined university students perceptions of special needs
students by having the students observe general elementary music
classes multiple times. They observed a lack of interaction between the
special needs students with general education students. Participants in
this study, reported high levels of comfort in their abilities to work with
students with special needs in different music education settings
following their field experience.
Summary
Current research does not examine the attitudes of the general
elementary music teacher toward collaborating with the special
education teacher. Hammel (2004) describes the responsibility of the
music teacher to consult with the special education teacher in order to
follow the specific goals of the IEP and to arrange the music curriculum
goals and objectives to develop an inclusive lesson. Therefore, the
purpose of this study will be to determine the preferences of general
music teachers toward the inclusion of special needs students into
general classroom music settings, and to examine the perceived
24
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
25/78
relationship between music and special education teachers from the
perspective of the general music teacher. A further outcome of the
study will be to identify specific strategies and solutions for improving
and to determine the necessity for increasing the amount of in-service
training and university training for general music teachers.
25
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
26/78
Chapter 3: Method
Subjects
Participants (N=23) in this study were employees of the Hanover
County (N=13), Richmond City (N=5) and Henrico County (N=5) Public
Schools for the 2010-2011 school year. As of April 2010, all were fully
Virginia licensed general elementary music educators and followed the
inclusion or self-contained method for teaching their music classes. In
order to solicit participants, a multi-step procedure took place. Initially, a
list of the names and contact information of all elementary general
music teachers in the Hanover, Henrico and Richmond City Public School
was compiled using the membership list for the District One region of
the Virginia Music Educators Association. A cover letter inviting the
teachers to participate in the study was emailed to those from the
targeted population. For those teachers choosing to participate in the
study, a web-based consent form and link to the web-based survey on
the website Survey Monkey.netwas also included in the initial emailed
cover letter.
Survey of Teachers Attitudes Toward Inclusion
The survey designed for use in this study was based on the
Survey of Teachers Attitudes Toward Mainstreaming tool from
Sharrocks (2007) dissertation which examined the preferences of
secondary school Choral directors with regard to mainstreaming. For the
purposes of this study, the questions were adapted to fit the proposed
26
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
27/78
subject group who were general music elementary public school
teachers from the state of Virginia. The questions were designed to:
(1)address issues relevant to the teaching assignments of the studys
participants; (2) determine the extent of placement of special need
students in the classes taught by the subjects; (3) explore the teachers
perceptions of their role in the process of mainstreaming; (4) collect
data specific to existing placement options for special students from the
schools the subjects work at; (5) record information about the extent of
the surveyed music teachers training in special education; and (6)
solicit suggestions for teaching special education students from the
subjects.
Method
Seventy-two District One general elementary public school music
educators were contacted by the researcher via an e-mail (Appendices
A) which provided an explanation of the study, a web-based consent
form, and a link to the web-based survey located at Survey Monkey.net.
By clicking the link the professionals gave their consent to participate in
the study.
Of the seventy-two elementary schools teachers contacted, only
twenty-three of the music teachers responded to the survey. Of the
initial e-mails sent, fifteen e-mails addresses were incorrect
consequently returned. A number of factors played a part into why the
additional thirty-four music teachers who had been invited to participate
27
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
28/78
chose not to respond. These music teachers who declined consent had
accidentally deleted the original e-mail, or had chosen to ignore the
study due to the lack of access to a computer during the summer
months that they were not at school. Fortunately, twenty-three general
music teachers did agree to participate and completed the survey.
Data Analysis
Upon collection and classification of individual subjects responses
to the survey questions, descriptive and inferential statistics were used
to analyze subjects responses from the Survey of Teacher Attitudes
Toward Inclusion. Numeric values were assigned to answer choices for
each multiple-choice question in order to calculate mean scores and
carry out t-tests. For questions related to teacher perceptions, the
values were: (a) Strongly- Agree-4: (b) Agree-3; (c) Disagree-2; and (d)
Strongly Disagree-1. Therefore, higher mean scores for responses
indicated more agreement with the statement. Numeric values assigned
for questions related to time were: (a)Always-4, (b)Occasionally-3, (c)
Rarely-2, and (d)\Never-1. Higher mean scoress indicated greater
frequency of occurrence of the event in question. The constant
comparative method was used for processing data gathered from the
open-ended questions
28
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
29/78
.
Chapter Four: : Results
The EExtent of Participation byof Self-Contained Students withDisabilities in the Music Classrooms
The Survey of Teacher Attitude Ttoward Inclusion begins with an
identification question that alloweds the subjects to acknowledge which
school system they teacher workeds in. Of the tThe twenty-three District
One respondents surveyed, the majority worked in Hanover County
(N=13), while equal numbers of survey participants worked in Richmond
City (N=5) and Henrico County (N=5) respectively.
Question two of the survey einquired about the location (i.e. the
music classroom or self-contained classroom) in which where the
primary music teaching of special needs students takes place at each
participants school, in the music classroom or in a self contained
classroom. Slightly more than nNinety-two point three percent (92.3%)
of the respondents taught special needs students in the music
classroom, and almost eight percent (7.7%) of respondents went to
reported that they taughtteach special the students in a separate their
own self-contained classroom.
29
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
30/78
Figure 1 Placement of Self-contained Students with
Disabilities in General Music
Question four examined considered the the reasons why special
needs for which the students were not integrated into a general music
classroom. Forty percent (40%) of the respondents indicated that
scheduling difficulties specific to the of the special needs students was
the most prevalent reason for scheduling issues due to the other
services that they receive. Respondents also reported a number of other
perceived included concerns with respect to inclusion. Twenty percent
(20%)of teachers believed about the musical ability level of special
needs students might prove problematic in the general music classroom,
while another twenty percent (20%) of subjects responded that(20%),
behavioral issues in thea classroom setting were potentially
problematic. (20%), Another twenty percent (20%) of teacher
30
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
31/78
participants reported concerns with special students behavior traditional
or in a performance settings (20%). None of the subjects reported
perceiving a one indicated that there was a lack of interest in music
from the special students, nor a lack of support from their schools
administration or parents apprehension with regard to the inclusion of
special students in their music classes. Two music teachers indicated
that at their schools an additional music class is scheduled to teach the
students with severe and profound disabilities in addition to their
general music class.
31
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
32/78
Table 1
Reasons for Not Including Students in the General Music Setting
32
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
33/78
33
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
34/78
The music teachers who indicated that self-contained students
were not placed in music classrooms did not answer questions six
through tquestion twenty-five of the survey since those questions dealt
with the services provided to these students in the classroom.
Therefore, the total number offor subjects answering these questions
was ill be fewer than for question five.
In questions six through ten of the survey, issues the relating
tofactors how general music classes were incorporated into the of
schedules ofing special needs students in the participants schools were
addressedinto the general music classroom is measured. Approximately,
eEighty-four point six percent (84.6%) of the music teachers surveyed
34
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
35/78
responded stated that special needs the students were placed into their
general music classes every year. The remaining other music 15.4% of
teachers (15.4%) indicated that special needs their students in their
schools occasionally joined the general music class. Of the students that
were included in the general classroom music settings, the majority
Ninety percent of special needs the students (90%) wereare placed in
the class for the entire year. Subjects also reported that tThe number of
special needs students that are placed in theira general music classes
never exceeded six students at onea time. Four teachers indicated that
they had experienced situations where there were four to six students
were placed in one class, but the majority of respondents (69.2%)
percent of the respondents indicated that only one to three students
were placed in their music classes at a time. When the students wereare
placed in a class, the percentage of students with special needs never
exceeded a quarter (25%) of the membership of the class.
Figure 2 Percentages of Special Needs in a General Music
Class
35
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
36/78
Research Question One: The Extent of Involvement byof GeneralMusic Teachers
iIn theDecision Making Processs to Place Students with Disabilities
in the General Music Classroom
Questions eleven, twelve, thirteen, seventeen, twenty-two,
twenty-four and twenty-five were designed to determine the extent to
which general music teachers were involved in decisions to place self-
contained students with disabilities in the general music classroom
setting. Issues specific to dDetermining whether accommodations were
necessary for teachers musicthe classrooms, providing examples of
additional general education classes that special t the students may be
are placed in (see Table 2), and the other criteria relating to the
placement of special for placing the students in the music classroom
were all questioned. (CHANGE BELOW TO VARIETY OF GENERAL
36
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
37/78
EDUCATION CLASSES USED FOR MAINSTREAMING OF SPECIAL NEEDS
STUDENTS RATHER THAN INTO WHAT etc
Table 2 Class placement of special needs students
The music tTeachers surveyed were also asked to note whether
music teachers areor not they were involved in IEP meetings designed
to address planning issues, accommodations, and the modification of
instruction for special needs studentsmeetings to plan and suggest
accommodations and modifications to instruction. In addition the
subjects Next, they were asked to explain the frequency with at which
they met with the music and special education teachers meet to plan for
the special needs studentchildrens instructional needs. Finally,
subjectsthey were asked to provide responses inquired about the
process through which they receiveding the information about updated
accommodations and modifications to special needs students deemed
necessary in the IEPs.
37
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
38/78
When addressing determining the relevance of having an
individualized music education plans for special needs students, all of
the teachers stated that they adjusted their instruction based on the
individual needs of theirir special needs students (see Table 3).
Table 3 CSignificant changes in classroom musicprocedures
for special needs students
Unfortunately, of the general elementary music teachers who that
responded totook the survey, seventeen out of twenty-three teachers
(73.91%) responded marked that they had are never given the
opportunity to attended IEP meetings for special needs students at their
schools(see Table 4). It should be noted that the survey questions did
not allow subjects to indicate whether or not they were the teachers
were invited to the IEP meetings at their schools, just whether or not
they had actually ever attended an IEP meeting or special review.
38
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
39/78
(WOW! THIS IS AN IMPORTANT FINDING OF YOUR STUDY STEPHANIE!!!
SCARY WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.)
Table 4 Frequency of General Music Teachers Participation
in Music Teachers Attending Music Class Placement IEP
Meetings About Special Needs Students (to Place Students in
Music Class V v ersus a Non-Music Specific specialIEP R r eview
M m eetings) of the IEP______________
IEP Meeting Special Review of the IEPAlways 1 1
Occasionally 2 2Rarely 1 2Never 17 16__________________________________
In addition to information about music related and special review
the initial IEP meetings and special review IEP meetings, the survey
solicited information about teachers were asked how often the subjectsy
communicated about the progress and/or needs of the students with
special needs whothat attended their music classes. Slightly less than
half (46%) of the music teachers surveyed reported Forty-six percent
stated that they occasionally communicated in this way, while almost a
quarter (23%)twenty-three percent rarely reported on spoke about the
progress of the special needs students in their music classes(see Figure
3). This means that almost three quarters (75%) of the teachers
surveyed either rarely or occasionally reported on the progress of their
assigned special needs students. (WOW! STEPHANIE, ALSO A VERY BIG
FINDING IN TERMS OF WHAT IT SAYSAND THE RELATED IMPLICATIONS
FOR SPECIAL NEEDS STUDENTS).
39
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
40/78
Figure 3 General Music Teacher Input into the
Recommendations concerning IEP Recommendation Processs
Fortunately, every music teacher except for one reportedstated that at
their schools they receivedd updated IEPs for special needs students in
their classes that includedwith modifications and listed accommodations
listed (see Figure 4). Of these, tThirty-eight respondents stated that they
only received the updates occasionally. While this could be cause for
concern on the part of parents and advocates for special needs
students, this potential problem receive them which could be remedied
with strong communication between the general music teacher and thespecial education department.
40
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
41/78
Figure 4 Communicating accommodations and modifications
to the IEP
Questions sixteen through twenty-one were designed to measure
the perceptions of the subjects regarding the amount of effort that goes
into the of collaboration process between special education teachers
and the themselvesgeneral music teachers. Reponses According to
question eighteen of the survey, revealed that ninety-six percent (96%)
of the general elementary music teachers agreed that having music
teachers and special education teachers collaborate in the classroom
would be beneficial to all the students in the general music
environment. The subjects responses teachers were fairly positive about
the amount of times that they spend meeting to discuss a students
progress. Seventy-eight percent (78%) of the teachers reported that
they met as many times as needed for each student. Four subjects
reported people havingd monthly meetings set-up with the specific
special education teachers to note the progress of the student (SeeTable 5).
41
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
42/78
Table 5 Frequency of discussion about progress (TEXT FONT
CONSISTENT?)
Study participantsThe teacher attitudes regardingtoward the
amount of time and support provided for given to collaborative effortse
by the school administration suggested that a lack of these conditions
may can affect the working climate between the general music teacher
and the special education department at the elementary school level.
Questions fifteen and sixteen were developed to measure this
perception. The responses from the teachers are mixed when examined
asked about the extent to which encouragement of collaborative
effortsons between the general music teachers and the special
education faculty department from the school administratorswere
encouraged by the administrators of the schools in which the
elementary music teachers worked. Sixty-one percent (61%) of the the
study participantsteachers agreed with the statement that collaborative
efforts were encouraged, and an additional twenty-three percent (23%)
of the respondents strongly agreed with this statement. OThere were
only two people felt that they did not receive enough encouragement
42
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
43/78
from their administrators to initiatehave collaborative effortsion (See
Figure 5).
43
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
44/78
Figure 5 Administration encouragement of collaboration
Many of the music teachers surveyed appreciated the
assistanceccompaniment of the special needs teacher in to helping the
special needs the students from their classes learn the pertinent
information in relevant to the music classroom setting.: Qquestions
nineteen, twenty and twenty-one focused on this aspect. Twenty-three
percent (23%) of the subjects reported population finds that they felt
that bringing a special education aide or teacher into their general music
classroom would have an adverse effect on the climate of the
classroom. The surveyed teachers had differing opinions with regard to
receiving modification help with their own lesson plans from the special
education teachers. Forty-six percent (46%) of subjects respondedfelt
that they had not received adequate assistancehelp from the special
education teachers at their schools, while thirty-eight percent (38%) felt
that they had. There were also two outliers that strongly disagreed and
strongly agreed with the statement (see Table 6).
44
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
45/78
Table 6 Elementary music teachers pPerceptions about the
effectiveness of of assistance from special education teachers
from their school setting.
In an an ideal situation, a special education aide shouldmust also
accompany special education the students to the general music
classroom in order to assist with instruction and discipline. According to
the responses of the teachers surveyedresults, this is not always the
case in the elementary school music classroom. Fifteen percent (15%) of
the survey participants teachers reportedstate that the aides never
accompaniedy special the students to their classes, while e. Eight
percent (8%) respondedstate that special education the aides rarely
accompaniedy special needs the students to their music class. (See
Table 7) (ALSO, IMPORTANT BECAUSE ALMOST A QUARTER OF SPECIAL
NEEDS STUDENTS ARE NOT RECEIVING ASSISTANCE TO WHICH THEY
ARE ENTITLED TO BY LAW)
45
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
46/78
46
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
47/78
Table 7 Elementary general music teachers pPerceptions
about the participation of special needs students of special
education participation with assistance
In a high energy music classroom, it is imperative for the maintenance
of a safety and positive classroom climate that a the teachers aide
accompanies each special needs the student to their class. In some
situations, All too often the teachers aides may viewtake the music
class time as their break time if they view the since the perception of
music class ais a time for planning for the classroom teacher.
Research Question Two: How Perceptions About toward Inclusion Differ
Between Comparing Music Teachers Who Have Had Training in Special
Education Withto Those Who Have Not Had Training
The second main goal part of thise investigation was to compares
the teachers attitudes toward teaching special needs students in the
context of from a self-contained classroom environment and compare
their responses with their based on the level of special education
training that they have received. Responses Answers to the survey
questions that addressed these related to the perception differences
47
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
48/78
were compared using independent t-tests, since the two groups were
not related in anyway. T-tests with equal variance were used since the
numerical range of the answer choices was small. A probability p< 0.05
was considered to be statistically significant. A total of four music
teachers indicated that they had taken at least one college-level course
related to special education, while nineteen stated that they had never
had a course in this area. Half of the teachers state that they had
attended professional development workshops in the area of special
education (see Table 8).
Table 8 Participation in professional development activities
In question eleven of the survey, the elementary music teachers
were asked to provide information specific to about their perceptions
48
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
49/78
about of the frequency at which the presence of special needs the self-
contained students in self contained teaching settings required specific
changes in the teaching lesson plan or music classroom procedures.
Seventy-five (75%) percent of the teachers with training (M=2.75,
SD=.5) responded by saying that they occasionally adjusted their
procedure, whereas only fifty-three (53%) percent of the non-trained
teachers noted that they occasionally changed their classroom
procedure (M=2.1, SD= .77). There was more variation between the
answers from the teachers who haddid not received training in special
education than those who had previously received training in special
education (see Table 9).
Table 9 A Comparison of Differences in the Perceptions of
Elementary Music Teachers Specific to How the About Inclusion
Process RequiresConcerning Significant Changes in Classroom
Procedure
________________________________________________________________________Music with Music Teachers w/outSPED training SPED Training(N = 4) (N = 19)
49
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
50/78
________________________________________________________________________Always (4) 0 1 (5%)Occasionally (3) 3 (75%) 10 (53%)Rarely (2) 1 (25%) 6 (32%)Never (1) 0 2 (11%)
M= 2.75 M= 2.1SD= .5 SD= .77_______________________________________________________________________
In comparing subjects responses to a comparison of question
thirteen, music teachers with training in the area of special education
were more definiteabsolute in their decisions about the importance of
providing accommodations and modifications to the IEPs of special
needs students. The music teachers without training varied in their
responses which could be grouped into were spread out over the four
categories (see Table 10).
Table 10 Comparison of Elementary Music Teachers
Perceptions Aabout Inclusion Specific to the Regarding Making
Recommendation, ns for Accommodations and Modification
Processs
Music Teachers with Music Teacherswith No
Special Education Training Special EducationTraining
(N=4) (N=19)________________________________________________________________________Always (4) 0 3 (15.6%)Occasionally (3) 2 (50%) 6 (31.5%)Rarely (2) 0 5 (26.3%)Never (1) 2 (50%) 5 (26.3%)
M= 2 M= 2.21SD= 1.15 SD= 1.06
In response toFor question eighteen which examined the importance of
concerning whether music teachers and special education teachers
should collaboratinge, teachers who had previously undergone training
50
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
51/78
in special education had a mean scorehool slightly higher than those
teachers without training. Ninety-six percent (96%) of the teachers,
including those both with and without prior special education training
agreed that collaboration is an important part of the process necessary
to effectively to teach the students with special needs (see Table 11).
Table 11 A Comparison of Perceptions About Inclusion Specific
to the Regarding Collaborativeon Process Between the Music
Teacher and Special Education Teachers
Music Teacher with Music Teacherwith No
Special Ed Training Special EdTraining
(N=4) (N=19)________________________________________________________________________Strongly Agree (4) 2 (50%) 7 (30%)Agree (3) 2 (50%) 11 (58%)Disagree(2) 0 1 (4%)Strongly Disagree (1) 0 0
M= 3.5 M= 3.31SD = .577 SD=.58
________________________________________________________________________
Not surprisingly, the music tTeachers who had previously had with
training in special education during their own pre-service studies agreed
with responded to question twenty-three of the survey at a agreed much
higher rate in their belief that pre-service teachers receive to the fact
that there was sufficient training given for teaching special education
students (M= 2.5, SD= .71). Forty-seven percent (47%) of the music
teachers with no training felt strongly that there was rarely training
available to them either in their regular school setting or in the context
51
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
52/78
of professional development opportunities offered by their schools
(M=2.94, SD=.84) (see Table 12).
52
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
53/78
Table 12 Comparison of Perceptions Whether Music Teachers
Have Sufficient Training in Special Education
Music Teachers with Music Teachers with NoSpecial Ed Training Special Ed Training(N=4) (N=19)
________________________________________________________________________Always (4) 0 1 (5%)Occasionally (3) 2 (50%) 4 (26%)Rarely (2) 2 (50%) 9 (47%)Never (1) 0 5 (26%)
M = 2.5 M = 2.94SD =.71 SD =.84
________________________________________________________________________
Although there were not significant (DO YOU MEAN THIS IN THE
STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT WAY? IF NOT AVOID USING THE WORD
SIGNIFICANT IN A RESEARCH STUDY)differences with regard to in the
ways in which that the music teachers adapted their classrooms and
discussed accommodations with special education faculty, there was a
noticeable large difference in the amount of education the music
teachers felt they needed to adequately provide the special education
services asked of them.
Respondents Suggestions Concerning Inclusion
In the final section of the survey, special education and music
teachers were asked to providegive suggestions for of strategies that
can be used in the general music classroom at the elementary level.
This section of the survey presentedey were given a list of
accommodations that could be used in a general music classroom
53
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
54/78
setting, and the subjects were asked to indicate if any of the strategies
were ones they are in currently used (see Table 13).
54
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
55/78
Table 13 Adapted Instructional Methods for the General Music
Classroom
In addition to the listed accommodations in Table 13, the subjects
teachers also indicated that they enlarged copies of music to make large
print materials for their partially sighted students, and used a Braille
machine to convert the pieces into Braille for their students who are
blind. The music teachers also reported that they simplified class the
requirements for the special needs students, and implemented used a
peer buddy systems between special needs and non-special needs
55
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
56/78
students to ensure a work with the student in order for the overall class
outcome to be positive classroom environment.
The survey participants teachers were also asked to provide one
helpful suggestion to aide in the inclusion of special needs students in a
general music classroom. One teacher response suggesteds to
alternatinge the activities from preferred to non-preferred activities
such as movement and then go in to the workstation tasks which are
either academic or IEP related. The lessons could be split up into a
more differentiated approach where there was more individualized
learning, such as stations. Another suggestion that could be used with
all students is when giving important directions, sing instructions to
them in a song. Special needs The students are more likely to pay
attention when listening with two different stimulations of the brain.
Another subject wrote: Students attempt to gain confidence
within the music room by staying as long as the student can manage
and then have a goal to increase that time throughout the year. The
more active the lesson, the more the students can stay involved. In
order to achieve this goal, having a consistent routine with frequent
repetition is essential. Preferential seating with the student seated in the
optimal place to allow them to pay attention to the teacher and to be
next to an assigned buddy that can silently help the student achieve the
goal as well is also an effective strategy in mainstreaming the special
needs child into the general elementary music classroom.
56
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
57/78
When asked about ways in which to facilitateing increased
cooperation between the special educators and the music educators,
and build support between the two, a few of the music surveyed
educators agreed that time needs to be set aside before the beginning
of the school year where everyone discusses how each can work
together for the benefit of the child. Another teacher added that one
must keep the lines of communication open among parents, all
teachers and administration.
One schools music education teacher recommended utilizinges
the inclusion method for interaction with other students but also
statedpromotes that there be a separate 30 minute slot in addition to
the general music time just for special education music based on
specific disabilities. Question thirty-two questioned whether an adaptive
music class was held in the subjects school in addition to the inclusion
classes and asked if not, in an ideal situation, would the teacher want to
teach such athe class. All but one teacher indicated that they would like
to have a class set-up for the students to be taught on their level of
musicianship. When discussing reasons against why to not havinge
special needs an the students included in the general classroom, one
teacher mentioned one experience in attempting to include special
students with stated of her severe and profound disabilities into her
music classroomstudents:, We tried that one year and it was not
successful. The SPED students showed no progress when integrated.
57
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
58/78
When seen by themselves, they made appropriate progress. The main
restrictions to this offering class now was time in the teachers schedule
and building administrators permitting allocations for a special
education class.
In Henrico County, music therapy is utilized for students who would
benefit from this type of instruction. It is a belief of the researcher that
thisThis philosophy should be extended to the entire greater Richmond
area toand would allow the music teachers to have an additional expert
to go to for help when planningith accommodations forting all students
with disabilities. Such a resourceIt would also give the special education
teacher, parents and administration another source of inputresource to
attend and contribute to attend IEP meetings that occur during the day,
when the music teacher is teaching.
In reponse toWith question thirty-three, teachers gaive
suggestions to help a class that might includes the special education
students participate in with the general music classes. The main
suggestion given was to keep the communication open with the special
education teacher by asking questions and being sure to obtain get all
of the facts available about of the students disability. By
communicating with the teacher and taking a look at the IEP, one
teacher suggested finding something in common with the student and
be willing to find unorthodox ways of teaching the information.
58
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
59/78
Chapter Five:Summary
The purpose of this study was to gather the data that reflected the
perceptions and attitudes of the elementary general music teachers in
the City of Richmond, Henrico County and Hanover County Public
Schools with regard to howas they adapt music instruction to meet the
needs of so that it complies with the 2006 Individuals with Disabilities
Act (PL108-446). Based on the previous literature on the topic ofon
special education and music education, the following questions were
developed to measure this: (MATCH THESE UP TO THE EDITED ONES
EARLIER IN THE DOCUMENT)
1. To what extent are the music teachers involved in the decision-
making process for placing special learners in the elementary
music classroom?
2. How do the perceptions of the music teachers who have received
training in special education compare to the perceptions of the
music teachers that have not with respect to teaching self-
contained students with disabilities?
Information gathered through the literature review was
supplemented by additional responses from the Survey of Teacher
Attitudes toward Inclusion in an effort to provide informed data and
recommendations additional information on the status of local inclusion
59
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
60/78
in music classes in some the Richmond area elementary schools. A
frequency analysis was used to document the extent to which self-
contained students wereare included in the general music classroom.
Teachers suggestions for facilitating instruction were summarized in a
report of teacher responses.
(MATCH THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS UP WITH THE EDITS I MADE
TO THE EARLIER QUESTIONS)
Question One: The Extent of Involvement of General Music Teachers inDecisions to Place Students with Disabilities in the Music Class
In the Richmond City and Hanover County Public Schools system
there does not seem to be a systematic framework to encourage an
inclusive music program as suggested by Norlund (2006). Henrico
County public schools seem to have more freedom with scheduling to
include a separate adaptive music class and access to a music therapist
as needed. The dedication of the music teachers to include all students
in their class without taking part in IEP meetings tends to closely follow
the finding of studies in the early 1990s of Darrow(1990), Hawkins
(1991), and Thompson (1990).
Gilbert and Asmus(1981) study, which found that general
teachers are not trained to work with students who have disabilities and
often have negative attitudes about teaching students with disabilities
that result in the students isolation and stigmatization, could explain
the teachers comment that music teachers need to have toleration-
pick your battles with the students. A trained teacher suggests that
60
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
61/78
students will be more willing to attend and behave if they felt the
teacher was being patent with them and encouraging them.
A systematic schedule beginning from the administration level
downwards would be helpful in facilitating for greaterthe collaboration
betweenof music teachers and special education teachers. Darrow
(1990) found a positive correlation between perceived success in music
inclusion and the extent of administrative and instructional support. One
of the music teachers surveyed in this study stateds that it is vital that
music teachers are made aware of special needs students and what
accommodations must be made for them to have an enriching musical
experience. An adaptive music teacher suggesteds that the special
education team and the music teacher meet before the school year
begins to discuss the accommodations and strategies to help benefit the
child.
A music therapist or an adaptive music teacher in addition to the
general music teacher in the building would providebe an excellentgood
solution to assistto assist with compensating for the lack of time for
communication and , attending IEP meetings, and would also provide an
additional expert for the music teachers without special education
training to look to for support. Students with special needs demand
excessive amounts of teacher time, impede the progress of other
students and often fall further behind without the services provided in
the special education classroom. This adaptive music professional would
61
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
62/78
be available to provide separate 30 minute slots in addition to the
general education music time just for special education music time
which is based on specific disabilities, as suggested by a special
education teachers survey response.
Question Two: Perceptions toward Inclusion Comparing MusicTeachers Who Have Had Training in Special Education to Those
Who Have Not Had Training
The music teachers in Richmond City, Henrico County, and
Hanover County Public Schools, according to the survey follow directly
along with the Hock, Hasazi & Patton (1990) study that found that music
educators are cognizant of their responsibility to their special needs
students, but nonetheless feel they have not been adequately prepared
to meet the challenge. Eighty-two percent (82%) of the teachers in the
survey responded that felt that they had not beenwere never provided
sufficient education to deal with their special education students.
Additional support from the public school system administration could
provide professional development sessions with music therapists,
college professors and expert music educators from other school
systems.
Currently, there is no requirement from the Virginia Department of
Education that higher learning institutions include special need training
for music education majors in the curriculum. There is currently only one
graduate class available in the state for music education for special
learners (Hammel, 2008). The Virginia Music Educators Association has
62
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
63/78
provided workshops at its annual convention for teachers to attend.
Much of the special education training available for the Virginia music
educator is only an afterthought once the teacher has received their
music education degree and Virginia Teachers License. There has not
been enough emphasis placed on educating the music educator about
the special needs students that they are going to encounter in a general
music class.
The power of the experiment was not as strong as it could have
been for this study. Because it was sent through a school e-mail
account, the e-mail was able to be ignored and unanswered, leaving
some of the stronger, older teachers opinions out of the results. The use
of the adapted survey from the Sharrock (2007) study showed the same
flaws as his Survey of Teacher Attitudes toward Mainstreaming. The
change in the survey allowed music educators to say their true extended
thoughts in a small comment box on the internet website. It would have
been easier for them to express their thoughts through one-on-one
conversations. It would have been good to have done a qualitative study
to gain even more information from the surveyed teachers.
Overall, additional studies on collaboration between general music
teachers and special education teachers could be continued. It would be
good to compare how other resource teachers, such as adaptive PE
programs or art programs conduct IEP meetings to set accommodations
and strategies for the students to learn. It would be good to measure the
63
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
64/78
attitudes of teachers throughout the entire state of Virginia. This could
be done through the VMEA website and convention goers.
On a personal level, the researcher plans I will be able to use the
findings of this study when approaching the administration and guidance
counselors of my own school to set up a schedule to incorporate an ideal
schedule where the students would get the best of both worlds including
accompanying peers to class and providing an adaptive music class for
them to work on their own musical skill level. (CONGRATULATIONS ON
RESEARCHING AND WRITING A SUBSTANTIVE, INFORMATIVE AND
IMPACTFUL RESEACRCH PAPER, STEPHANIE!!!!)
64
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
65/78
List of References
Atterbury, B. (1986). A survey of present mainstreaming practices in the
Southern United
States.Journal of Music Therapy, 23(4), 202-207.
Atterbury, B. (1990). Mainstreaming exceptional learners in music.
Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Charles, B. (1990). The personal and social development of children with
special
educational needs through musical activities. London: University
of London,
Institute of Education.
Chen, Y. (2008). A Research Procedure and Study of Elementary Music
Curriculum for
Children with Special Needs in Inclusive Music Programs. Ann
Arbor: ProQuest
Information and Learning.
Colwell, Cynthia Melissa (1995). Adapting music instruction for
elementary students
with special needs: A pilot. Music Therapy Perspectives, Vol.
13; Issue 2; pp. 97-103.
Colwell, C. M., & Thompson, L. K. (2000). Inclusion of information on
mainstreaming
65
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
66/78
in undergraduate music education curricula. Journal of Music
Therapy, 37(3), 20521.
Darrow, A.A. (1990). Research on mainstreaming in music education.
Update:
Applications of Research in Music Education, 42, 94-104.
Forsythe, J., & Jellison, J. (1977). It's the Law. Music Educators Journal,
64(3), pp.30-
35.
Gilbert, J.P. and Asmus, E.P. (1981). Mainstreaming: Music Educators
participation and
professional needs. Journal of Research in Music Education, 29,
283-289.
Harris, T. (1991). The development of teaching strategies for the
multiple-handicapped
music classroom. Louisville: University Of Louisville.
Hammel, A. (2004). Inclusion Strategies That Work. Music Educators
Journal, 90(5), pp.
33-37.
Hammel, A., & Sobol, E. (2008).An Attitude and Approach for Teaching
Music to
66
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
67/78
Special Learners. New York: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Hammel, A (2008) Music and Students with Special Needs. Retrieved
October 28, 2008
from http://www.people.vcu.edu/
%7Ebhammel/special/types/autism/index.htm.
Hawkins, G. D. (1991). Attitudes toward Mainstreaming Students with
Disabilities
Among Regular Elementary Music and Physical Education
Educators.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 52(09), 3245A. Ann Arbor:
Proquest.
Hock, M., Hasazi, S. B. & Patton, A. (1990). Collaboration for learning;
Strategies for
program success. Music Educators Journal, 76(8), pp.44-48.
Jellison, J.A (1996). A content analysis of music research with disabled
children and youth with disabilities (1975-1993): Applications in
special education. In C. E. Furman (Ed.), Effectiveness of music
therapy procedures: Documentation of research and clinical
practice (2nd ed., pp. 167-229). Silver Spring, MD: American
Music Therapy Association.
67
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
68/78
Jellison, J. (1985). An investigation of the Factor Structure of a Scale for
the Measurement of Children's Attitudes Toward Handicapped
Peers within Regular Music Environments. Journal of Research in
Music Education, 33(3), 167-177.
Jellison, J., Huck, A., & Brooks, B. (1998). Structuring small groups and
music reinforcement to facilitate positive interactions and
acceptance of severely handicapped students in the regular music
classroom. Reston: Music Educators National Conference.
Jellison, Judith A. & Duke, Robert A. (1994). The mental retardation label:
Music teachers' and prospective teachers' expectations for
children's social and music behaviors. Journal of Music Therapy,
31(3), 166-185.
Jellison, Judith A. & Flowers, Patricia J. (1991). Talking about music:
Interviews with
disabled and non-disabled children. Journal of Research in Music
Education. 39(4), 322-333.
Jellison, Judith A. & Taylor, Donald M. (2007). Attitudes toward inclusion
and students
with disabilities: A review of three decades of music research.
Bulletin of the Council for Research in Music Education. 172, 9-23.
Kaiser, K. A., & Johnson, K. E. (2000). The effect of an interactive
experience on music
68
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
69/78
majors perceptions of music for deaf students. Journal of Music
Therapy, 37(3),
22234.
Massie, C.M. (1993). Preparing pre-service teachers for mainstreaming.
Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Virginia.
National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabilities (NICHCY).
Individualized
Education Program. Retrieved August 20, 2008 from
http://www.nichcy.org/SchoolsAndAdministrators/Pages/KeyTerms.
aspx
Patterson, Allyson (2003). Music Teachers and Music Therapists: Helping
Children
Together. Music Educators Journal. 89(4), 35-38
Public Law 108-446-Dec.3, 2004. (2004, December 3). Retrieved Oct. 20,
2008, from
ies.ed.gov/ncser/pdf/pl108-446.pdf
Ropp, C., Caldwell, J., Dixon, A., Angell, M., & Vogt, W. (2006). Special
education
administrators' perceptions of music therapy in special education
programs.Music
Therapy Perspectives, 24(2), 87-93.
Sacks, O. (2008). Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain (Vintage).
69
http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID00274321http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID00274321http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID00274321http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID00274321http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID00274321http://iimp.chadwyck.com/articles/displayItem.do?QueryName=articles&Multi=&ResultsID=11A453F0DCA&ItemNumber=21&ItemID=iimp00280970&ItemID=iimp00280970&journalID=JID002743218/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
70/78
New York:
Vintage.
Salvador, Karen (2010). Who Isnt a Special Learner? A Survey of How
Music
Education Programs Prepare Future Educators to Work with
Exceptional Populations. Journal of Music Teacher Education.
October 2010 vol. 20 no.1 27-38.
Sharrock, B. (2008). A Comparison of the Attitudes of South Carolina
Special Education
and Chorus Teachers toward Mainstreaming Students with Mild
and Moderate
Mental Disabilities. Ann Arbor: UMI Proquest Information and
Learning.
Sideridis, G. D., & Chandler, J. P. (1995). Attitudes and characteristics of
general music
teachers toward integrating children with developmental
disabilities. Update:
Applications of Research in Music Education, 14(1), 1115.
Smith, D.D (2004) Introduction to special education (5th edition). Boston:
Pearson
Education, Inc.
Stone, S.J. (1980).A Study of teacher attitudes that affect the quality of
education for
70
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
71/78
exceptional children. Dissertation Abstracts International, 41 (08),
3371A. UMI:
Proquest Information and Learning.
Thompson, K. P. (1990). Working toward solutions in mainstreaming.
Music Educators
Journal, 76(8), 30-35.
Walter, Jennifer S. (2006) The Basic IDEA: The Individual with Disabilities
Act in Your
Classroom. Teaching Music, 23-26
Wilson, Brian & McCrary, Jan (1996). The effect of instruction on music
teachers
attitudes toward students with disabilities.Journal of Research in
Music
Education, 44(1), 25-33.
VanWeelden, Kimberly and Whipple, Jennifer(2005). The Effects of Field
Experience on
Music Education Majors Perceptions of Music Instruction for
Secondary
Students with Special Needs.Journal of Music Teacher Education,
14(2), 62-70.
71
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
72/78
Appendices
Appendices A. Initial Contact Letter with Web Consent and Survey Link
Dear Colleague,
As a part of my final project for MUED 680 class at James MadisonUniversity, I am conducting a survey of those who teach general musicand students with special needs in all elementary schools in HanoverCounty, Henrico County and Richmond City Public Schools.
72
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
73/78
In addition to my graduate studies, I teach choir and music theory atPatrick Henry High School in Hanover County Public Schools in Virginia. Iam interested in how students with disabilities are involved with musicin our schools. In addition, I will be gathering information about teacherperceptions toward these students participation, as well as perceptions
about collaboration between music and special education teachers. Yourparticipation in this survey will help tremendously in accomplishing thisendeavor.I assure you that your responses will be kept confidential. However, thesurvey forms will be coded so that I will be able to pair teachers fromthe same school in order to compare teacher responses on theperceptions of collaboration.The entire survey should take only fifteen minutes of your time.Follow this link to survey monkey access your survey:
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/musicteachersThank you for taking time out of your busy schedule to complete thesurvey. Thank you also for your time and effort in teaching music to allstudents.Sincerely,Stephanie Ransome
Appendices B. Follow-up Contact E-mailDear Colleagues,Thank you for those of you that have agreed to fill out my survey for mythesis. I have just had a request to send the link out again. So, I will justsend the whole e-mail once again. Once I have compiled my data, I'll letyou know the outcome and pass on any interesting ideas that we canuse in our classrooms.Sincerely,
Stephanie Ransome
Appendices C. A Survey of Teacher Attitudes toward InclusionElementary General1. What school system do you teach music in?
73
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/musicteachershttp://www.surveymonkey.com/s/musicteachers8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
74/78
2. Where does your primary teaching take place?music classroomself contained classroom
3. What is your primary teaching responsibility?
Music teacherSpecial needs teacher
4. Are students with special needs placed in your class as a part of theIndividual Education Plan for inclusion purposes?YesNo
5. Why are students with special needs not placed into the generalmusic classroom?Scheduling difficulties
Students are not interested in musicConcerns about the disabled students musical abilitiesConcerns about the disabled students performance abilitiesConcerns about the disabled students behavior in classConcerns about behavior in performance situationsParents concerns or wishesLack of support of administrationOther (please specify)
6. How often are students with special needs placed in general music?every year
occasionally(course placement changes from year to year
7. For what part of the year do special needs students typically remainin music?less than nine weeksnine weeksone semesterfor the entire year
8. Is there a maximum number of special needs students placed in anyone general music class?
yesno
9. How many students with special needs are placed in one music classat one time?1-34-67-10
74
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
75/78
more than 1010. Approximately what percent of the total enrollment of the class arestudents with special needs?0-10%11-25%
26-50%more than 50%
11. The inclusion of students with special needs requires significantchanges in regular music classroom procedures.AlwaysOccasionallyRarelyNever
12. The music teacher attends and participates in IEP meetings where
decisions are made to place students in to a music class.AlwaysOccasionallyRarelyNever
13. The music teacher makes recommendations concerningaccommodations and modifications to instruction for students withspecial needs.AlwaysOccasionally
RarelyNever
14. The music teacher participates in special reviews of IEPs for studentswith special needs who are included in the general music classroom.AlwaysOccasionallyRarelyNever
15. The school administration encourages collaboration between the
music teacher and the teacher(s) of students with special needs.Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree
16. The school administration facilitates collaboration between themusic teacher and the teacher of students with special needs.
75
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
76/78
Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree17. How frequently do the special education teacher and the music
teacher meet to discuss progress and/or needs of the students withspecial needs that attend music class?DailyWeeklyMonthlyAnnuallyAs Needed
18. Special education and music teacher should collaborate instructingstudents with special needs in the general music classroom.Strongly Agree
AgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree
19. Bringing special education teachers into the music classroom canhave a disruptive effect on the classroom environment.Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree
20. The music teacher receives little assistance from special educationteachers in modifying instruction for students with special needs.Strongly AgreeAgreeDisagreeStrongly Disagree
21. A special education teacher or teacher aide attends music class withstudents with special needs to assist in instruction and discipline.AlwaysOccasionally
RarelyNever
22. The music teacher receives information concerning accommodationsand modifications deemed necessary by the IEP team.AlwaysOccasionallyRarely
76
8/2/2019 Final Edited Stephanie Mued 680 Document3
77/78
Never
23. Music teachers have sufficient training to teach students with specialneeds.Always
OccasionallyRarelyNever24. Into what general education classes do IEP teams place studentswith disabilities?English/ Language ArtsPhysical EducationScienceSocial StudiesMusicMathematics
ArtLibraryGuidanceOther (please specify)
25. What criteria does the IEP team base their d