University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

(USC Thesis Other)

Trending upward: an evaluation study of teacher practices in serving special needs students in a public high school

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Trending Upward: An Evaluation Study of Teacher Practices in Serving Special Needs
Students in a Public High School

by

Dario Lujan

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

May 2021

Copyright 2021 Dario M. Lujan

ii
DEDICATION
I view my experience of obtaining a doctoral degree as my life’s dream and had a lot of
people believe in my ability along the way. This academic journey has come full circle for me as
it began with the death of my grandfather.
I dedicate my journey to my grandfather with those that are still present in my life today.
My grandfather’s last words to me were “Do it for me,” and that was my motivation for this
academic journey. I must give a lot of credit to my wife, Maria Kelly- Lujan, for having patience
with me and embracing my journey to complete my doctoral degree. She is truly the most
beautiful soul. I give a lot of credit to my daughter Raelynne George, she makes life blissful and
rewarding. My grandmother, Ortencia Montezuma, and uncle, Edward Montezuma, have
supported me. I wanted my grandmother to see me graduate from the greatest school on this
earth. To Dave Sierra who gave me great counsel and provided me with perspective that will
help in the next phase of my life. To Dr. Mark Saka, professor of history at Sul Ross State
University, helped me realize my potential and pushed me to excel in my studies. Dr. Abelardo
Baeza showed me that it is possible to achieve success even when people are against you and I
wish he was here to see it. Julie Vega helped understand that writing was a great, difficult
endeavor. She taught me to fight for everything and embrace failure as an opportunity to do great
things.
To those who doubted me, my mother and others, I have excelled despite you with great
support from others that believed I could reach this point in my life.

iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my dissertation committee: Dr. Maria Ott, Dr. David Cash, and Dr.
William Bewley. To my dissertation chair, Dr. Maria Ott, I appreciate your guidance, honesty,
and integrity with guiding my research. Dr. David and Dr. Bewley have affected my writing
greatly and I am indebted to them for giving me the confidence to complete my study. To the
faculty of this great university I appreciate the knowledge that was shared and the program for
challenging the way I perceive leadership and the world.

iv
ABSTRACT
This study applies the gap analysis model to understand barriers facing teachers to
differentiate instruction for special needs students in the general education setting. The purpose
of this study was to conduct an evaluation gap analysis for implementing differentiated
instructional strategies to improve outcomes of special needs students in the general education
classroom. The analysis focused on discovering gaps that exist for general education teachers
differentiating instruction using knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors. Six
instructors participated in the study. This study contributed to the continuing study of improving
the outcomes of special needs student in public high schools and discusses how differentiating
instruction can improve the educational experience for special needs students.

v
Table of Contents
DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
ABSTRACT iv
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1
Organizational Context and Mission 1
Organizational Goal 2
Related Literature 5
Importance of the Evaluation 6
Description of Stakeholder Groups 7
Stakeholder Group of Study 8
Purpose of the Project 9
Methodological Framework 9
Definitions 10
Organization of the Project 11
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE 12
Literature on the Problem of Practice 12
Knowledge-Focused Research and Literature 14
Teacher Knowledge-Application of IEP Modifications 14
Teacher Knowledge-Professional Development for Teachers 15
Teacher Knowledge-Limited Knowledge of Instructional Strategies 15
Teacher Motivation Focused Research and Literature 16
Teacher Motivation-Low Self Efficacy Towards Inclusion 16
Teacher Motivation- Self Efficacy 17

vi
Organizational Focused Literature 18
Organizational Influence-Support for Teachers in the Classroom 18
Organizational Influence-Access to Professional Development 18
The Differentiated Teacher: Goals 19
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Framework 22
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Introduction of
Knowledge Types 23
Conceptual Knowledge 23
Procedural Knowledge 24
Motivation 27
Organization 28
Conclusion 34
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS 35
Participating Stakeholders 35
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale 36
Interview Strategy and Rationale 36
Data Collection and Instrumentation 36
Data Analysis 39
Credibility and Trustworthiness 40
Validity and Reliability 40
Ethics 41
Conclusion 42
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS 43
Participating Stakeholders 43

vii
Determination of Assets and Needs 44
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes 45
Procedural Knowledge 45
Teachers Implementing Modifications in Accordance with IEPs 45
Teachers Knowledge of Differentiated Instruction for Special Needs Students 46
Conceptual Knowledge 48
The Incorporation of Differentiated Strategies and Alignment with IEP Modifications 49
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes 50
Teacher Belief in Capability of Differentiating Instruction for Special Needs Students 50
Results and Findings for Organization Causes 51
Cultural Setting: Clearly Specified Goals with IEP Modifications at Spear High School 51
Cultural Setting: Preparation Time/Professional Development for Teacher/Co-teacher 52
Cultural Model: Advocacy for Equity for Special Needs Students in the Classroom 53
Summary of Validated Influences 55
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS 60
Organizational Context and Mission 61
Organizational Performance Goal 61
Description of Stakeholder Groups 62
Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge Influences 62
Procedural Knowledge Solutions and Recommendations 63
Recommendations for Practice to Address Motivation Influences 64
Motivational Influence 65
Recommendations for Practice to Address Organizational Influences 66
Discussion of the Organizational Recommendations 67

viii
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan 68
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators 68
Level 3: Behavior 69
Level 2: Learning 70
Level 1: Reaction 72
Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach 72
Limitations and Delimitations 73
Future Research 74
Conclusion 74
References 76
APPENDIX A: Interview Protocol 88
APPENDIX B: Interview Questions 90
APPENDIX C: Instructional Strategies and KMO Factors 95

1
CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
Schools and school districts that fail to meet the educational needs of students with
disabilities in the classroom risk being identified as underperforming (Cortiella, 2007). It is
important to examine how teachers are implementing classroom instruction techniques for
special needs students in the general education classroom. This research study examined the
instructional techniques that teachers implement in the classroom to teach special needs students
and identified factors that influence teacher implementation of professional development
strategies focused on educating students with disabilities instructed by the special education
program (SPED). This study will help teachers adopt instructional practices that will facilitate
learning for special needs students.
Organizational Context and Mission
Spear High School (a pseudonym)
1
provides opportunities for students from underserved
communities to excel through project- based and blended learning. This approach is used for
both general education and special needs students. Spear High School instructs SPED students
and has been identified as not meeting federal Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA)
compliance. Most students who attend Spear High School come from underserved communities
from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The mission of Spear High School communicates that the
school prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment and fosters
rigorous and blended learning opportunities within a supportive environment. Also, the school’s
mission describes that it aspires for students to make contributions to an ever-changing
environment. Prospective students with special needs are between the ages of 13 to 17. The
population of Spear High School is 3,000 students; 7.1% of the students are identified as being in

1
Information concerning Spear High School originates from organizational documents and
websites not cited to protect anonymity.

2
special education (Texas Education Agency, 2019). Spear High School is part of the Paso Del
Norte school district (a pseudonym) that features seven high schools and 39 elementary/ middle
schools. The primary goal of faculty is to increase student achievement and use instructional
methods that help all student populations succeed (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan,
2019).
2

Spear High School prepares students for higher education and fosters a safe environment
that is collaborative for student achievement (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019).
In addition, the Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan (2019) provides information about
the school and its programs and indicates that Spear High School prepares students for higher
education and fosters a safe and collaborative environment for student achievement. The study
examined how teachers are using instructional techniques in the general education classroom to
help special needs students.
Organizational Goal
Spear High School prepares each student for higher education by providing a safe, caring,
and collaborative atmosphere (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). By the 2020-
21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district initiatives to
effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress. This organizational goal
was established through a comprehensive improvement plan that was completed by the principal
and assistant principals in response to federal compliance issues and mandates from the Paso del
Norte School District (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). In addition, it was
important to examine the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors, as outlined in Clark

2
Information concerning Paso Del Norte originates from organizational documents and websites
not cited to protect anonymity.

3
and Estes (2008), that influence teachers as they implement the initiatives established to improve
SPED student achievement.
The organizational goal was established in response to a drop in achievement for special
needs students. Moreover, it is important to examine how teachers are using instructional
techniques to influence student achievement of special needs students in the classroom given the
identified drop in progress from special needs students at Spear High School. In addition, the
data used to track student progress was established by the Texas Education Agency (TEA), the
state education entity in Texas (Teach for Texas, 2019). The end of course (EOC) examination is
the state delivered test students must take in order to advance to the next grade level. Students
with disabilities are a student population that was tracked within the TEA ratings. As a result, the
TEA EOC examinations are applied to Spear High School to evaluate student progress for the
academic year.
In a campus improvement plan authored by the Spear High School administration,
English I (freshman English) EOC results for special education populations decreased from the
previous year, 2018-2019 (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). As an illustration
of the data, special needs students approaching grade level went down from the district average
of 21.8% to 14.9% (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). The 21.8% represents the
district average of special needs students who passed the EOC examination and the 14.9% is the
score of passing students at Spear High School. This score is an accommodation for special
needs students taking the EOC. The improvement report cited that the examination was
structured differently from the previous year, and that students were not pacing themselves
correctly when taking the examination (Paso Del Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). Since
64% - 65% is the passing score range established by TEA, and Spear High School SPED

4
students in freshman English scored 60%, it is important that teachers focus on improving
achievement to meet the performance requirements (Teach for Texas, 2019).
To emphasize, Spear High School had a score of 60% reflected in the freshman English
EOC examinations for special needs students who took the test. For this reason, Spear High
School did not reach the 64%- 65% threshold the state mandates for special needs students to
show academic achievement.
Student achievement, student progress, closing performance gaps, and post-secondary
readiness comprise the performance index by the TEA. The performance indices that were used
for this study from the TEA performance study reflect standards set by TEA as the benchmark of
expected achievement, indicating a gap between the current performance of 60% and the target
of 64%- 65% set as the progress measure for special needs students.
Measuring student progress, with examining the instructional techniques teachers use in
the classroom for special needs students, was used in this gap analysis study. Moreover, this
research studied formative data that can be used to assess the implementation of teacher
instructional strategies for SPED students and to measure student progress. In addition, the
district benchmark scores were used to show a decrease or increase in achievement for SPED
students. Benchmarks are used to gauge student achievement and are developed by the school
district. Utilizing the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework, data was gathered to
evaluate knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact teachers in
implementing instructional techniques to teach special needs students in general education
classrooms. Benchmark assessments provide a valuable tool for teachers to measure student
progress during the academic year and to highlight where changes to instruction are needed to
support student achievement.

5
Related Literature
Despite the spirit of federal laws to promote equity, the research showed that special
needs students are being provided limited instructional opportunities in the general education
classroom because of funding cuts (Barkmeier, 2012). In addition, the quality of instruction for
special needs students continues to be an impediment to academic success (Kovach, 1995).
Teachers feel the pressure to meet academic yearly progress goals and funding is tied to meeting
student achievement (Aronson, Murphy, & Saultz, 2016). Districts and schools felt the pressure
to attain Academic Yearly Progress (AYP) goals by emphasizing test-related content focused on
students near the statistical cut-off points or bubble kids (Mintrop & Zane, 2017). AYP is the
measurement used to determine how public schools are performing academically according to
tests delivered by a state’s education agency or body. Teachers use test taking related strategies
to help students do well on the state mandated examination. These bubble kids were the point of
focused instructional efforts to improve academic progress by concentrating on test strategies
and skills to pass the state examination. Bubble kids at Spear High School are identified based
upon data collected by teachers from district benchmark examinations to identify students that
are not meeting achievement goals. This practice of targeting specific students relates to this
study because the “bubble kids” are SPED students that did not meet academic achievement
goals on the EOC examinations, set by TEA, in English classes at Spear High School (Paso Del
Norte Campus Improvement Plan, 2019). The issue of disproportionality is present within the
spectrum of academic progress for special needs students.

6
Importance of the Evaluation
It is important to examine the preparedness of teachers who teach SPED students in their
general education classrooms. Students with special needs are a population that needs proper
classroom instruction for them to succeed in school (Barkmeier, 2012). Special needs students
can become vulnerable to not learning important skills in the classroom without proper
instructional strategies or teachers that are competent in the use of said strategies (Rayner, 2007).
Spear High School teachers have attended district training to prepare and implement strategies
designed to improve performance of SPED students. This study investigated the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational factors that influence teachers as they work to implement
strategies presented during training workshops provided by the school district and school site.
Obiakor, Beachum, and Harris (2010) found that economically disadvantaged students
who came from poor families often attend schools where teachers or other personnel are ill-
prepared to deliver an equitable education as promised under federal law. As found by Obiakor
et al. (2010), the use of unqualified personnel makes it difficult to educate or meet the
educational needs of students with disabilities. Management reforms are essential to serving
special needs students. Rayner (2007) placed a value of utilizing different ways and applications
to successfully lead programs that affect special needs students. Developing a strategic process to
manage actions or outcomes must be knowledge based and using research-based techniques by
administrators to cultivate successful academic achievement outcomes for special needs students
are key components to delivering instruction to special needs students. Management reforms are
needed to teach students with disabilities in schools. Without qualified teachers or
administrators, students with disabilities will face difficulties and limited opportunities in the
secondary school setting (DeMatthews, 2014). From an organizational perspective, the lack of
student achievement or growth for all students can lead to sanctions by the state including losing

7
funding when federal accountability standards are not met. The lack of funding may have an
adverse effect on a school’s financial viability and ability to provide instruction for special needs
students (Aronson et al., 2016).
Teachers and their readiness to deliver effective instruction for SPED students in general
education classrooms will impact student achievement (Obiakor etal., 2010). Furthermore, SPED
students impacted by lack of teacher readiness to deliver instruction in the general education
classroom demonstrates that there is an uneven playing field to gain positive outcomes in student
achievement (Aronson et al., 2016).
Student achievement is the mission of Spear High School and failure to demonstrate
progress for special needs students will lead to impactful consequences. For example, the loss of
funding will decrease the capacity of the school to hire more special education teachers, retain
effective teachers, or other support staff necessary to help special needs students achieve positive
outcomes. Accountability goals are not met when teachers are not ready to provide effective
instruction and administrators are not meeting goals for accountability measures (Mintrop &
Zane, 2017).
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Teachers, school administration, and students. Teachers have to tailor instruction for
their diverse student populations while fulfilling the commitments expressed by the mission
statement of Spear High School. Students are the beneficiaries of the competent strategies that
affect student improvement. In addition, school administrators must provide training and
resources for teachers who instruct special needs students. Table 1 examines stakeholder goals of
school administrators, teachers, and students.

8
Table 1
Organizational Mission, Global, and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission

Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment.
Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning
opportunities built on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all
students to positively contribute to society.
Organizational Performance Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
School Administration Teachers Students
By May 2020, administrators will
provide training and resources for
teachers who instruct special needs
students.
By May 2020, teachers will
implement strategies
presented in district training
to modify the core curriculum
for special needs students.
By May 2020, special needs
students will see an increase
in district benchmark scores
by 5%.

Stakeholder Group of Study
The stakeholder of focus for this study was the teachers who were interviewed on how
they facilitated instruction of special needs learners in the classroom. The stakeholders’ goal is to
implement effective instructional strategies to effectively instruct SPED students that are in their
general education classrooms. This study focused on teachers and their ability to implement
effective instructional techniques presented during district staff development. Furthermore,
teachers must use Individual Education Plans (IEPs) to coordinate instruction on what
specifically the student needs in order to learn, incorporate modifications into instruction, and the

9
teacher must be fully capable to deliver the instruction to the special needs students (Aronson et
al., 2016). IEPs are created by parents and district officials for a child in a public school.
Purpose of the Project
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of training provided to
general education teachers who educate SPED students in their core instructional classrooms.
The school district and school site provide training and support; however, teacher
implementation depends on the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that impact
their ability to effectively incorporate the new learning into their planning and delivery of
instruction.
The questions that guided this study were:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to implement IEP modifications?
2. What are the recommendations for practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors supporting teachers to provide instruction to special
needs students?
Methodological Framework
A gap analysis (Clark & Estes, 2008) was used to explore the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors that influence teachers who are assigned to teach students with disabilities
in the general education classroom. This project employed qualitative methods for data gathering
and analysis. The gap analysis model was appropriate with the perspective of an evaluative
design (Clark & Estes, 2008). Creswell and Creswell (2018) offer that purposeful sampling
involves settings, persons, and activities that are deliberately selected to provide information for
relevant questions and goals. In this study, the goal for purposeful sampling was to relate how
teachers are serving special needs students in the classroom and the activities that are specifically

10
designed into their lesson plans. Weiss (1994) establishes that the interviewer-respondent
relationship must work together to produce information that is key to the research project. The
interviewer defined areas of exploration while the respondent provided observations on the topic,
and the interviewer respected the respondent’s integrity while ensuring their credibility would
not be damaged while participating in this study. Questions identified how special education
affected the way teachers plan lessons for instruction in the classroom, how they used
differentiating instruction for their special needs students, the gaps that existed for special needs
students in the classroom, and the specific strategies they utilized to teach special needs students.
The questions were marked and identified by specific research questions related to this study:
knowledge, motivation, and organizational constructs to triangulate data. Document analysis was
used for this study. Agendas collected from staff development were used to examine what
techniques were shared by the school district. These staff development agendas were used to
identify if teachers are using the techniques presented in professional development in their
classrooms when triangulated with the interviews of English department instructors at Spear
High School. Combining both interviews and document analysis allows the researcher to
triangulate concepts to determine whether a gap exists (Clark & Estes, 2008).
Definitions
Section 504. The section in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 that prohibits discrimination
based upon disability (Cortiella, 2007). This statute requires the needs of students with
disabilities to be met the same as those of students without disabilities.
Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1975.This federal legislation provided a free and
appropriate education to students with disabilities to meet their needs (Cortiella, 2007). Also, this
act gave parents a voice on educational decisions that are made by a school.

11
Differentiated instruction. A framework of teaching that provides all students from
diverse backgrounds a range of options for understanding content (Cortiella, 2007).
Individualized Education Plan (IEP). Helps establish specific goals for a child’s needs.
It includes an evaluation, a description of the student’s current academic status, measured goals,
and transition for students (Cortiella, 2007).
Organization of the Project
Five chapters were used to organize this study. This chapter provided the reader with the
key concepts and terminology commonly found in a discussion about compliance with federal
legislation and the need for qualified personnel to provide instruction to students with
disabilities. The organization’s mission, goals and stakeholders and the framework for the project
were introduced. Chapter 2 provides a review of current literature surrounding the scope of the
study. Topics include the role of differentiated instruction to teach students with disabilities,
qualified personnel in the classroom, federal compliance policy, and compliance with federal
law. Chapter 3 details the knowledge, motivation and organizational elements to be examined as
well as methodology when it comes to the choice of participants, data collection and analysis. In
Chapter 4, the data and results are assessed and analyzed. Chapter 5 provides recommendations,
based on data and literature, for closing the perceived gaps as well as recommendations for an
implementation and evaluation plan for the solutions.

12
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE

This chapter includes a literature review that examines the root causes of gaps in
measuring influences on teachers instructing students with disabilities as they work to implement
instructional strategies in the general education classroom. The review includes general research
on the importance of compliance with federal regulations and of teachers differentiating
instruction for students with mild to moderate disabilities. In addition, an overview of literature
on differentiated instruction and on challenges instructing students with disabilities in the
classroom is included. Specifically, this review provides an in- depth discussion of scientifically
based instructional practices and characteristics of teachers who instruct students with
disabilities. Therefore, this section includes current research on differentiated instruction for
teachers and continuing professional development practices in the public-school system. This
study discusses special education in secondary schools through knowledge, teacher motivation,
and organizational influences based on focused research and literature. Following the general
research literature, the review turns to the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis conceptual
framework. Furthermore, the gap analysis framework includes knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on teachers’ abilities to implement differentiated strategies for students
with disabilities in the general education classroom.
Literature on the Problem of Practice
History and growth of the field. The field of special education has developed over time,
starting with early federal legislation related to students with special needs. Prior to the 1950s
there were few federal laws that benefited students with disabilities (Martin, Martin, & Terman,
1996). The Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 was the first major
legislative act used to subsidize services directed to specific student populations (Martin et al.,
1996). In the 1960s, education advocates sought exclusive federal funding for students with

13
disabilities with an entitlement for a free education (Martin et al., 1996). The Education for the
Handicapped Act of 1975 (EHA) ensured that special needs students had access to an education
in public schools that accept federal funds (Yell, Rogers, & Rogers, 1998). The EHA also
created an education plan, with parent input, that would duplicate an educational experience with
that of non-disabled students (Yell et al., 1998). Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973
guaranteed access to education and other “vital” public services (Yell et al., 1998). Federal
legislation has impacted the field of special education and gives guidance for serving students
with disabilities.
Secondary schools’ compliance. Secondary schools must meet federal compliance
regulations to properly instruct students with disabilities in the classroom. States must collect,
and report data based upon special education representation that is disaggregated by race
(Thorius & Maxcy, 2015). In addition, schools analyze demographic data to determine if
placement of students in special education programs is disproportionate by race (Thorius &
Maxcy, 2015). Policies and procedures must be reviewed and revised to reduce or eliminate the
improper referral of students of color to special education programs. Implementation of these
policies and procedures would be simplified if structures or resources are available for federal
programs (Marshall & Patterson, 2002). Schools promote innovation to solve problems, but
governance programs can appear to be a checklist of tasks. In reality, educators and districts
must work together to facilitate desired outcomes of policy intentions.
Example of non-compliance under federal law. Inappropriate placement in special
education programs can lead to unintended consequences for students with disabilities. A 2009
report from the Department of Education found that a significant number of students from
culturally or linguistically diverse backgrounds are wrongfully categorized or placed in special
education programs (Castro-Villareal, Villareal, & Sullivan, 2016). Inappropriate placement

14
leads to more restrictive classroom settings and reduces exposure to high-quality instruction.
School compliance with federal regulations is necessary to avoid consequences and sanctions
that can affect special education programs.
Knowledge-Focused Research and Literature
There are knowledge factors that impact a teacher’s ability to facilitate or teach special
needs children in the classroom (Nilsen, 2017). The application of IEP modifications, limited
knowledge of instructional strategies, and professional development of teachers will be examined
in the literature. All of these three elements are essential to provide focused instruction to special
needs students.
Teacher Knowledge-Application of IEP Modifications
The IEP involves a team of teachers, family members, school administrators, and other
officials to set special education instructional methods that a student will receive (Barnard-Brak
& Lechtenberger, 2010). Also, the process of developing an IEP is a collaborative effort between
stakeholders that has the best intentions of the students as they progress through school (Barnard-
Brak & Lechtenberger, 2010). General education teachers have a limited knowledge of applying
IEP modifications special needs students. Marino, Marino, and Shaw (2006) make the point that
teachers have limited knowledge of assistive technology (AT) because of a lack of training.
Assistive technology is an instrument or product system that is used to increase or improve
functional capabilities of special needs students (IDEA P.L.108-446, 2004). Furthermore,
teachers express low satisfaction with the IEP process for setting student achievement goals
(Cooc, 2019). The language constructed within individual learning plans has the power to
heighten the disability of a child and minimize their importance as individual students (Nilsen,
2017).

15
Teacher Knowledge-Professional Development for Teachers
Targeted and ongoing professional development is necessary to ensure that students with
special needs receive the best instruction within the classroom (Pugach &Winn, 2011). Cooc
(2019) found that teachers who worked in large schools with a high percentage population of
special needs students had less resources due to budget cuts. This resulted in limited training
opportunities for teachers and led to reduced expertise in addressing learning needs for the
special education population (Cooc, 2019). Many teachers feel ill prepared to meet the needs of
students with disabilities in their classrooms and deliver effective instruction (Jenkins &
Yoshimura, 2010). Teachers must have training in inclusion, so students have a sense of
belonging in the classroom. For example, inclusion addresses the learning needs of special
education students within the general education classroom (Shady, Luther, & Richman, 2013).
Daane, Beirne-Smith, and Latham (2000) stated that teachers who lacked training and skills
necessary for teaching special needs students reported difficulties implementing inclusive
practices such as co- teaching.
Teacher Knowledge-Limited Knowledge of Instructional Strategies
Many teachers who instruct special needs students do not use evidence-based strategies to
increase achievement in the classroom (Klingner, Urbach, Golos, Brownell, & Menon, 2010).
According to Kutash, Duchnowski, and Lynn (2009), professional development sponsored by
school districts failed to demonstrate a transfer of skills to the classroom. Thus, the strategies are
not sustained after they are taught through professional development (Kutash et al., 2009).
Maccini, Gagnon, and Hughes (2002) noted several recommendations for teachers to use
technology strategically for instruction and instructional design. The incorporation of technology
enhances lessons for special needs students (Maccini et al., 2002). Kennedy and Deshler (2010)
stated that teachers need guidance for selecting or designing lessons that involve technology to

16
support the learning needs of special needs children. Also, Kennedy and Deshler (2010) stated
that teachers, not familiar with technology, will not have the skills to support special needs
students with classroom activities that involve technological applications. King-Sears and
Evmenova (2007) argued that technology must not be overused to facilitate instruction for
special needs students, so it is not the only mechanism used and students do not get bored.
Teachers’ limited knowledge of IEP modifications, professional development
opportunities, and instructional strategies affect how special needs students receive instruction
within the classroom. Additionally, limited knowledge of instructional strategies and IEP
modifications also affects motivational factors for teachers delivering instruction to special needs
students.
Teacher Motivation Focused Research and Literature
There are important motivational factors that affect the abilities of teachers to create
classrooms in which special needs students can receive an equitable education. Low self-
efficacy towards inclusion and the role of self- efficacy are examined in this section of the
literature. Examining these two sides of motivation affect the learning environment of special
needs students.
Teacher Motivation- Low Self Efficacy Towards Inclusion
DeBoer, Pijl, and Minaert (2011) indicated that most teachers expressed uncertainty or
had negative attitudes moving towards the concept of inclusion in the classroom. Inclusion is an
important concept when teaching or facilitating instruction for special needs students in the
classroom (Kirk, 1998). Currently, federal legislation mandates special needs students’ access to
a general classroom with Response to Intervention (RTI), which is an initiative that ensures
proper instruction for both general education and special needs students instructed together
(McHatton & Parker, 2013). There are demands on teachers to understand special needs students

17
and how the inclusive classroom is essential to net positive outcomes for all learners (President’s
Commission on Excellence in Special Education, 2002). However, Jobling and Moni (2004) and
Kirk (1998) indicated that teachers feel unprepared for teaching within an inclusive classroom
environment. Research consistently identifies teacher concerns that they do not have the skills
needed to instruct diverse learners, including special needs students (Johnson, 2016).
Teacher Motivation- Self Efficacy
Gibson and Dembo (1984) applied efficacy to personal teaching efficacy (PTE) which
means the teacher believes that they have the skills to influence student learning and behavior.
Gibson and Dembo (1984) also pointed out that any teacher’s ability is limited by variables that
influence learning and behavior due to student abilities or home environments. Teachers make
assumptions about the cause of a child’s learning problems by an overreliance on information
that is purely causal (Podell & Soodak, 1993). Teachers must deal with new developments or
changes within the field of special education and are increasingly expected to improve their
competence. However, there are no established ways of preparing teachers to meet these
demands or cope with these requirements (Sarıçam & Sakiz, 2014). In addition, teachers who
worked with students who had impairments felt exhausted and stressed (Jennett, Harris, &
Mesibov, 2003). Furthermore, teacher burnout is a serious issue because it results in teacher
shortages (Lee, Patterson, & Vega, 2011).
Overall, teachers lack self- efficacy when implementing inclusion tasks or lessons
(Cherniss, 1988). These factors are associated with teachers because they must create classrooms
in which students can receive an equitable education in the least restrictive environment
(Brunsting, Sreckovic, & Lane, 2014). Organizational factors also influence the quality of
education that special needs students receive in the classroom.

18
Organizational Focused Literature
Organizational factors are a component that affect the quality of education that special
needs students receive in the classroom. Support for teachers in the classroom, access to
professional development, evolving models of special education in the secondary school setting,
and barrier facing teachers/ administrators were examined in the literature of this section. These
organizational factors affect teachers who instruct special needs students in the general education
classroom.
Organizational Influence-Support for Teachers in the Classroom
Jones, Youngs, and Frank (2013) cited that teachers must become familiar with district
curricula and adapt to professional norms in their schools. However, teachers receive little
guidance on how they should manage routines and tasks specific to curricula or professional
norms (Jones et al., 2013). Special education teachers reported higher levels of job stress than
teachers who did not provide instruction to special needs students (Fore, Martin, & Bender,
2002). Moreover, special education teachers more often express dissatisfaction and leave the
profession to pursue other opportunities (Conley & You, 2017). In addition, Billingsley and
Cross (1991) suggested that many teachers leave the profession because they receive insufficient
support from school administration. Cancio, Albrecht, and Johns (2013) reported that teachers
who had higher levels of principal support were more likely to have greater commitment and job
satisfaction. Nojani, Arjmandnia, Afrooz, and Rajabi,(2012) argued that teachers, who work in
an environment in which their opinions are not valued experience greater stress in the workplace.
Organizational Influence-Access to Professional Development
Sanford, Levine, and Blackorby (2008) offered in a descriptive study that students with
autism spectrum disorder (ASD) struggled in academic performance and social relationships. In
addition, student- centered strategies to address these needs are limited by lack of teacher

19
professional development (Brock, Huber, Carter, Juarez, & Warren, 2014). Teachers reported a
limited use of evidence-based strategies and use of ineffective education practices not based on
validated research (Burns, & Ysseldyke, 2009) and teachers are not adopting evidence-based
strategies when supporting special needs students (Brock & Carter, 2015). In addition, Weiner
and Murawski (2005) asserted that lack of guiding principles and intervention strategies lead to
disunity within a school system. Odom, Cox, and Brock (2013) asserted that school systems do
not provide adequate development of IEPs and staffing to carry out individualized supports for
special needs students.
The Differentiated Teacher: Goals
Evolving models of special education in the secondary school setting. There are
evolving models of instruction to provide special needs students with effective ways to gain
content knowledge in the secondary classroom. Co-teaching is defined as a partnership between
a classroom teacher and special education teacher who share the responsibility for planning/
delivering instruction to special needs students (Treahy & Gurganus, 2010). Sileo and van
Garderen, (2010) defined co-teaching as a model that applies to special needs students in a less-
restrictive setting when special education and general education teachers plan or use evidence-
based instructional strategies to deliver quality instruction. Teachers take turns instructing the
class group during a lesson (Treahy & Gurganus, 2010). In the one teach, one assist model, one
teacher takes the lead while the other circulates around the classroom to assist students (Treahy
& Gurganus, 2010). The strategy of co-teaching has been advocated as a promising practice for
improving the inclusion for special needs students (Strogilos, & Avramidis, 2016). Scruggs,
Mastropieri, and McDuffie (2007) identified in a qualitative research study on co- teaching that it
has a positive effect on special needs students. The co-teaching environment offers students with
special needs the opportunities to remain in a general education setting, provides students with

20
the least restrictive environment, and ensures they receive support from a special education
teacher (Rexroat-Frazier, & Chamberlin, 2018). Furthermore, teachers can collaborate based
upon varying areas of expertise to provide quality instruction (Murawski & Lochner, 2011),
which benefits all students.
Strategies for co-teaching are necessary to examining this structure for teaching special
needs students. Co-teaching has rapidly become the delivery approach for use in the classroom
(Murawski & Lochner, 2011). Murawski and Lochner (2011) stated that individual attention in
the classroom increased for students, negative behaviors were reduced, and increased academic
achievement for special needs students improved.
Modification strategies for students with disabilities. Teachers must modify
instruction for special needs students as recommended in the IEP. The use of virtual or
computer-based learning opportunities offers another opportunity for special needs students to
learn in the classroom. Virtual classrooms provide special needs supplemental or full-time
studies that are comparable to the traditional class setting (Marteney & Bernadowski, 2016). The
use of virtual classrooms can help special needs students and the asynchronous nature of the
virtual classrooms allows them to complete work at their own pace with teacher guidance
(Marteney & Bernadowski, 2016). In addition, positive behavior support (PBS) has been used
with special needs students. PBS offers support for special needs students when completing a
task or making progress on an assignment (Hieneman, Dunlap, & Kincaid, 2005). Positive
behavior support allows teachers to create educational environments that engage students in
academic work and minimize distractions or behavior problems (Hieneman, et al., 2005).
Features of positive based supports in the classroom include clearly articulated rules, effective
instruction, rewards for positive behavior, and consistent consequences to deter problem
behaviors.

21
The differentiated teacher: Barriers. Barriers exist for teachers who instruct students
with disabilities in the classroom. Some students need more specific help to be able to study in
the classroom environment (Lersilp, Putthinoi, & Lersilp, 2018). Teachers have knowledge and
motivational barriers for serving special needs students in the classroom. The preparation for
university students to become special education teachers has lost its focus (Brownell, Sindelar,
Keily, & Danielson 2010). Overall, many teachers are unprepared to cope with the diverse needs
of students (Brownell, et al., 2010). Monitoring systems are used by educators to mark the
progress of special needs students.
Response to Intervention (RTI) is a process that lets educators monitor the progress of
students with disabilities (Werts, Carpenter, & Fewell, 2014). As noted by Werts et al. (2014),
teachers found the RTI reporting system to be burdensome in correlating and noting data or
instructional strategies. Teachers with high student ratios could not find the time to identify their
special needs students (Cherniss, 1998). Also, teachers were not using the RTI system because it
would create “too much work” for themselves (Werts et al., 2014). Teachers with high student
ratios were implementing RTI with a one size fits all approach and not helping students in areas
that needed improvement (eg. vocabulary and the synthesis of ideas; Gersten & Dimino, 2006).
In addition, a report from the United States Department of Education indicated that schools are
facing challenges to implement an inclusion-based environment in the classroom, which cannot
be successful without teacher buy-in (Ross-Hill, 2009). To promote buy-in, regular and special
education teachers need training in effective inclusion practices. However, there is limited time
to implement the needed training (Ross-Hill, 2009).
Teacher organization barriers. Secondary school teachers face institutional barriers
to providing special needs students necessary instruction. These obstacles are related to
institutional barriers. Districts lack funding to provide needed supports for students with

22
disabilities (Katsiyannis & Ward, 1992). Expectations are lowered for special needs students in
the classroom resulting in lowered expectations. In addition, Katsiyannis and Ward (1992)
argued that students are not being taught communication or organizational skills that are crucial
in college and work environments. In theory, educators and districts must work together to
facilitate desired outcomes of policy intentions (Marshall & Patterson, 2002). Evolving methods
in differentiating instruction give teachers a framework to instruct special needs students, and
they also face barriers to implement effective teaching strategies. Identifying barriers for
implementing effective differentiated teaching strategies can be evaluated by the Gap Analytical
Framework as defined by Clark and Estes (2008).
Clark and Estes’ (2008) Gap Analysis Framework
Clark and Estes (2008) provided an analytical framework that identifies stakeholder
performance goals as well as the gap between actual performance levels and the defined goals.
The gap is identified as specific stakeholder knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences that impact the performance of a person (Clark & Estes, 2008). In addition,
knowledge and skills that can be identified as conceptual and procedural to determine if
stakeholders know how to achieve a performance goal (Krathwohl, 2002). Motivation is an
internal process that gets people going and helps get work done (Clark & Estes, 2008). Also, it
influences the choice to consider goal achievement, working towards a goal, and the effort
needed to accomplish the goal. In addition, organizational work processes, resources, and culture
also influence stakeholder performance. The elements presented in the gap analytical framework
were addressed below as knowledge, motivation, and organizational influencers impact on
teachers’ ability to meet their performance goal. The first section discussed assumed influences
on the stakeholder performance within the context of knowledge and skills. In addition,
motivation was then examined in the attainment of the stakeholder goal. Finally, organizational

23
influences on achievement of the stakeholder goal will be examined. Stakeholder knowledge,
motivation, and organizational influences on performance will be assessed through methodology
discussed in Chapter Three.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences Introduction of
Knowledge Types
Two knowledge types will be covered in this study. Conceptual and procedural
knowledge were introduced and characterized how they apply to teachers planning lessons for
special needs students in the secondary classroom. The linking of how modifications are
implemented with instructional strategies is essential to what can be used to benefit special needs
students in the classroom.
Conceptual Knowledge
The first dimension is the knowledge influences required for Spear High School teachers
to achieve the goal of using differentiation in their lesson plans for special needs students.
Krathwohl (2002) cited that conceptual knowledge is necessary to learn the basic
interrelationships within a large structure that enable them to function. Teachers must understand
the interrelationships of differentiated instruction and how they connect to IEPs to teach students
with disabilities. Teachers must have knowledge of how modification relates to formulating
instruction to teach students with disabilities. Rueda (2011) specified that conceptual knowledge
includes categories, models, theories, and principles that a practitioner can use to address gaps or
needs within an organization.
Linking differentiated strategies to Individualized Education Plans (IEP). Curricula
modifications are necessary to ensure inclusivity within the classroom. The implementation of
differentiated instruction allows students to benefit from teachers’ planning lessons that include
the consideration of individual characteristics (Strogilos, Avramidis, Voulagka, &Tragoulia,

24
2018). Differentiated strategies allow teachers to focus on a student’s individual characteristics,
meeting the federal regulations, while also designing lessons where students have equal access to
the content. Thus, teachers must understand the connection that differentiated lessons can have to
both meeting federal standards and impacting students with disabilities learning content.
Therefore, the method to assess whether a conceptual knowledge gap exists would be through
interviewing teachers on how they are differentiating instruction for students with disabilities
(Clark & Estes, 2008).
Procedural Knowledge
Teachers must understand techniques and methods that teach students with disabilities to
teach or evaluate comprehension of skills within a content area (Cooc,2019). Procedural
knowledge is necessary for methods of inquiry and techniques that are subject-specific
(Krathwohl, 2002). Procedural knowledge describes how to do something. It can be subject-
specific or general (Krathwohl, 2002; Rueda, 2011). Research-driven practices that include
procedural knowledge have become a major focus of federal education policy (Rueda, 2011).
Implementation of Individualized Education Plans. Barkmeier (2012) cited section
504 of the National Rehabilitation Act and IDEA as guidance for schools to follow when
applying IEPs. Barkmeier (2012) stated that the policies of the IEP are rooted in federal
regulations and that they are an instrumental in gaining an overall look into specific
modifications for students with disabilities. For example, teachers must understand the
relationship between formulating lessons and understanding a student’s modifications. The
modifications give the teacher insights into how a student learns. This knowledge influence is
categorized as procedural because it focuses on what teachers need to follow regarding federal or
district guidelines and how the IEP identifies specific qualities that need to be met to properly
instruct students. Accordingly, the method to assess whether a procedural knowledge gap exists

25
would include interviews (Clark & Estes, 2008). Teachers have access to proper IEP
documentation and must process the modifications to properly design instruction for students
with disabilities. IEPs suggested such approaches as giving students extra time to complete
assignments, using notes on tests, or reading a question aloud to the student.
Methods of differentiating instruction for students with disabilities. Differentiation is
teaching material using a variety of strategies to help students who exhibit a range of learning
abilities. The knowledge influence is that teachers need to be introduced to methods of
differentiated instruction to teach students with disabilities. Baum, Cooper, and Neu (2001)
suggested that instruction needs to be balanced between teacher-led guidance and student
construction of knowledge. In addition, teachers must engage in instructor-led group learning
within their content areas and blend technology in which students can produce an electronic
assignment that will allow the instructor to grade for proficiency in content (Mahoney & Hall,
2017). The integration of differentiation within their instructional framework addresses different
student populations. Teachers can incorporate technology to better engage students with
disabilities and enhance content. This knowledge influence is categorized as procedural because
teachers use different learning strategies and facilitate instructor led groups to improve teaching
practices. Another method that may help assess the presence of differentiation is to conduct
interviews with teachers to identify which strategies are being used in the classroom or how
teacher-led instructional groups are affecting overall lesson construction.
This review of current scholarly research identified three influences that are needed for
teachers at Spear High School who teach students with disabilities to achieve their stakeholder
goal. With the Spear High School May 2020 performance goal, teachers may implement
strategies presented in district training to modify the core curriculum for special needs students.

26
Table 2 illustrates an overview of how the three knowledge influences of Spear High
School teachers must implement modifications in accordance with IEPs, knowing methods of
differentiation, and incorporate differentiated strategies into lesson plans.
Table 2
Knowledge Influence, Knowledge Type, and Knowledge Influence Assessment

Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive
environment. Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning
opportunities built on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all
students to positively contribute to society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the
core curriculum for special needs students.
Knowledge Influence

1.Teachers must implement
modifications in accordance with
Individual Education Plans (IEP).

Knowledge Type
(Conceptual or
Procedural)

Procedural

Knowledge Influence
Assessment

Interview
2.Teachers need to know the
methods of differentiating
instruction for students with
disabilities.

Procedural
Interview, Document Analysis
3.Teachers need to incorporate
differentiated strategies into lesson
plans that are in line with
modifications in the IEP.
Conceptual Interview, Document Analysis

27
Motivation
Motivation is the second dimension required for Spear High School’s implementation of
federal regulations that instruct students with disabilities. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that
people continue to work towards goals despite barriers and effort needed to achieve those goals.
There are three challenges to motivated performance: active choice (intention replaced by
action); persistence (once started, continue despite distractions); and mental effort (invest effort
in achieving the goal).
Spear High School can increase its ability to achieve goals by supporting teachers’ ability
to learn new strategies and fostering a rise in confidence among teachers to differentiate
instruction to meet federal guidelines. Motivational theory is aligned with self-efficacy theory.
Self-efficacy plays a role based on the challenges that people choose to undertake, how much
effort to expend, how to persevere in the face of obstacles, and whether failure is motivational
(Bandura, 2001). For some, the strong sense of coping reduces the vulnerability to stress or
depression in tough situations (Bandura,2001).
Self-efficacy theory. A motivational influence, related to Spear High School, in
achieving their stakeholder goal is self-efficacy. Rueda (2011) defined self-efficacy as people’s
beliefs about or confidence in their capabilities of doing tasks. The author asserted that belief or
confidence levels are based upon various factors such as successes or failures, feedback, and
prior knowledge or skills needed to perform the task. Teachers with higher confidence levels in
their capabilities will have higher levels of self-efficacy to meet federal regulations. Based on the
self-efficacy motivation influence, the methodology to assess stakeholder motivation will be
through interviews of teachers that teach students with disabilities.

28
Table 3 illustrates an overview of the organizational mission, organizational global goal,
stakeholder goal, assumed motivational influence, and the assessment that will be conducted
using interviews.
Table 3
Assumed Motivation Influence and Motivational Influence Assessments

Organization
General theory. Ross-Hill (2009) articulated that an increasing number of school
districts are attempting to establish inclusive practices for students who have significant
intellectual, emotional, and physical disabilities. A cultural model is a shared mental schema or
normative understanding of how the world works, or ought to work. (Gallimore & Goldenberg,
2001). It helps categorize or filter information, determine relevance of practices, and make sense
of information to apply conclusions (Bakken, 2016).
Stakeholder specific factors. Districts lack funding to provide needed supports for
special needs students, expectations are lowered for special needs students, and students are not
Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment.
Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning
opportunities built on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all
students to positively contribute to society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the core
curriculum for special needs students.
Assumed Motivation Influences

Motivational Influence Assessment

1.Teachers need to believe they are capable of
effectively differentiating instruction for students
with disabilities.
Interview Item- Interviews will ask teachers
to indicate challenges they face in
differentiating instruction for special needs
students and how they feel about these
challenges.

29
showing achievement towards skills that are crucial in college and work environments
(Katsiyannis & Ward, 1992). These are specific factors that may be at work to explain the cause
of organizational problems within the implementation of special education programs for teachers
in the classroom. Teachers lack preparation to teach special needs students and are having
difficulty forming differentiated instruction for students with disabilities in the classroom
(Brownell et al., 2010). Figure 1 shows the organizational mission and global goals of Spear
High School. Spear High School has a goal of 100% compliance with district initiatives to teach
students with disabilities and show academic progress as evidenced in district benchmarks for
the 2020 school year. Teachers serving special needs students with 100% federal compliance will
have the presence of adequate resources and differentiated lessons to facilitate instruction.
Assumed organizational influences include focusing on teachers becoming advocates of equity
for special needs students. In addition, interviews were used to see how much time is needed to
plan lessons with co-teachers for differentiating instruction.

30
Table 4

Assumed Organization Influences and Organization Influence Assessments

Conceptual Framework: Interaction of Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Context
Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment. Spear
High School will foster rigorous and blended learning
opportunities built on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all students to
positively contribute to society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district initiatives
to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the core
curriculum for special needs students.
Assumed
Organizational
Influences

Organizational Influence Assessment
(Cultural Settings)
1.The organization
needs clearly defined
goals to be compliant
with federal legislation
of special needs
students.

Interview of teachers in classrooms of how they use modifications to
differentiate instruction.
(Cultural Models)
2.There needs to be a
culture established
among teachers to be
advocates of equity for
students with
disabilities.

Interview questions on how teachers can better instruct students with
disabilities.
(Cultural Models)
3.The inclusivity of
special needs students
within the classroom at
Spear High School and
preparation time for
teachers.
Interview questions on how special education leadership at the school level
can better instruct teachers with professional development to improve lessons
in the classroom.

Interview teachers to see what the needed time is to plan lessons with co-
teachers to better instruct students with disabilities.

31
A conceptual framework is the system of concepts, assumptions, and theories that are
supportive components that inform research (Maxwell, 2013). Theories are built on previous
research and supported by data to determine how a study can further build on or contribute to the
existing body of research for a given topic (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Therefore, the conceptual
framework presented here considers the previous research on federal compliance for secondary
schools and evolving models of instruction to provide ways for special needs students to learn
new content in the classroom.
Two views were included in this study: constructivism and pragmatism. Constructivism
is a view that seeks an individual’s understanding of the world, develops subjective meanings of
their experiences, and generates explanations from interactions among individuals (Creswell &
Creswell, 2018). Constructivism is used to understand evolving models of instruction in the
classroom and how they relate to serving student with disabilities. Creswell and Creswell (2018)
articulates that pragmatism comes from actions or consequences that equate to an emphasis of a
research problem. Pragmatism allows researchers to focus on the use of all available approaches
to understand a problem or question (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Knowledge, motivation, and
organizational needs are to be addressed at the same time for the stakeholder goal to be achieved
(Clark & Estes, 2008). The conceptual framework presented here introduces how knowledge and
motivation work together within Spear High School to achieve the organizational goal of
compliance with district initiatives to teach students with disabilities and show academic
progress through district benchmarks. Also, the framework describes how teachers are using
different instructional strategies to impact student achievement growth and the value of
professional development to better teach special needs students in secondary classrooms. Figure
1 better illustrates this conceptual framework.

32

Figure 1. Interaction of Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Federal Compliance
Figure 1. Conceptual Framework
This figure outlines the relationship between factors that influence teacher knowledge,
motivation, and organizational settings models. Spear High School has an organizational mission
and identity to teach all student populations. The cultural settings within Spear High School
Spear High School
Organization
-The organization needs clearly defined goals to be
compliant with federal legislation of special needs
students.
- There needs to be a culture established among teachers
to be advocates of equity for students with disabilities. . . .
- Teachers need to have preparation time to make sure
they are planning lessons with co-teachers that are
serving students with disabilities. . . .
- The inclusivity of special needs students within the
classroom at Spear High School.

Teachers
Knowledge: Teachers need to
know the methods of
differentiating instruction for
students with disabilities.

Knowledge: Teachers must
implement modification in
accordance with Individual
Education Plans (IEP).
Knowledge:
Teachers formulate
lessons that focus on
uses of differentiated
strategies and IEP
modifications.
Motivation:
Teachers need
to believe they
are capable of
effectively
differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.
Goal for Stakeholder:
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training
to modify the core curriculum for special needs students

33
focus on influences of teacher support for serving students with disabilities as well as
implementing models for differentiated instruction. Responding to the individual differences has
been a concern in schools and effective schools implement instructional practices that enable all
students to learn (Roy, Guay, & Valois, 2013). Using differentiated instructional strategies in the
classroom reflects teacher knowledge while serving special needs students.
Teachers must also have knowledge of the role of IEPs. Yell et al., (1998) outlined the
Education for Handicapped Act created an education plan, with parent input, which would
duplicate an education experience with that of non-disabled students. Teacher motivation is an
essential component to serving students with disabilities. Teachers must engage in professional
development and learn different strategies to instruct special needs students. Effective motivation
to institute professional development strategies must include teacher buy-in and a direct purpose
for teachers using their training to improve student achievement (Ross-Hill, 2009). Teacher
knowledge and motivation support achievement of organizational mission/vision of Spear High
School. The last element that the diagram addresses is federal compliance. Federal laws specify
the teacher modifications that must be met for individual students to show achievement in the
classroom and teachers must have the knowledge of IEPs to meet compliance measures. Also,
federal compliance recommends that the teacher engage in professional development to learn
instructional strategies or learn changes that need to be made or learn how to differentiate
instruction based on the IEP specifications for special needs students.
In conclusion, Figure 1 created an outline of elements that address organizational values,
teacher motivation, teacher knowledge, federal compliance and how they connect to teach
students with disabilities. Each variable is important in Figure 1 to create a structure for policy
implementation and professional development to instruct special needs students. Marshall and
Patterson (2002) indicated the policy implementation is easy if stakeholders agree on structures

34
that will lead to teachers and school administrators working together to facilitate desired
outcomes to teach diverse school populations.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to evaluate teacher preparation to implement professional
development practices to effectively instruct students with disabilities in the fully included
classroom. The literature within this chapter focused on the presence of special education in
secondary schools, schools meeting federal compliance guidelines to teach special needs
students, and barriers associated with serving special needs students. Also, the literature
presented teacher knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences. In addition, the
evaluative study’s conceptual framework was presented in this chapter. Chapter Three presents
the study’s methodological approach.

35
CHAPTER THREE: METHODS

The purpose of this project was to evaluate how teachers are incorporating requirements
into daily lessons in order to achieve compliance with district initiatives to teach special needs
students and show academic progress through district benchmarks. Interviews were conducted
along with document analysis of agendas provided from professional development opportunities
at Spear High School. More importantly, the study examined knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences. The increasing budget cuts to special education programs that limit
teacher materials, the unpreparedness of educators teaching special needs students in an inclusive
environment, and the limited professional development opportunities for teachers made this
project incredibly relevant for Spear High School. However, the results may be difficult to
replicate in a different educational environment.
The questions that guided this study were the following:
1. What are the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to implement IEP modifications?
2. What are the recommendations for practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors supporting teachers to provide instruction to students with
disabilities?
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholder population of focus were teachers at Spear High School. Gathering data
through interviews of teachers helped evaluate teacher preparedness to teach special need
students fully included in the general education classroom. This inductive process of gathering
data helped build concepts rather than testing hypotheses (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).

36
Interview Sampling Criteria and Rationale
The six teachers that volunteered were interviewed detailing their experience working
with special needs children. In addition, questions were formulated that determined the
motivation about serving students with disabilities, and how they feel about Spear High School’s
commitment in providing an environment in which all students can succeed. Volunteers from the
English department were solicited through an invitation letter sent to the English teachers by the
principal. The purpose of the study was described, and teachers were asked to contact the
researcher if interested in serving as a volunteer for the interviews.
Interview Strategy and Rationale
Interview questions were used to identify the perspectives of teachers and how they
formulate lesson plans for special needs students in the secondary classroom. The interview
questions framed the respondents’ perceptions on how instruction is delivered to the special
needs students (Maxwell, 2013). The respondents’ perceptions were necessary to aid this study
in identifying gaps and improvements that needed to be made to deliver instruction to special
needs students. The interviews explored how Spear High School’s organizational culture
intersects with a teacher’s ability to deliver differentiated, student centered instruction for special
needs students.
Data Collection and Instrumentation
The design of the methodology for this project considered that the KMO gap analysis of
teachers at Spear High School requires data from benchmarks conducted by the school district to
evaluate student performance or progress. The study employed the basic qualitative model
(Creswell & Creswell, 2018), which uses face- to- face interviews. Data were collected in two
phases for this study. In the first phase of the study, document analysis was used to see what

37
techniques were demonstrated during professional development opportunities. Also, the
researcher conducted interviews with instructors identified as teaching special needs students at
Spear High School. The respondents were provided with a consent form outlining criteria that
Weiss (1994) described for protecting the integrity and credibility of the volunteer teachers
participating in this study at Spear High School. Teacher consent was obtained before interviews
and participants were notified that they could stop their interview at any time.
As explained in Creswell and Creswell (2018), the qualitative model allows the
researcher to use data collection that identified themes of student performance through
interviewing of volunteer participants. An interpretation of the results allowed the researcher to
identify the relevant themes and design qualitative research through one-on-one interviews with
teachers. As a result, the basic qualitative model was based on the belief that knowledge is
constructed in an ongoing fashion as people seek meaning of an activity or phenomenon
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
The T-TESS model evaluates learner outcomes, teacher behaviors, and student behaviors
(Teach for Texas, 2019). The model appears in Figure 2.

38

Figure 2. The Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System (T-TESS)
Figure 2 shows the relationships of teacher behaviors and what instructional strategies
can facilitate positive learning outcomes for students. The T-TESS was relevant to this study
because it focused on teacher behaviors, instructional practices, and how they affected special
needs students at Spear High School. The learner outcomes delineated how outcomes are
identified and communicated to the students, the evidence that students understood a lesson, and
how the evidence reflected students’ understanding and movement toward mastery of learner
outcomes. The learner outcomes took into consideration how outcomes are reflected in students
mastering a learning concept and the communication that was used to teach students within a
lesson. Also, teacher behaviors were examined on how the lesson aligns with and supports the

39
objectives of a lesson, the pacing for students, and how technology or questions affect students’
outcomes.
In the interview phase of the study, the researcher conducted interviews to identify Spear
High School’s achievement gaps that were preventing or interfering with reaching its
organizational goal of district compliance. The interviews were done via Zoom due to the
COVID- 19 pandemic. The researcher used qualitative methods to collect data to inform the
KMO solutions to eliminate performance gaps (Clark & Estes, 2008). Also, the researcher
addressed federal compliance from the vantage point of teacher instructional practices used in
the classroom to teach special needs students. Further, the researcher collected data from
interviews. A total of six teachers/classrooms followed the number recommended for subjects to
be interviewed for this study as cited in Creswell and Creswell (2018).
Document analysis was used in this study from agendas that were collected from
professional development opportunities that English teachers at Spear High School attended to
help provide instruction for special needs students. The document analysis was used to
triangulate responses from interviews with the teachers. The agendas collected were compared
against teacher responses to see if the professional development techniques used in the classroom
to facilitate instruction for special needs students to determine if a gap existed.
Data Analysis
The primary tools for the analysis for this study are teacher interviews and what
instructional techniques they used in the classroom. In the first phase of the data analysis,
interview responses were transcribed in relation to KMO constructs that examined how
identification of special education affected lesson planning, how differentiated instructional
strategies are used for special needs children, gaps that existed in the classroom environment for

40
teachers, and the role of professional development in how teachers implement new practices in
the classroom.
The process of triangulation was used in this study (Maxwell, 2013). Interviews were
used to create a nexus of understanding the teacher’s perspective in the classroom and drawing
inferences from the teacher interviews. The data analysis for the interviews used the triangulation
of data with the agendas collected from the professional development opportunities given at
Spear High School to English teachers. The agendas helped the researcher notice from the
response to interview questions whether techniques from professional development were used to
facilitate instruction for special needs learners in their classrooms.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Purposeful sampling was used to maintain the integrity of the study. The criterion used
for the selection were English classrooms that have students with disabilities present. In phase
one, the researcher interviewed teachers voluntarily by presenting to them a permission sheet.
This sheet informed the teacher that they can stop the interview at any time and would remain
anonymous; the data were locked in a cabinet within the residence of the researcher. The process
of triangulation was used in this study. Maxwell (2013) defined triangulation as collecting
information from a wide range of individuals or setting while using a variety of methods. The
methods for this study included interviewing participants and document analysis to examine
what instructional strategies were demonstrated during professional development at Spear High
School.
Validity and Reliability
Interviewing teachers that volunteered was done for this study. In the interviewing phases
data were collected from freshman English teachers at Spear High School. The process of
triangulation reduced the risk of chance associations and biases of a specific method while

41
increasing better assessments of explanations that one develops (Maxwell, 2013). The potential
of bias was reduced because the teachers are outside of the researcher’s content area. The
freshman English teachers do not know the researcher, have perceptions of the researcher, and
they were provided with an explanation of the research design so they would understand the
study focus on instructional strategies for special needs students at Spear High School. The
research for this study followed procedures faithfully to ensure that there is enough detail to
reach conclusions that make sense (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Ethics
Data were obtained in an ethical and respectful manner to the participants. Creswell and
Creswell (2018) asserted that research design, along with data collection and analysis, must be
appropriate and must not compromise the study due to lack of ethical conduct. In addition, the
researcher must be responsible for showing how data were not compromised and how information
would not endanger study participants in the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Glesne (2011)
argues that participants must be protected from unintended consequences in collection instruments
such as interviews. Also, participants must be protected within the organization or from negative
consequences that may stem from participating in this study. Three essential protections were
enacted before the collection of data takes place for the study. Furthermore, the three protections
that were featured for this evaluation study are as follows: (a) University of Southern California
(USC) Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, (b) Signature of Informed Consent forms, and
(c) data collection procedures.
This study went through the USC IRB approval process. There was coordination with the
principal of Spear High School to teachers. The teachers volunteered for this study and were from
the English department. The incorporation of IRB recommendations and constraints were essential
to protecting the participants and the institution (Rubin & Rubin, 2012). In addition, there were

42
informed consent releases signed by each teacher for voluntary participation in this study. The
forms addressed the voluntary participation within the study and the fact that participants have the
right to withdraw at any time (Glesne, 2011). The confidentiality of participants for this study was
paramount. The researcher worked at Spear High School as a social studies teacher and remained
neutral; therefore, no teachers within the social studies department were interviewed.
Conclusion
This study addressed federal compliance at the secondary school level and how these
measures led teachers to instruct special needs students in the classroom. The use of basic
qualitative model for the study supported the greater connection to the effects that federal
compliance has on teachers instructing students with disabilities in the classroom.
Qualitative methods offer diversity on how data is collected and interpreted in a study.
The researcher was the collector of data, multiple data sources, and a holistic account supported
the development of a qualitative study that the organization can use for future examination.
Through this informed research, the researcher made recommendations for needed adjustments
to achieve compliance with federal regulations and for teaching strategies used to increase
achievement for special needs students.

43
CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The purpose of this project was to examine the degree to which Spear High School is
meeting the goal of 100 percent compliance with district initiatives to effectively teach SPED
students and improve their academic achievement. This study focused on teachers implementing
strategies presented in district training to modify core curriculum for special needs students. The
results are organized by the categories of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences
reflected in this study.
The researcher employed a qualitative study and data were collected by interviewing six
English teachers. Qualitative data were collected to validate the assumed causes. Specifically,
interviews were conducted to understand the knowledge, motivation, and organization challenges
Spear High School teachers encounter implementing strategies presented in district training to
modify the core curriculum for special needs students. Document analysis and interviews were
conducted for this study. Document analysis was used to examine what techniques were used in
professional development opportunities. Also, interviews were conducted for teachers identified
as teaching special needs students at Spear High School. The interviews were aimed at
identifying Spear High School’s achievement gaps that are preventing or interfering with
reaching the school’s organizational goal of district compliance. In addition, the interviews
addressed the teacher instructional strategies used in the classroom that feature special needs
students.
Participating Stakeholders
The stakeholders participating were English teachers at Spear High School. The
interviews of English teachers at Spear High School provided data related to teacher
preparedness to instruct special needs students in the general classroom. All six of the teachers

44
volunteered for this study and each participated in interviews via Zoom to comply with IRB
requirements stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. Requirements for the participants
included: freshman English teachers at Spear High School, five to 10 years of teaching
experience, and special needs teachers at Spear High School. Participant One had five years of
experience, Participant Two had seven years of experience, Participant Three had five years of
experience, Participant Four had eight years of experience, Participant Five had 10 years of
experience, and Participant Six had ten years of experience.
Determination of Assets and Needs
The sources of data were compiled from interviews with teachers and document analysis
of professional development agendas during the school year. The questions within the interview
focus on how special education affects the way teachers prepare their lessons, how they use
differentiated instructional strategies for special needs students, and what gaps exist for special
needs students in the classroom. In addition, the questions for the interview are identified by
specific research questions for this study: knowledge, motivation, and organizational constructs.
Document analysis was used for this study. Professional development agendas were
collected and used to examine techniques shared by the school district. The agendas were used to
determine whether teachers were using specific strategies learned at staff development trainings.
Appendix C outlines different strategies that were taught to freshman English teachers. The
document analysis of the professional development agendas showed these instructional
strategies: graphic organizers, learning stations, game based learning, Socratic seminars, working
in pairs, “I do, we do” model, and building upon the strengths of students through lesson
planning. The combination of both interviews and document analysis allowed the researcher to
triangulate concepts and determine whether KMO gaps exist (Clark & Estes, 2008).

45
Triangulation results from two methods, analysis of the agendas and responses to interview
questions; each helped the researcher determine what instructional strategies were used to
facilitate learning for special needs students. Interview and document analysis results were used
to determine whether KMO influences are assets or needs.
Results and Findings for Knowledge Causes
Three influences emerged from the literature review and established the knowledge
construct for the conceptual framework that is outlined in Chapter 3 of this study. The focus of
the interviews reflected how teachers implement modifications in accordance with IEPs, how
teachers need to know methods of differentiating instruction for special needs students, and the
incorporation of differentiated strategies in lesson plans that feature IEP modifications.
Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge was collected in this study on how teachers implement
modifications that come from IEPs and how teachers differentiate for special needs students.
Teachers at Spear High School implemented modifications in accordance with IEPs and
instructional strategies to improve the learning outcomes of special needs students.
Teachers Implementing Modifications in Accordance with IEPs
Interview findings. Teachers must implement modifications in accordance with IEPs for
special needs students into their lessons plans thus they must have procedural knowledge to
successfully carry out instruction in the classroom. Respondent Three mentioned that the “IEPs
are living, breathing documents that can change at any time.” Also, Respondent Three included
that they have constant conversations with the “campus diagnostician, parents, and that teachers
need to be active in the ARD committees that improve or change.” Respondent One indicated
that “when I am making my plans every nine weeks that I take into account each student's

46
modifications.” Respondent Six indicated that “Most IEP modifications can be solidly addressed
when differentiated instruction is incorporated into the lesson plan.” Specifically, Respondent
Six mentioned that “Some IEP expectations, however, focus on specific (and at times unique)
student needs.” These unique IEP requirements must be kept in mind by the educator.
Summary. Teachers at Spear High School mentioned within interviews that the IEPs are
living documents, they have conversations with parents and campus diagnosticians to adjust or
improve IEPs for the students, and that IEPs can change at any time. Teachers at Spear High
School use the Admission Review and Dismissal (ARD) committee meeting to communicate
with different stakeholders and mention any progress or issues in an IEP for special needs
students. The ARD committee formulates an instructional plan for special needs students with
input from teachers and family members and recommendations are made to facilitate an
experience for the special needs student to have positive academic outcomes in the classroom.
The process of developing an IEP is a collaborative effort between stakeholders that serves the
best intention of students and supports their progress (Barnard- Brak & Lechtenberger, 2010). In
addition, other teachers mention that modifications can be addressed through differentiating
instruction for special needs students and that some IEPs are unique to individual students that
the educator must keep in mind when planning instruction.
Teachers Knowledge of Differentiated Instruction for Special Needs Students
Interview findings. Freshman English teachers at Spear High School indicated that
planning time is essential for formulating inclusive lessons, flexible ways that lessons can be
completed by students, and differentiating lesson plans to impact special needs student
populations. Teachers at Spear High School are invested in seeing their students make progress
and planning with a co-teacher is necessary for the student’s success. Also, differentiation plays

47
a role based upon the needed planning time between the classroom teacher and co-teacher to
create lessons that are applicable to the IEP. Respondent Five mentioned that they were fortunate
to have “an inclusion teacher in the classroom to plan targeted lessons to enhance understanding
and retention for special needs students.”
Shady et al., (2013) asserted that inclusion addresses the learning needs of special needs
students and creates a belonging or acceptance in the classroom. Respondent Six mentioned that
they like to “offer many choices how the assignment can be completed and allow group work for
special needs students rather than it being done on an individual basis.” The teachers have
described their co-teacher as having an inclusive mindset to make sure students do not fall
behind and are a part of the learning experience in the classroom.
Differentiating instruction and having goals for its use in lesson planning are essential
elements to creating lessons for special needs students. Teachers described their student
populations ranging from students with dyslexia to those facing language barriers or differing
reading levels. For example, Respondent One indicated it is important to “find a variety of ways
to simplify the content for students that have dyslexia or language barriers.”
Targeted and ongoing professional development is necessary to ensure that students with
special needs receive the best instruction within the classroom (Pugach & Winn, 2011). The
professional development at Spear High School allows for teachers to review documentation
requirements for special needs students and other federal requirements. Spear High School offers
professional development to emphasize small groups, using technology in the classroom, and
Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) strategies. Respondent Six indicated in the
interview that AVID strategies are taught in professional development that can be used for all
student populations. All six respondents mentioned that they use graphic organizers to break

48
down essays and use Socratic seminars to gauge the comprehension of students. Respondent
Two mentioned “I use graphic organizers to break down the writing process for essays and I use
Socratic seminars to discuss important steps in the writing process.” In the Socratic seminars all
six respondents indicated that they modify class discussion questions so special needs students
can participate in the activity. The purpose of AVID strategies are to provide students academic,
social and emotional support that will help students succeed in college.
Summary. Teachers at Spear High School have experienced inclusion and planned with
co-teachers to help special needs students in classrooms. The classroom teacher and co-teacher
consult with each other to prepare lessons that address IEP modifications. In addition, freshman
English teachers offer inclusion in their preparation and classroom environments for special
needs students to feel a sense of comfort to complete tasks or work. Specific strategies included
learning stations with flexible seating, journaling, and using technology to make lessons come to
life in the classroom.
Conceptual Knowledge
Krathwohl (2002) cited that conceptual knowledge is necessary to learn basic
interrelationships within a large structure that will enable them to function or work. Teachers
must realize the relationships of differentiated instruction and their connection to Individualized
Education Plans that affect special needs students. Rueda (2011) noted that conceptual
knowledge includes categories, models, theories, and principles that a practitioner can use to
address gaps within an organization. The incorporation of differentiated strategies and alignment
with IEP modifications will be examined in this section.

49
The Incorporation of Differentiated Strategies and Alignment with IEP Modifications
Interview findings. Freshman English teachers at Spear High School connected the use
of differentiated instruction and its alignment with IEP modifications to help special needs
students gain comprehension from content. They use the know, want to learn, and learned
(KWL) system to help special needs students and annotations of previous knowledge to link
current lessons with ones taught in the past. Respondent One indicated that they use “KWL and
annotate worksheets to check for previous knowledge.” Co-teachers help special needs students
get started with the bell ringers and their interactive notebooks for use in class. Since it is one
instructional strategy, bell ringers functions as an instructional approach similar to writing
prompts to activate a student’s knowledge from previous lessons. Multiple differentiated
strategies can be used to accommodate students’ varied learning styles. Respondent Three
indicated the rationale for using differentiated instructional techniques is to “not lower the bar
and to incorporate teaching activities that incorporate the diversity of student populations in a
classroom.” This can be connected to IEP modifications as to what differentiated strategies can
used to benefit special needs students on a lesson-by-lesson basis.
Summary. The freshman English teachers at Spear High School used bell ringers, KWL,
and interactive notebooks for special needs students. The basis for what strategies to use in the
classroom for special needs students is dependent on IEP modifications. The teachers start the
lesson with a bell ringer, the students go to a KWL station to link current with past lessons, and
then they move to a station that uses interactive notebooks to heighten content. The bell ringers
and KWL are already annotated by the general education teacher to help special needs students
follow concepts and to link them. The interactive notebooks are set to different reading levels to
help students comprehend content and this will help the teacher identify possible gaps for needed

50
improvement. Furthermore, the instructional strategies consider the varied learning styles of
special needs students in the classroom.
Results and Findings for Motivation Causes
Rueda (2011) defined self-efficacy as people’s beliefs or confidence in their capabilities
to complete tasks. Beliefs or confidence levels are based upon factors such as failures, feedback,
and prior knowledge needed to perform tasks. Clark and Estes (2008) asserted that people
continue to work towards better outcomes despite barriers and efforts needed to achieve goals.
Motivation and self-efficacy are related for the purpose of this study when examining teacher
beliefs to deliver differentiated instruction for special needs students.
Teacher Belief in Capability of Differentiating Instruction for Special Needs Students
Interview findings. Freshman English teachers at Spear High School have confidence in
their ability to differentiate instruction for special needs students due to professional
development. Respondent Three indicated that they have “become better at differentiating,
understanding the needs of my students in the classroom, and I adjust instruction that are needed
to improve student progress.” Respondent Five mentioned that they “learn from their last lesson
and I try to improve it for upcoming content areas.” Respondent Six also indicated that
differentiated instruction has “led to positive learner outcomes for special needs student in my
classes.” Furthermore, Respondent Six indicated in the interview that they felt “confident
implementing or using differentiated instructional strategies in my classroom.” Respondent
Three indicated that “the most important thing I can do is get to know my students and
understand their needs so I can make the correct adjustments to my instruction, even if that
involves research into strategies on my part.”

51
Summary. Teachers at Spear High School want to know their special needs students
better and adjust instruction to improve learning outcomes in the classroom. Teachers improved
lessons by learning from the last one that was taught in the classroom and move forward with
consistent improvement. Furthermore, teachers mentioned that they are confident with using
differentiated instructional strategies in their classroom and that it led to positive student
outcomes in the classroom. One mentioned that they research their own strategies they can use in
the classroom.
Results and Findings for Organization Causes
This study examined cultural settings and models within Spear High School. Specified
goals for IEP modifications, preparation time and professional development for teachers/co-
teachers, advocating equity for special needs students, and formulating an inclusive classroom
environment for special needs students are elements that were characterized with organizational
causes of Spear High School.
Cultural Setting: Clearly Specified Goals with IEP Modifications at Spear High School
Interview findings. Public schools must establish goals for IEP modifications used in the
classroom for special needs students. Respondent Two indicated that “my campus has made it
clear that modifications are expected through the section of our lesson plan template.”
Respondent Three explained that “there are bi-weekly meetings as to the legalities involved with
IEP compliance.” Respondent Six explained that it is “an educator’s responsibility to each
special needs student is to be accountable for staying current on the student’s right to an equal
education.”
Summary. The teachers have indicated that Spear High School requires that
modifications must be present in lesson plans. There are bi-weekly meetings to address IEP

52
compliance to make sure that federal standards are being met for special needs students at Spear
High School. Freshman English teachers at Spear High School recognized it was their
responsibility to provide a learning environment that promotes an equal opportunity to obtain an
education.
Cultural Setting: Preparation Time/Professional Development for Teacher/Co-teacher
Interview findings. Professional development opportunities are necessary for general
education and co-teachers. Respondent Three attended at gifted and talented AVID training and
indicated that “it does incorporate discussions of differentiation and accommodation, which are
what our special needs students require.” Respondent Four mentioned that “AVID strategies for
gifted and talent learners can also be used for special needs students.” Respondent Two indicated
that “most of trainings offered mentioned how different student populations can benefit from
differentiated instruction and specific strategies teachers can use in the classroom.” Respondent
Two indicated that “professional development at Spear High School is heavily suggested and
that trust is given to teachers to enrich themselves.” Respondent Six mentioned during the
interview that “the professional development sessions are varied in topic and should vary in topic
because of the different subjects we all teach.”
Preparation time is a key concept to preparing lessons for special needs students for the
general education teacher and co-teacher. Respondent Two indicated the time they meet with
their co-teacher: “Daily. Perhaps three and a half hours in a seven-day week. The internet has
afforded a maximization of multitasking.” Respondent One indicates that their co-teacher “are in
professional learning community meetings and we plan out the instruction for the week.”
Respondent Five indicated that “we do confer via email and text as well as during the occasional
planning period.”

53
Summary. Teachers from Spear High School indicated that professional development
incorporates differentiated instruction. The teachers also mentioned that they use AVID
strategies, and they adapt them for special needs student in their classroom. Professional
development at Spear High School was encouraged by the school, incorporates different topics
for teachers to engage and use in their classrooms. The variety in the professional development is
content specific for all subjects at Spear High School. Preparation occurred at different times for
freshman English teachers at Spear High School. Some met in their professional learning
community time slots, others meet every day via the internet to make sure instructional outcomes
are being met. The use of technology is linking general education teachers with co-teachers by
using email or other means to stay connected and plan effective lessons for special needs
students.
Cultural Model: Advocacy for Equity for Special Needs Students in the Classroom
Interview findings. Advocating for the equity of special needs students helps teachers
ensure equity in the classroom. Respondent One mentioned “showing respect for all students and
how their abilities can heighten classroom activities for others.” Respondent Three said that
“they get to know their students, their abilities early in the school year, and adjust or improve
instruction to ensure equity for special needs students.” Respondent Five indicated “impartiality
for students is always central to my practice. Maintaining the least restrictive environment is
necessary when comprising or making lessons that facilitate positive learning outcomes for
special needs students.” Respondent Six said “I encourage my students by supporting them and
that they need to support each other when completing lessons or tasks. I create a supportive
classroom environment.”
Spear High School must establish at culture of equity to engineer a supportive
educational experience for special needs students. Respondent Three indicated “Spear High

54
School has done a good job for caring for special needs students and the school has established
this by making sure their educational needs are met in the classroom by differentiating
instruction.” Respondent Five indicated that “Spear High School can keep on moving forward by
keeping true to the mission statement, encouraging teachers to keep meeting the needs of
students and their varied learning styles through differentiated instructional strategies.”
Respondent Six mentioned:
The school district and campus have done a great job of promoting positive learning
outcomes for special needs students through continued support for teachers. Teachers
have access to professional development and clear channels of communication to affect
positive change for our special needs students.
Summary. Preparation occurred at different time for freshman English teachers at Spear
High School. Some met in their professional learning community time slots, others met every
day via the internet to make sure instructional outcomes are being met. The use of technology
linked general education teachers with co-teachers by using email or other means to stay
connected and plan effective lessons for special needs students. Freshman English teachers at
Spear High School wanted to understand students in their classrooms and ensure positive
outcomes. They see equity as looking after special needs students and that it is an essential
cultural building block in their classroom culture. In addition, their responses indicated their
intention to create the least restrictive environment in the classroom for special needs learners to
actively take part in the learning experience. Spear High School tried to establish a culture of
equity for special needs students.

55
Summary of Validated Influences
Tables 5, 6, and 7 show the knowledge, motivation, and organization influences for this
study and their determination as an asset or need. Assets were classified as carrying out an action
with a positive outcome. Needs were classified as areas where there was a gap and improvements
were needed for a positive outcome. In this study there were 100% assets that were found within
interviews of English teachers at Spear High School who taught special needs students.
Teachers have learned how to implement learning strategies taught in professional development
and this was evident in the number of times this was mentioned by respondents.

56
Table 5
Knowledge Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data

Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive
environment. Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning opportunities built
on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all students to
positively contribute to society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the
core curriculum for special needs students.
Knowledge Influence Knowledge Type Asset or Need
1. Teachers must implement
modifications in
accordance with IEP.
Procedural Asset
2. Teachers need to know
the methods of
differentiating instruction
for students with
disabilities.
Procedural Asset
3. Teachers need to
incorporate differentiated
strategies into lesson plans
that are in line with
modifications in the IEP.
Conceptual Asset

57
Table 6
Motivation Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data

Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment.
Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning opportunities built on inspiring,
impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all students to positively contribute to
society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the core
curriculum for special needs students.
Assumed Motivation Influences

Asset or Need

1.Teachers need to believe they are capable of
effectively differentiating instruction for students
with disabilities.
Asset

58
Table 7
Organization Assets or Needs as Determined by the Data
Organizational Mission
Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive
environment. Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning opportunities built
on inspiring, impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all students to
positively contribute to society.
Organizational Global Goal
By the 2020-21 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goal
By May 2020, teachers will implement strategies presented in district training to modify the
core curriculum for special needs students.
Assumed
Organizational
Influences

Asset or Need
(Cultural Settings)
1.The organization
needs clearly
defined goals to be
compliant with
federal legislation of
special needs
students.

Asset
(Cultural Models)
2.There needs to be
a culture established
among teachers to
be advocates of
equity for students
with disabilities,
Asset

59

Table 7, continued

(Cultural Settings)
3.Teachers need to
have preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons
with co-teachers that
are serving students
with disabilities.

Asset
(Cultural Models)
4.The inclusivity of
special needs
students within the
classroom at Spear
High School.
Asset

60
CHAPTER FIVE: RECOMMENDATIONS
This evaluation study analyzed teacher knowledge, motivation, and organizational
influences affecting the usage of instructional strategies shown in professional development at
Spear High School. Chapter 1 outlined the problem, Chapter 2 established themes taken from the
literature, and Chapter 3 discussed methods for this study. Chapter 4 presents the results of
interviews with six freshman English teachers. Also, the data presented in Chapter 4 were
compared against specific instructional strategies that were shown to freshman English teachers
in professional development and were used as a tool to analyze if they were used in the
classroom with special needs students.
Eight KMO influences developed from the literature review and validated through the
data analysis provided the basis for recommendations. Knowledge elements focus on the
implementation of IEP modifications, teachers knowing methods of differentiating instruction
for special needs students and incorporating instructional strategies into lesson plans in
accordance with IEP modifications. Motivational factors signified the belief and capability of
effectively differentiating instruction for special needs students. Organizational influences
included having clearly defined goals compliant with federal regulations, establishing a culture
of equity amongst teachers to advocate for special needs students, having preparation time to
develop lessons, and having the presence of inclusivity within the classroom for special needs
students. Solutions presented can be implemented in the classroom to improve academic
outcomes for special needs students. The implementation and evaluation provided the framework
for the recommendations for Chapter 5.

61
Organizational Context and Mission
Spear High School provides opportunities for students that come from underserved
communities to excel through project and blended learning strategies. A gap analysis was used to
explore knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors that influenced teachers who instruct
special needs students (Clark & Estes, 2008). Spear High School helps SPED students and has
been identified as not meeting state and district learning outcomes. The mission of Spear High
School states that it fosters relevant, rigorous, and blended learning opportunities within a safe
environment. Also, Spear High School aspires to make its students global citizens that can
contribute to a changing environment. Students with special needs are between the ages of 13 to
17 years of age. The total population of Spear High School is 3,000 students; 7.1% of the
students are identified as being in special education (Texas Education Agency, 2019). The
primary goal of faculty at Spear High School is to increase positive student learning outcomes
and use instructional methods that help all student populations succeed.
Organizational Performance Goal
The goal of the Spear High School to comply with district initiatives was a success. The
organization gave teachers specific goals by having them identify modifications for special needs
students and formulate differentiated instruction used in lessons. These were reflective in teacher
lesson plans to indicate specific strategies that align with modifications. Teachers indicated that
they had access to professional development that was adapted from AVID strategies. Teachers
interacted and organized preparation time to share instructional strategies for special needs
students. Instructors at Spear High School became advocates for special needs students by
understanding their students and ensuring positive student outcomes by having students
participate in the classroom environment. Classroom teachers incorporate flexible learning
environments by differentiating instruction for special needs students.

62
Description of Stakeholder Groups
Teachers, school administration, and students. Teachers have to tailor instruction for
their diverse student populations while supporting the mission statement of Spear High School.
Students are the beneficiaries of competent strategies that affect student improvement in the
classroom. Table 8 examines stakeholder goals of school administrators, teachers, and students.
Table 8
Organizational Mission, Global, and Stakeholder Goals
Organizational Mission

Spear High School prepares each student within a respectful, safe, and supportive environment.
Spear High School will foster rigorous and blended learning opportunities built on inspiring,
impactful relationships with high expectations to prepare all students to positively contribute to
society.
Organizational Performance Goal

By the 2020-2021 school year, Spear High School will achieve 100% compliance with district
initiatives to effectively instruct SPED students and improve their academic progress.
Stakeholder Goals
School Administration Teachers Students
By May 2021, administrators
will provide training and
resources for teachers who
instruct special needs students.
By May 2021, teachers will
implement strategies presented
in district training to modify the
core curriculum for special
needs students through less
By May 2021, special
needs students will see
an increase in district
benchmark scores by
5%.

Recommendations for Practice to Address Knowledge Influences
Knowledge factors will be introduced and within the overview will be characterized as to
how they apply to teachers forming lessons in the secondary classroom for special need students.
Table 9 indicates a complete list of assumed influences with recommendations to facilitate
performance improvement for each influence.

63
Table 9
Summary of Knowledge Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Knowledge
Influence
Validated as
a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation

Teachers must
implement
modification in
accordance with
Individual Education
Plans (IEP).

N

Y Teachers must have knowledge of
how modification relates to
formulating instruction to teach
students with disabilities. Rueda
(2011) specifies that procedural
knowledge includes clear policy
rules and regulations.

Teachers have access to
a job aid with
modifications in the
IEP.

Teachers need to know
the methods of
differentiating
instruction for students
with disabilities.

N

Y

Kennedy and Deshler (2010) state
that teachers need guidance for
selecting or designing lessons that
involve technology to support the
learning needs of special needs
children.

Continued professional
development on
differentiating
instruction.

Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated strategies
into lesson plans that
are in line with
modifications in the
IEP.

N

Y

The implementation of
differentiated instruction allows
students to benefit from teachers’
planning lessons that include the
consideration of individual
characteristics (Strogilos, et al.,
2018).

Teachers have attended
professional
development for
differentiating
instruction.

Procedural Knowledge Solutions and Recommendations
Cooc (2019) found that teachers who worked in large schools with a high percentage
population of special needs students had less resources due to budget cuts. This resulted in
limited training opportunities for teachers and led to reduced expertise in addressing learning
needs for the special education population. Many teachers feel ill prepared to meet the needs of
students with disabilities in their classrooms and deliver effective instruction (Jenkins &

64
Yoshimura, 2010). Targeted and ongoing professional development is necessary to ensure that
students with special needs receive the best instruction within the classroom (Pugach &Winn,
2011). The results and findings of this study indicated that teachers at Spear High School have
knowledge related to IEP modifications to formulate instruction for special needs students. One
recommendation is to continue giving teachers access to professional development opportunities.
In addition, teachers can be provided job aids detailing IEP modifications for student
populations. Job aids are used to provide focused information about how to perform a task and
are usually instructional lists or specific written protocols. Also, teachers showed apt abilities to
differentiate instruction for their special needs students in the classroom. The recommendation
for Spear High School is to continue to encourage freshman English teachers to attend
professional development opportunities to gain new instructional techniques for the classroom.
The implementation of differentiated instruction allowed students to benefit from
teachers’ planning lessons that include the consideration of individual characteristics (Strogilos
et al., 2018). Differentiated strategies allowed teachers to focus on a students’ individual
characteristics, meeting the federal regulations, while also designing lessons where students have
equal access to the content. Thus, teachers must understand the connection that differentiated
lessons can have to both meeting federal standards and impacting students with disabilities
learning content.
Recommendations for Practice to Address Motivation Influences
Spear High School can increase its ability to support the learning of new instructional
strategies to foster a rise in confidence among teachers to differentiate instruction to meet district
and federal guidelines. Spear High School should continue professional development for teachers
and continue to empower them to implement these strategies for special needs students.

65

Table 10
Summary of Motivation Influences

Assumed Motivation
Influence
Validated as
a Gap?
Yes, High
Probability
or No
(V, HP, N)
Priority
Yes,
No
(Y, N)
Principle and Citation Context-Specific
Recommendation

Teachers need to
believe they are
capable of effectively
differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.

N

Y
For instance, in a study of 11,000
students with a range of
disabilities, Bakken (2016) found
that teachers who had confidence
in their abilities to differentiate
instruction to better facilitate
learning outcomes in the classroom
for special needs student were
more impactful in their instruction.

Continued
professional
development in
differentiated
instruction.

Motivational Influence
Bakken (2016) found that teachers who had experience differentiating instruction for
special needs learners had less problems in student behavior and it led to better student
achievement outcomes on academic progress. Here, the results and findings indicated that
teachers are capable of effectively differentiating for special needs students. Spear High School
can increase its ability to achieve goals by supporting teachers’ ability to learn new strategies and
fostering a rise in confidence among teachers to differentiate instruction to meet federal
guidelines. Support will be initiated by providing teachers professional development
opportunities, encouraging them to implement differentiated strategies, and empowering teachers
to advocate for their students.

66
Recommendations for Practice to Address Organizational Influences
Organizational factors are a component that affects the quality of education that special
needs students receive in the classroom. Schools need clearly defined goals to be compliant with
federal legislation. Also, teachers must have access to professional development opportunities
and preparation time to differentiate instruction for special needs students. Furthermore, teachers
need to become advocates for special needs students. Special needs students need teachers who
ensure they are given the same attention and opportunity for an equitable education.
Table 11
Summary of Organizational Influences and Recommendations
Assumed Organization
Influence

The organization needs
clearly defined goals
to be compliant with
federal legislation of
special needs students

Validated as
a Gap
Yes, High
Probability,
No
(V, HP, N)

N
Priority
Yes,
No
(Y, N)

Y
Principle and Citation

Teachers must be trained to
implement IEP modifications
into structured lessons to
facilitate learning for special
needs students (Mintrop & Zane,
2017).
Context-Specific
Recommendation

Provide teachers a list of
goals that come from the
administration of what is
needed for federal
compliance.

Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.

N

Y

Teachers lack preparation to
teach special needs students and
are having difficulty forming
differentiated instruction for
students with disabilities in the
classroom (Brownell, et al.,
2010).

The organization can
recommend that both
parties meet after school
when instructional topic
changes to plan lessons.

Encourage co-teachers
attend professional
development.

67
Table 11, continued

The inclusivity of
special needs students
within the classroom at
Spear High School.

N

Y

PBS offers support for special needs
students when completing a task or
making progress on an assignment
(Hieneman, Dunlap, & Kincaid,
2005). Positive behavior support
allows teachers to create educational
environments that engage students
in academic work and minimize
distractions or behavior problems
(Hieneman, et al., 2005).

The organization can
offer a job aid that
contains tips on how to
create a supportive
educational environment
for special needs
students.

Discussion of the Organizational Recommendations
The findings in this study indicated that teachers included modifications while planning
lessons for special needs students. Spear High School should provide a list of goals for federal
compliance that are specific for the English department. Also, teachers must become advocates
for special needs leaners to support their success in the classroom. Teachers created the least
restrictive environment for special needs learners to actively participate in activities and
advocating for their students is an important cultural building block for classroom culture. On-
site equity training for teachers would be useful so teachers can implement solutions for special
needs learners (Weiss, 1994).
Teachers have used time before or after school to formulate lesson plans that contain
differentiated instructional learning strategies. Also, professional development is given for one
week, involves AVID instructional strategies, technology trainings, and lesson planning tips.
Spear High School recommends that teachers use time before or after school to plan lessons. In
addition, teachers need to be encouraged by administration to attend professional development in
the future. Freshman English teachers at Spear High School have created an inclusive
environment for special needs students in the classroom. Instructors must be consistently
reminded that the goal is to improve achievement and ensure that every students is incorporated
in their lessons.

68
Integrated Implementation and Evaluation Plan
The Kirkpatrick model was used for this study to evaluate results and leading indicators,
behaviors, learning, and reactions that provided a conceptual framework for evaluation of
organizational factors (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The New World Kirkpatrick Model
describes the four levels of results or leading indicators, behaviors, learning, and reaction. The
value of the Kirkpatrick New World Model for this study was used to examine outcomes for
external and internal factors and required drivers to support critical behaviors within Spear High
School.
Level 4: Results and Leading Indicators
Table 12 shows the internal and external outcomes, metrics, and evaluative methods that
contribute most clearly to the organization’s goal attainment.
Table 12
Outcomes, Metrics, and Methods for External and Internal Outcomes
Outcome Metric(s) Method(s)
External Outcomes
Increase academic
yearly progress for
special needs students.
Scores on district
benchmarks.
Monthly district benchmark data.
Increase academic
yearly progress of
special needs students.
Number of students
passing district
benchmarks
Interview teachers to determine if they
will refine their methods for
differentiation and observations will be
used.

Internal Outcomes
Improved professional
development for English
teachers.
Strategies taught at
professional
development.
Use evaluations by teachers to determine
if the strategies are adequate, understood,
and applicable to classrooms.
Incorporation of
differentiated strategies
with IEP modifications.
The binding of
differentiation and
IEP modifications.
Interview of teachers to examine how they
are combining differentiation and IEP
modifications. This can be part of
observations by administrators.

69
Level 3: Behavior
Critical behaviors. The teachers will receive professional development on instructional
strategies and how teachers can incorporate them into IEP modifications. The metrics used to
request professional development include a request form that teachers can submit with
professional attendance records. Classroom observations can be made to make sure that teachers
are using and implementing differentiated instructional strategies for special needs students.
Table 13
Critical Behaviors, Metrics, Methods, and Timing for Evaluation
Critical Behavior Metric(s)
Method(s)
Timing
Teachers attend professional
development
Request form for
professional
development
Record of teachers
who attended
professional
development
Every
Semester
Teacher implements activities
with IEP modifications and
incorporating differentiated
strategies
Examine if the teacher
is using strategies in
the classroom
Classroom
observations
Every
Month

Required drivers. The required drivers are allowing teachers preparation time with co-
teachers and providing professional development opportunities for instructors. Encouraging
teachers to use differentiated instructional strategies for special needs students will be ongoing
and the principal acknowledges the progress of teachers to achieve positive outcomes for special
needs students. Monitoring the progress of special needs students will be ongoing every three
weeks. Table 14 indicates support drivers for critical behaviors.

70

Table 14
Required Drivers to Support Critical Behaviors
Method(s) Timing
Critical Behaviors
Supported
1, 2, 3 Etc.
Reinforcing

Allowing general education teachers preparation time with
SPED co-teachers.
Ongoing 2
School or district provides professional development
opportunities for teachers.
Ongoing 2
Encouraging

Encouraging teachers that they can differentiate instruction
for special needs students.
Ongoing 1
Rewarding

Principal acknowledges the progress of teachers to achieve
compliance and help SPED students.
Ongoing 2
Monitoring

Monitor student progress on critical district benchmark
examinations
Every three
weeks
1

Level 2: Learning
Teachers teaching special needs students with 100 percent federal compliance will have
the presence of adequate resources and differentiated lessons to facilitate instruction. Assumed
organizational influences will focus on teachers becoming advocates of equity for special needs
students, providing clearly defined goals, preparation or professional development time, and a
cultural model of inclusivity of special needs students. Table 15 evaluates the components of the
implementation of the instructional strategies that the English teachers learned during
professional development. It is broken down in levels from declarative knowledge, procedural
skills, attitude, confidence, and commitment. The timing for these themes is ongoing during the
school year.

71

Table 15
Evaluation of the Components of Learning for the Program
Method(s) or Activity(ies) Timing
Declarative Knowledge “I know it.”

Teacher can describe the relationships of differentiated lessons
coupled with modifications. (Mentorship and coaching)
Held during professional
learning communities.

Procedural Skills “I can do it right now.”

Teachers can establish their knowledge of differentiation
through evidence in lesson plans. (Mentorship and coaching)
During the school year at
least monthly.
Attitude “I believe this is worthwhile.”

Discussions of issues in implementing differentiation with
other teachers
During the school year.

Confidence “I think I can do it on the job.”

Discussion in small groups about the applicability of
differentiation.
During the school year.
Commitment “I will do it on the job.”

Self- reports on how professional development is working for
kids.
During the school year.

72

Level 1: Reaction
Table 16 highlights engagement, relevance, and customer satisfaction. In addition, the
table indicates how instructional strategies are being used in the classroom. The use of
instructional strategies for special needs students and the showing of improvement while using
differentiated strategies will occur throughout the school year.
Table 16
Components to Measure Reactions to the Program
Method(s) or Tool(s) Timing
Engagement

How the instructional strategies are being used for special
needs students through observation.
During the school year.
Relevance

How the instructional strategies are showing improvement
for special needs students
During the middle of the
semester and at the end.
Customer Satisfaction

Anonymous survey At the end of each nine weeks.

Strengths and Weaknesses of the Approach
Gap analysis guided the research for this study (Clark & Estes, 2008). The New World
Kirkpatrick model guided the evaluation of implementation of the recommendations based on the
results of the research for this study (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016). The classic qualitative
study approach allowed the researcher to conduct interviews to find out what instructional
techniques they were using in the classroom, and how differentiated instructional strategies were
used in the classroom with special needs students. Also, document analysis of what instructional
strategies were shown in professional development gave the researcher a baseline to examine if
the strategies were used in the classroom by teachers. The interview data and document analysis
were used in tandem with the KMO influence tables in this study.

73
Limitations and Delimitations
There are limitations associated with this study. Participants for this study were
voluntarily interviewed to help gain insight on how teachers can better facilitate instruction for
special needs students. The interview questions were consistent with the KMO framework and
were categorized to help the researcher analyze trends or gaps. Also, the volunteers were given
the choice to opt out of the study, but all answered all questions. In addition, the researcher does
not interact with teachers in other departments. The researcher did not have any personal
connections to the faculty that were interviewed, avoiding influence in responses. Another
limitation for this study was due to the coronavirus epidemic. It limited the researcher’s ability to
speak to and interview teachers in person. The researcher used Zoom to communicate and
interview teachers from Spear High School and only used interviews and document analysis to
triangulate data for this study.
The selection of the teachers as the key stakeholder group provided a focused perspective
on how instructional strategies were used in their classrooms for special needs students. This
focused approach provided a boundary within this study to look at the relationships of how
instructional techniques affect special needs students in the English classrooms. The sample size
of interviewing six teachers of the English department gave pertinent information as to what
instructional strategies were being used in the classroom. The focus of the KMO influencers
were well supported in the literature and fit well for this study. The timing of this study became
ever needed due to the COVID-19 pandemic with the increased need to implement effective
instructional strategies for special needs students in the virtual learning environment. The
participants volunteered to participate, reflected on their teacher practices, and provided insight
into what instructional strategies were working in their classrooms. All six volunteers
participated in the entire interview.

74
Future Research
There are two critical areas for future research that are fundamental to examining how
teachers use instructional strategies for special needs students. First, research examining how
administration evaluates the application of instructional strategies by teachers is needed. Second,
how teachers evaluate the progress of special needs learners must be done in order to facilitate
positive outcomes for special needs students. These two aspects were out of the scope of this
study. The evaluation of teachers involved separate permissions by teachers and the ability to
conduct classroom observations. This study only evaluated the use of instructional strategies by
teachers in the classrooms and their effect on the academic progress of special needs students in
the classroom. Further research will make necessary connections to foster professional feedback
for educators to better their practice of teaching special needs students in the general education
classroom.
Conclusion
This dissertation examined the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences of
differentiating instruction for special needs students in the freshman English classroom. The
importance of this study centered on providing insight into how Spear High School achieved the
stakeholder goal of teachers implementing instructional strategies presented in district training to
modify the core curriculum for special needs students. The research questions were:
1. What were the knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors necessary for Spear
High School general education teachers to implement the new instructional strategies
learned in professional development?
2. What were the recommendations for practice in the areas of knowledge, motivation,
and organizational factors supporting teachers to effectively teach special needs
students?

75
The Clark and Estes (2008) gap analytical framework structured the review of literature
which identified influences that included three knowledge factors, one motivation, and four
organizational cultural models or settings. Each influencer was validated through qualitative
analysis that involved interviewing teachers and triangulating document analysis from
instructional strategies gained at professional development to seek out trends or gaps. Change
recommendations follow the New World Kirkpatrick Model (Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2016).
The evaluation plan focused on teachers being encouraged to seek out professional development
opportunities, implementing differentiated instructional strategies for special needs students, the
capability of teachers to effectively use differentiation techniques, and goals for the organization
to help instructors have a supportive environment and advocate for special needs students.
Understanding, identifying, and leading indicators influenced teachers to improve lessons
for special needs students. It was valuable to study teacher instructional practice in the general
education classroom to facilitate the best possible learning environment for special needs
students. The researcher learned that teachers must use differentiated instructional strategies and
models to influence positive learning outcomes for special needs students.

76
References
Aronson, B., Murphy, K., & Saultz, A. (2016). Under Pressure in Atlanta: School Accountability
and Special Education Practices During the Cheating Scandal. Teachers College
Record, 118(14), 1–26. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1810868947/
Bakken, J. (2016). General and special education inclusion in an age of change: An
introduction. Advances in Special Education, 31, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1108/S0270-
401320160000031001
Bandura, A. (2001). SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review
of Psychology.
Barkmeier, A. (2012). Special education compliance and charter schools: A study of national,
state, and local policy in Denver public schools. Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law &
Policy, 19(2), 283-308.
Barnard-Brak, L., & Lechtenberger, D. (2010). Student IEP Participation and Academic
Achievement Across Time. Remedial and Special Education, 31(5), 343–349.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932509338382
Baum, S., Cooper, C., & Neu, T. (2001). Dual Differentiation: An Approach for Meeting the
Curricular Needs of Gifted Students with Learning Disabilities. Psychology in the
Schools, 38(5), 477–490.
Billingsley, B.S., & Cross, L.H. (1991) Teachers’ decisions to transfer from special to general
education. The Journal of Special Education 24(4): 496–511

77
Brock, M., & Carter, E. (2015). Effects of a Professional Development Package to Prepare
Special Education Paraprofessionals to Implement Evidence-Based Practice. Journal Of
Special Education, 49(1), 39–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022466913501882
Brock, M., Huber, H., Carter, E., Juarez, A., & Warren, Z. (2014). Statewide Assessment of
Professional Development Needs Related to Educating Students with Autism Spectrum
Disorder. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 29(2), 67–79.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088357614522290
Brownell, M., Sindelar, P., Kiely, M., & Danielson, L. (2010). Special Education Teacher
Quality and Preparation: Exposing Foundations, Constructing a New Model.
Exceptional Children, 76(3), 357–377. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291007600307
Burns, M. K., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2009). Reported prevalence of evidence-based instructional
practices in special education. The Journal of Special Education, 43, 3–11. doi:10.1177/
0022466908315563
Cancio, E.J., Albrecht, S.F., and Johns, B.H., (2013). Defining administrative support and its
relationship to the attrition of teachers of students with emotional and behavioral
disorders. Education and Treatment of Children, 36(4): 71–94.
Castro-Villarreal, F., Villarreal, V., & Sullivan, J. R. (2016). Special Education Policy and
Response to Intervention: Identifying Promises and Pitfalls to Advance Social Justice for
Diverse Students. Contemporary School Psychology, 20(1), 10–20. -
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40688-015-0077-3
Cherniss, C. (1988). Observed Supervisory Behavior and Teacher Burnout in Special
Education. Exceptional Children, 54(5), 449–454.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440298805400508

78
Clark, R. E. & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, Inc.
Conley, S., & You, S. (2017). Key influences on special education teachers’ intentions to leave:
The effects of administrative support and teacher team efficacy in a mediational
model. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 45(3), 521–540.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143215608859
Cooc, N. (2019). Teaching students with special needs: International trends in school capacity
and the need for teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 83,
27–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.021
Cortiella, C. (2007). No Child Left Behind and students with disabilities. (Insight on
Federal Policy: This month's focus: No Child Left Behind. The Exceptional
Parent, 37(9), 70-73.
Council for Education Policy Research and Improvement (CEPRI). (2005). In-service education
for Florida educators. Tallahassee, FL: Author
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J.D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed
methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Daane, C. J., Beirne-Smith, M., & Latham, D. (2000). Administrators’ and teachers’ grades.
Education, 121(2), 331- 339
De Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., & Minnaert, A. (2011). Regular primary schoolteachers’ attitudes
towards inclusive education: A review of the literature. International Journal of Inclusive
Education, 15, 331-353.
DeMatthews, D. (2014). Deconstructing Systems of Segregation. Journal of Cases in
Educational Leadership, 17(1), 17-31.

79
Fore, C., Martin, C., & Bender, W. N. (2002). Teacher Burnout In Special Education: The
Causes and The Recommended Solutions. The High School Journal, 86(1), 36–44. doi:
10.1353/hsj.2002.0017
Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational
Psychologist, 36(1), 45–56.
Gersten, R., & Dimino, J. (2006). RTI (Response to Intervention): Rethinking Special Education
for Students with Reading Difficulties (Yet Again). Reading Research Quarterly, 41(1),
99–108. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.41.1.5
Gibson, S., & Dembo, M. H. (1984). Teacher efficacy: A construct validation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 76, 569–582. doi: 10.1037//0022-0663.76.4.569
Glesne, C. (2011). But is it ethical? Considering what is “right.” In Becoming qualitative
researchers: An introduction (4th ed.) (pp. 162–183). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Hieneman, M., Dunlap, G., & Kincaid, D. (2005). Positive Support Strategies for Students with
Behavioral Disorders in General Education Settings. Psychology in the Schools, 42(8),
779–794. https://doi.org/10.1002/pits.20112
Hoy, W. K., & Miskel, C. G. (2005). School effectiveness, accountability, and improvement
in educational administration: Theory, Research, and Practice (7th ed.). Boston, MA:
McGraw Hill.
Jenkins, A., & Yoshimura, J. (2010). Not Another Inservice! Meeting the Special Education
Professional Development Needs of Elementary General Educators. Teaching
Exceptional Children, 42(5), 36–43. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/742863802/

80
Jennett, H. K., S. L. Harris, & G. B. Mesibov. 2003. “Commitment to Philosophy, Teacher
Efficacy, and Burnout among Teachers of Children with Autism.” Journal of Autism and
Developmental Disorders 33: 583–593.
Jobling, A., & Moni, K. B. (2004). I never imagined I’d have to teach these children:
Providing authentic learning experiences for secondary pre-service teachers in teaching
students with special needs. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 32, 5-22.
Jones, N., Youngs, P., & Frank, K. (2013). The Role of School-Based Colleagues in Shaping the
Commitment of Novice Special and General Education Teachers. Exceptional
Children, 79(3), 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900303
Johnson, C. E. "The Role of the General Educator in the Inclusion Classroom" In General and
Special Education Inclusion in an Age of Change: Roles of Professionals Involved.
Published online: 25 Oct 2016; 21-38.
Katsiyannis, A., & Ward, T. (1992). Parent Participation in Special Education: Compliance
Issues as Reported by Parent Surveys and State Compliance Reports. Remedial and
Special Education (RASE), 13(5), 50–55,62.
https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259201300508
Kennedy, M., & Deshler, D. (2010). Literacy Instruction, Technology, and Students with
Learning Disabilities: Research We Have, Research We Need. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 33(4), 289–298. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/813381196/ Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(4),
289–298. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/813381196/
King-Sears, M. E., & Evmenova, A. S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for
integrating Technology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 6-14.

81
King‐Sears, M. (2008). Facts and fallacies: differentiation and the general education
curriculum for students with special educational needs. Support for Learning, 23(2), 55–
62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9604.2008.00371.x
Kirk, R. H. (1998). The link between university coursework and pre-service teachers’ attitudes
toward students with special learning needs. College Student Journal, 32(1), 153-157.
Kovach, J. (1995). Decreasing educational segregation in urban schools: the role of inclusive
education and the need for structural change. Applied Behavioral Science Review, 3(2),
165–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1068-8595(95)80005-0
Klingner, J. K., Urbach, J., Golos, D., Brownell, M., & Menon, S. (2010). Teaching reading
in the 21st century: A glimpse at how special education teachers promote reading
comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(2), 59-74.
Krathwohl, D. (2002). A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Kutash, K., Duchnowski, A., & Lynn, N. (2009). The use of evidence-based instructional
strategies in special education settings in secondary schools: Development,
implementation and outcomes. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(6), 917–923.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.016
Lee, Y., Patterson, P., & Vega, L. (2011). Perils to Self-Efficacy Perceptions and Teacher-
Preparation Quality among Special Education Intern Teachers. Teacher Education
Quarterly, 38(2), 61–76.
Lersilp, S., Putthinoi, S., & Lersilp, T. (2018). Facilitators and Barriers of Assistive
Technology and Learning Environment for Children with Special Needs. Occupational
Therapy International, 2018, 9. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3705946

82
Maccini, P., Gagnon, J. C, & Hughes, C. A. (2002). Technology Based Practices for
Secondary Students with Learning Disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25, 247-
261.
Mahoney, J., & Hall, C. (2017). Using technology to differentiate and accommodate students
with disabilities. E-Learning and Digital Media, 14(5), 291–303.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2042753017751517
Marino, M., Marino, E., & Shaw, S. (2006). Making Informed Assistive Technology Decisions
for Students with High Incidence Disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(6),
18–25,2. https://doi.org/10.1177/004005990603800603
Marshall, C., & Patterson, J. (2002). Confounded Policies: Implementing Site-Based
Management and Special Education Policy Reforms. Educational Policy, 16(3), 351–
386. https://doi.org/10.1177/08904802016003001
Marteney, T., & Bernadowski, C. (2016). Teachers’ Perceptions of the Benefits of Online
Instruction for Students with Special Educational Needs. British Journal of Special
Education, 43(2), 178–194. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8578.12129
Martin, E., Martin, R., & Terman, D. (1996). The legislative and litigation history of special
education. The Future of Children, 6(1), 25–39. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602492
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). Thousand
Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
McHatton, P., & Parker, A. (2013). Purposeful Preparation: Longitudinally Exploring
Inclusion Attitudes of General and Special Education Pre-Service Teachers. Teacher
Education and Special Education, 36(3), 186–203.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406413491611

83
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation. (4th ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mintrop, H., & Zane, R. (2017). When the Achievement Gap Becomes High Stakes for Special
Education Teachers: Facing a Dilemma with Integrity. Teachers College
Record, 119(9).
Murawski, W., & Lochner, W. (2011). Observing Co-Teaching: What to Ask For, Look For, and
Listen For. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46(3), 174–183.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451210378165
Nilsen, S. (2017). [Review of Special education and general education – coordinated or
separated? A study of curriculum planning for pupils with special educational
needs]. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21(2), 205–217.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2016.1193564
Nojani, M., Arjmandnia, A., Afrooz, G., & Rajabi, M. (2012). The Study on Relationship
between Organizational Justice and Job Satisfaction in Teachers Working in General,
Special and Gifted Education Systems. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46,
2900–2905. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.586
Obergriesser, S., & Stoeger, H. (2020). Students’ emotions of enjoyment and boredom and their
use of cognitive learning strategies – How do they affect one another? Learning and
Instruction, 66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101285
Obiakor, F., Beachum, F., & Harris, M. (2010). African American Students’ Experiences with
Special Education in Milwaukee Public Schools. Western Journal of Black Studies, 34(4),
425–437. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1018073301/

84
Odom, S., Cox, A., & Brock, M. (2013). Implementation Science, Professional Development,
and Autism Spectrum Disorders. Exceptional Children, 79(2), 233–251.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001440291307900207
Podell, D., & Soodak, L. (1993). Teacher Efficacy and Bias in Special Education Referrals. The
Journal of Educational Research, 86(4), 247–253.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1993.9941836
President’s Commission on Excellence in Special Education. (2002). A new era: Revitalizing
special education for children and their families. Retrieved from http://www.nectac
.org/~pdfs/calls/2010/earlypartc/revitalizing_ special_education.pdf
Pugach, M. C., & Winn, J. A. (2011). Research on Co-teaching and Teaming. Journal of Special
Education Leadership, 24(1), 36-46.
Rayner, S. (2007). Managing special and inclusive education. Los Angeles, [Calif.] ;: SAGE.
Rexroat-Frazier, N., & Chamberlin, S. (2018). Best practices in co-teaching mathematics with
special needs students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs,
https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12439
Ross-Hill, R. (2009). Teacher Attitude towards Inclusion Practices and Special Needs
Students. Journal of Research in Special Educational Needs, 9(3), 188–198.
Roy, A., Guay, F., & Valois, P. (2013). Teaching to address diverse learning needs:
development and validation of a Differentiated Instruction Scale. International
Journal of Inclusive Education, 17(11), 1186–1204.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2012.743604
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. S. (2012). Conversational partnerships. In Qualitative interviewing:
The art of hearing data (3rd ed., pp. 85–92). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

85
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 Dimensions of Improving Student Performance. New York, NY:
Teachers College Press.
Sanford, C., Levine, P., & Blackorby, J. (2008). A national profile of students with autism.
Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.
Sarıçam, H., & Sakız, H. (2014). Burnout and teacher self-efficacy among teachers working in
special education institutions in Turkey. Educational Studies, 40(4), 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2014.930340
Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A. & McDuffie, K. A. (2007) Co-teaching in inclusive
classrooms: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research. Exceptional Children, 73 (4), pp.
92–416
Shady, S., Luther, V., & Richman, L. (2013). Teaching the Teachers: A Study of Perceived
Professional Development Needs of Educators to Enhance Positive Attitudes toward
Inclusive Practices. Education Research and Perspectives, 40(1), 169–191. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1413417195/
Sileo, J. M. & van Garderen, D. (2010). Creating optimal opportunities to learn mathematics:
blending co-teaching structures with research-based practices. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 42, pp. 14–9.
Spear High School. 2019. Paso Del Norte School District Campus Improvement Plan.
Retrieved from
https://www.sisd.net/cms/lib/TX01001452/Centricity/domain/56/campus_improvement_
plans/2018-2019/011.pdf
Strogilos, V., & Avramidis, E. (2016). Teaching experiences of students with special educational
needs in co‐taught and non‐co‐taught classes. Journal of Research in Special Educational
Needs, 16(1), 24–33. https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-3802.12052

86
Strogilos, V., Avramidis, E., Voulagka, A., & Tragoulia, E. (2018). Differentiated instruction
for students with disabilities in early childhood co-taught classrooms: types and quality of
modifications. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2018.1466928
Teach for Texas. 2019. Texas Teacher Evaluation and Support System.
Retrieved from https://www.teachfortexas.org/Resource_Files/Guides/T-
TESS_Appraiser_Handbook.pdf
Texas Education Agency. 2019. Texas Education Agency 2017-2018 Report Card.
Retrieved from https://www.sisd.net/cms/lib/TX01001452/Centricity/Domain/83/2017-
2018%20School%20Report%20Cards/Pebble%20Hills%20HS%20Report%20Card.pdf
Thorius, K., & Maxcy, B. (2015). Critical Practice Analysis of Special Education Policy: An
RTI Example. Remedial and Special Education, 36(2), 116–124.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932514550812
Weiner, I., & Murawski, W. (2005). Schools Attuned: A Model for Collaborative
Intervention. Intervention in School and Clinic, 40(5), 284–290.
https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512050400050501
Weiss, R. S. (1994). Chapter 3: Preparation for interviewing, Chapter 4: Interviewing, and
Chapter 5: Issues in interviewing. In Learning from strangers: The art and method of
qualitative interview studies (pp. 51-59, 61-81, and 141-150). New York, NY: The Free
Press.
Werts, M., Carpenter, E., & Fewell, C. (2014). Barriers and Benefits to Response to Intervention:
Perceptions of Special Education Teachers. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 33(2), 3–
11. https://doi.org/10.1177/875687051403300202

87
Yell, M., Rogers, D., & Rogers, E. (1998). The Legal History of Special Education: What
a Long, Strange Trip It’s Been. Remedial and Special Education, 19(4), 219–228.
https://doi.org/10.1177/074193259801900405

88
APPENDIX A: Interview Protocol
Opening Discussion
The following narrative is an overview of the interview discussion. The recommendations
followed from Merriam and Tisdell (2016) and Taylor and Bogdan (1984). The elements of the
interview phase include: a) motives, intentions, and the purpose of the study; b) protection of
anonymity of participants; c) content inclusion authority; and d) interview logistics. The
presentation of the interview questions is sequential, and the goal of the interviews is to allow
dialogue between the researcher and the participant. There will be a general question in each area
and may reflect the only question based upon the response of the participant. The use of probing
questions will serve to pull additional information from the participant or help add detail to
information if answers are incomplete or to clarify concepts in each area.
For the purposes of this study, a framework was created to define the nature of the
questions:
(Research Question) Identify an association to the research questions reflected in this
study.
(Knowledge) Key knowledge influences reflected in this study; each knowledge
component is classified along with the specific influence as reflected in KMO tables found in
this study.
(Motivation) Key motivation components in this study along with specific influences
reflected in KMO tables found in this study.
(Organization) Key organizational components in this study along with specific
influences reflected in KMO tables found in this study.
(Probing Question) Follow- up questions

89
Introduction
My name is Dario Lujan, a doctoral student at the University of Southern California. In
addition, I work at Spear High School as a social studies teacher. This study is examining
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences related to dissertation research questions at
Spear High School. My goal is to uncover gaps associated with teachers instructing special needs
students in the classroom within a school year. The findings from this study will provide a basis
for change targeting the identified groups for this study. Although I identify Spear High School
by this name in this study, pseudonyms replace all references to the organization, people, or any
other identifiable information used for this dissertation. All information provided in the interview
will remain confidential. Participation in this study is voluntary and there is not a penalty for
refusing to take part or terminating the study at any time.
Do you have any questions concerning the purpose of the study, the protection and
anonymity information for participants, and the voluntary right to participate or terminate your
participation in this study at any time?
With your permission, I will be recording and transcribing this interview via Zoom for
analysis and it will be in a secure location for six months. At the conclusion of those six months
the recording will be destroyed. A copy of the interview will be provided to you. If you decide to
end the interview you may do so at any period. I anticipate the interview to last about an hour.
Do you have any questions currently? I will begin the recording.

90
APPENDIX B: Interview Questions
Research Question KMO Influences Interview Question
Type of
Question
(Patton)
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities
Can you explain how special
education affects the way you
plan lessons for instruction in
the classroom?

Knowledge-
Open Ended

What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence number 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities
Can you elaborate on how
you use differentiation in
lesson planning? What is your
goal of differentiating
instruction for special needs
students?
Knowledge-
Open- Ended
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence number 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities
What is your goal of
differentiating instruction for
special needs students?
Knowledge
Follow Up
Question;
Probing
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.
What student centered
strategies do you use in the
classroom to incorporate
students with special needs?
Knowledge
Follow Up
Question;
Probing

91

What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Organizational-
Cultural Setting
Influence 2
There needs to be a
culture established
among teachers to
be advocates of
equity for students
with disabilities.
How do you advocate equity
for special needs students in
your classroom?
Organizational-
Open Ended
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Organizational-
Influence 3
Teachers need to
have preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons
with co-teachers
that are serving
students with
disabilities.
Can you elaborate on what
professional development the
school has offered you to
facilitate student centered
instruction to special needs
students?
Organizational-
Open Ended
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.
Can you explain what
instructional strategies were
offered in the professional
development?
Knowledge
Follow Up;
Probing
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and organizational
factors necessary for Spear
High School teachers to
implement IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 2
Teachers need to
know the methods
of differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.
Can you describe how you
incorporate differentiated
strategies for special needs
students to address
instructional gaps?
Knowledge-
Open Ended

92
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
necessary for Spear High
School teachers to implement
IEP modifications?

Knowledge- Procedural
Influence 2
Teachers need to
know the methods of
differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.

What specific strategies do
you use in your class to help
address students with
disabilities?

Knowledge
Follow Up
Question;
Probing
What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
necessary for Spear High
School teachers to implement
IEP modifications?

Knowledge- Procedural
Influence 1
Teachers must
implement
modification in
accordance with
Individual Education
Plans (IEP).

How do you blend the IEP
modifications into your
instructional plans?
Knowledge-
Open Ended

What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
necessary for Spear High
School teachers to implement
IEP modifications?

Knowledge-
Conceptual
Influence 3
Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated
strategies into lesson
plans that are in line
with modifications in
the IEP.

What differentiated strategies
do you incorporate with IEP
modifications?

Knowledge-
Open Ended

What are the knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
necessary for Spear High
School teachers to implement
IEP modifications?
Motivation
Teachers need to
believe they are
capable of effectively
differentiating
instruction for
students with
disabilities.

How do you feel about your
ability to differentiate
instruction for students with
disabilities?

Motivation-
Open Ended

What are the
recommendations for practice
in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
supporting teachers to
provide instruction to
students with disabilities?

Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 1
The organization
needs clearly defined
goals to be compliant
with federal
legislation of special
needs students.

Has Spear High School
indicated clearly defined
goals with regards to being
compliant on using IEP
modifications in your
lessons?

Organizational-
Open Ended

93
What are the
recommendations for practice
in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
supporting teachers to
provide instruction to
students with disabilities?
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.
How long is your preparation
time with your co-teacher at
Spear High School?

Organizational-
Open Ended

What are the
recommendations for practice
in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
supporting teachers to
provide instruction to
students with disabilities?
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.
Can you elaborate on the
professional development at
Spear High School?
Organizational-
Open Ended

What are the
recommendations for practice
in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
supporting teachers to
provide instruction to
students with disabilities?
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.
What type of professional
development is needed to
improve lessons in the
classroom for special needs
students?
Organizational-
Open Ended

What are the
recommendations for practice
in the areas of knowledge,
motivation, and
organizational factors
supporting teachers to
provide instruction to
students with disabilities?
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 2
There needs to be a
culture established
among teachers to be
advocates of equity
for students with
disabilities.
How can Spear High School
establish a culture for equity
that advocates for special
needs students?
Organizational-
Open Ended

94

8

What are the recommendations
for practice in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors supporting
teachers to provide instruction to
students with disabilities?

Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.

What kind of special
education professional
development do you
receive to improve your
lessons for special needs
students in the
classroom?

Organizational-
Open Ended

What are the recommendations
for practice in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors supporting
teachers to provide instruction to
students with disabilities?

Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.

What strategies of
inclusivity from
professional development
do you use in your
classroom?

Organizational-
Follow Up

What are the recommendations
for practice in the areas of
knowledge, motivation, and
organizational factors supporting
teachers to provide instruction to
students with disabilities?

Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to have
preparation or
professional
development time to
make sure they are
planning lessons with
co-teachers that are
serving students with
disabilities.

What does inclusivity
look like in your
classroom?

Organizational-
Open Ended

95
APPENDIX C: Instructional Strategies and KMO Factors
Strategy
KMO
Influences
Source Explanation
Graphic Organizers
(Foldables)
Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 3
Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated
strategies into
lesson plans that
are in line with
modifications in
the IEP.

Obergriesser, S., & Stoeger, H. (2020). Students’
emotions of enjoyment and boredom and their use
of cognitive learning strategies – How do they
affect one another? Learning and Instruction, 66.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101285
Students use
graphic
organizers to
divide
information
and see
relationships
for concepts.
Learning Stations

Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 3
Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated
strategies into
lesson plans that
are in line with
modifications in
the IEP.

Obergriesser, S., & Stoeger, H. (2020). Students’
emotions of enjoyment and boredom and their use
of cognitive learning strategies – How do they
affect one another? Learning and Instruction, 66.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101285
Learning
stations help
students move
around the
class and they
can see
different
concepts of a
lesson.
Game Based Learning Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 3
Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated
strategies into
lesson plans that
are in line with
modifications in
the IEP.

Obergriesser, S., & Stoeger, H. (2020). Students’
emotions of enjoyment and boredom and their use
of cognitive learning strategies – How do they
affect one another? Learning and Instruction, 66.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101285
Students can
use games to
apply or
review
concepts.
Also, it helps
them
remember key
concepts.
Socratic Seminar Knowledge-
Procedural
Influence 3
Teachers need to
incorporate
differentiated
strategies into
lesson plans that
are in line with
modifications in
the IEP.

Obergriesser, S., & Stoeger, H. (2020). Students’
emotions of enjoyment and boredom and their use
of cognitive learning strategies – How do they
affect one another? Learning and Instruction, 66.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2019.101285
Students can
discuss topics
and ask
questions of
students or
the teacher
about
concepts
within the
lesson.

96
Strategy
KMO
Influences
Source Explanation
Allow different students to
work with each other.

Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to
have preparation
or professional
development time
to make sure they
are planning
lessons with co-
teachers that are
serving students
with disabilities.

Da Fonte, M., & Barton-Arwood, S.
(2017). Collaboration of General and
Special Education Teachers: Perspectives
and Strategies. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 53(2), 99–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451217693370
Special needs
students can
work with
others in a
group setting.
“I do, we do” Model
(Explicit teaching and
modeling)
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to
have preparation
or professional
development time
to make sure they
are planning
lessons with co-
teachers that are
serving students
with disabilities.

Da Fonte, M., & Barton-Arwood, S.
(2017). Collaboration of General and
Special Education Teachers: Perspectives
and Strategies. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 53(2), 99–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451217693370
The teacher
tells students
what they need
to know.
Teacher then
does activity
with the
students.
Teach to different learning
styles when planning lessons
Organizational
Cultural Setting
Influence 3
Teachers need to
have preparation
or professional
development time
to make sure they
are planning
lessons with co-
teachers that are
instructing
students with
disabilities.
Da Fonte, M., & Barton-Arwood, S.
(2017). Collaboration of General and
Special Education Teachers: Perspectives
and Strategies. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 53(2), 99–106.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1053451217693370
Teachers must
plan for
students of
different
abilities.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This study applies the gap analysis model to understand barriers facing teachers to differentiate instruction for special needs students in the general education setting. The purpose of this study was to conduct an evaluation gap analysis for implementing differentiated instructional strategies to improve outcomes of special needs students in the general education classroom. The analysis focused on discovering gaps that exist for general education teachers differentiating instruction using knowledge, motivation, and organizational factors. Six instructors participated in the study. This study contributed to the continuing study of improving the outcomes of special needs student in public high schools and discusses how differentiating instruction can improve the educational experience for special needs students.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Perception of alternative education teachers readiness to instruct English language learners: an evaluation study

PDF

Embedded academic support for high school student success: an innovation study

PDF

An evaluation study of... What do teachers know about gifted students?

PDF

Explicit instruction’s impact on the student achievement gap in K-12 English language learners

PDF

Implementing effective leadership development initiatives at the unit level in the Air Force: an innovation study

PDF

Teacher role in reducing the achievement gap: an evaluation study

PDF

Building data use capacity through school leaders: an evaluation study

PDF

The disproportionality of African Americans in special education programs: an exploratory study

PDF

Principal leadership influences teacher retention in schools identified for comprehensive and targeted support: an evaluation study

PDF

Closing the achievement gap for students with disabilities: a focus on instructional differentiation - an evaluation study

PDF

Narrowing the English learner achievement gap through teacher professional learning and cultural proficiency: an evaluation study

PDF

Challenging stigmas and perceptions in alternative high schools through mentorship: an innovation study

PDF

Advisor impact on student veterans at a post-secondary institution: an evaluation study

PDF

Strategies to create a culture of inclusion for students with special needs

PDF

Implementation of the International Baccalaureate Middle Years Program in an urban secondary school: an improvement practice to address closing the achievement gap

PDF

Understanding the factors that contribute to successful school reconstitution: A promising practice

PDF

Equitable schooling for African American students: an evaluation study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Teacher perception on positive behavior interventions and supports’ (PBIS) cultivation for positive teacher-student relationships in high schools: an evaluation study

PDF

Supporting emergent bilinguals: implementation of SIOP and professional development practices

Asset Metadata

Creator Lujan, Dario M. (author)

Core Title Trending upward: an evaluation study of teacher practices in serving special needs students in a public high school

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 02/17/2021

Defense Date 10/26/2020

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag instructional strategies,OAI-PMH Harvest,Special Education,special needs students

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Ott, Maria (committee chair), Bewley, William (committee member), Cash, David (committee member)

Creator Email darioluj@usc.edu,detectiveknight2010@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-422175

Unique identifier UC11667817

Identifier etd-LujanDario-9270.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-422175 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LujanDario-9270.pdf

Dmrecord 422175

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Lujan, Dario M.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA