Handbook of Arts Education and Special Education: Policy, Research, and Practices [1 ed.] 1138669598, 9781138669598

Table of contents :
Cover
Half Title
Title Page
Copyright Page
Contents
Preface
List of Contributors
SECTION I: Setting the Context for Educating Students with Disabilities in the Arts
1 The Changing Landscape of Arts Education and Special Education
2 Conceptual and Historical Foundations of Education in and through the Arts for Students with Disabilities
3 Collaboration between Special Education and Arts Education: Negotiating Standards for Teachers and Students
4 Creativity, Disability, Diversity, and Inclusion
SECTION II: Ensuring an Appropriate Education in the Visual and Performing Arts
5 Legal Aspects of Teaching Students with Disabilities in the Arts
6 Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching Students with and at Risk for Developing Disabilities
7 Preparing to Teach Students with Disabilities in and through the Arts
8 Utilizing Paraeducators: Issues and Strategies for Supporting Students with Disabilities in Arts Education
SECTION III: Developing Students’ Artistic, Academic, and Personal Growth
9 Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts Education
10 Including Students with Disabilities in Music Education
11 Dance Education for Students with Disabilities
12 Including Students with Disabilities in Theater Education
13 Arts Integration and Special Education
14 Arts in the Therapeutic Process: Art Therapy, Dance/Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy in Schools
SECTION IV: Arts Education and Community Living
15 Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities
16 Perspectives of Young Artists with Disabilities: Negotiating Identity
17 Family Perspectives on Access to Arts Education for Students with Disabilities
18 Career and Workforce Development in the Arts for Youth with Disabilities
19 International Perspectives on Arts Education and Special Education: Views from the Field
SECTION V: Emerging Trends and Future Directions in Arts Education and Special Education
20 The Impact of Technology Innovations at the Intersection of Arts Education and Special Education
21 Educating Students in and through the Arts: The Need for Research and Evaluation
22 Trends and Issues Influencing Arts Education for Students with Disabilities
Index

Citation preview

Handbook of Arts Education and Special Education

The Handbook of Arts Education and Special Education brings together, for the first time in a single reference volume, policy, research, and practices in special education and arts education synthesized to inform stakeholders across a broad spectrum of education. This handbook encompasses arts education for students with disabilities, from pre-K through transition to postsecondary education and careers as well as community arts education, with particular attention to conceptual foundations; research-based practices; professional standards; students’ cognitive, artistic, and social growth; career education; and future directions for research and practice in special education and arts education. Jean B. Crockett is Professor of Special Education and former Director of the School of Special Education, School Psychology, and Early Childhood Studies at the University of Florida. Her publications address special education leadership and policy, and the education of students with disabilities in and through the arts. Sharon M. Malley is a special educator, art educator, and artist, and previously a special ­education specialist for the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. She led the special education team contributing to the development of the National Core Arts Standards and works on ­initiatives of national significance for arts and special education.

Handbook of Arts Education and Special Education Policy, Research, and Practices

Edited by Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

First published 2018 by Routledge 711 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10017 and by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2018 Taylor & Francis The right of Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book has been requested. ISBN: 978-1-138-66959-8 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-66960-4 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-61813-5 (ebk) Typeset in Bembo by codeMantra

Contents

Prefaceviii List of Contributorsxi Section I

Setting the Context for Educating Students with Disabilities in the Arts 1 1 The Changing Landscape of Arts Education and Special Education 3 Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee 2 Conceptual and Historical Foundations of Education in and through the Arts for Students with Disabilities 16 Sharon M. Malley 3 Collaboration between Special Education and Arts Education: Negotiating Standards for Teachers and Students32 Sharon M. Malley 4 Creativity, Disability, Diversity, and Inclusion 45 Karen Keifer-Boyd Section II

Ensuring an Appropriate Education in the Visual and Performing Arts57 5 Legal Aspects of Teaching Students with Disabilities in the Arts 59 Jean B. Crockett

v

Contents

6 Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching Students with and at Risk for Developing Disabilities 72 Bryan G. Cook, Jamie Simpson-Steele, and Lysandra H. Cook 7 Preparing to Teach Students with Disabilities in and through the Arts 91 Juliann B. Dorff 8 Utilizing Paraeducators: Issues and Strategies for Supporting Students with Disabilities in Arts Education 105 Ritu V. Chopra, Diane Carroll, and Sharon K. Manjack Section III

Developing Students’ Artistic, Academic, and Personal Growth 129 9 Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts Education 131 Michelle Kraft 10 Including Students with Disabilities in Music Education 153 Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek 11 Dance Education for Students with Disabilities 166 Jenny Seham 12 Including Students with Disabilities in Theater Education 184 Sally Bailey 13 Arts Integration and Special Education 196 Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry 14 Arts in the Therapeutic Process: Art Therapy, Dance/Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy in Schools 216 Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow Section IV

Arts Education and Community Living 233 15 Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities 235 Donalyn Heise 16 Perspectives of Young Artists with Disabilities: Negotiating Identity 248 Erin J. Hoppe 17 Family Perspectives on Access to Arts Education for Students with Disabilities 267 Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

vi

Contents

18 Career and Workforce Development in the Arts for Youth with Disabilities 278 Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp 19 International Perspectives on Arts Education and Special Education: Views from the Field 298 Donald DeVito, with Gertrude Bien Aime, Hannah Ehrli, Abijah Bertrand, and Gloria Valladares Section V

Emerging Trends and Future Directions in Arts Education and Special Education 311 20 The Impact of Technology Innovations at the Intersection of Arts Education and Special Education 313 Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley 21 Educating Students in and through the Arts: The Need for Research and Evaluation 332 Rob Horowitz 22 Trends and Issues Influencing Arts Education for Students with Disabilities 342 Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley Index 359

vii

Preface

What do arts educators need to know about special education, and what do special educators need to know about arts education? These questions lie at the heart of this collection of chapters. This handbook is based on the premise that all students need opportunities to learn in and through the arts, regardless of abilities. In addition to fostering artistic development, arts education can spark curiosity and stimulate the capacity of young people “to imagine, investigate, construct, and reflect as unique beings committed to giving meaning to their experiences” (NCCAS, 2016, p. 17). We believe that cultivating these habits of mind is essential to educating the whole child in the 21st century. Arts education provides students with disabilities, who receive special education and often struggle to succeed in other disciplines, with opportunities to convey sophisticated ideas and experience personal validation. Emerging evidence also suggests the power of arts education to enhance their learning and life outcomes, although more research is needed to understand how students with disabilities actually engage in arts education and how effectively arts educators ­engage in their instruction. With regard to shared work and mutual understanding at the intersection of arts education and special education, there is much to be learned. A dynamic community of researchers, practitioners, and leaders of professional arts and special education organizations has formed in recent years to strengthen the knowledge base supporting well-designed learning opportunities in the arts for students with disabilities. The community’s formation began with national forums held at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and its affiliate VSA in the summers of 2012 and 2013 (Malley & Silverstein, 2014). ­Forum participants, invited for their expertise in arts education and/or special education, shared their ­k nowledge, identified trends, and made recommendations for the development of a national agenda, establishing the arts as an essential component of the education of students with ­d isabilities. A key recommendation arising from the forums was the need for publications ­h ighlighting policy, practice, and research at the interdisciplinary juncture of both fields. In response, the ­chapters in this collection make a unique contribution to the existing literature. This handbook is designed to address an interdisciplinary audience concerned with the ­i­nclusion and education of students with disabilities in the arts. Relevant articles in peer-reviewed journals are difficult to find as they are scattered among professional journals representing various areas of arts education and arts therapies, and those devoted to various special education topics. Books addressing the subject of students with disabilities in the arts typically provide applied knowledge for practitioners in a specific arts education field, such as music or theater. In contrast, chapters in this volume incorporate in-depth analysis of research, practice, and policies, incorporating viii

Preface

content related to special education with content across the major arts education disciplines of music, dance, theater, and visual and media arts. The chapters in the volume offer an overview of the foundational knowledge informing the practice of art education related to special education in today’s schools. Thus, this handbook is designed to meet the informational needs of influential stakeholders, including teachers and administrators of arts education and special education, school principals, policy makers, parents, and community members who need accessible, research-based information to guide their decisions. We asked our contributors to synthesize important information related to arts education for students with disabilities from pre-K through transition into postsecondary educational settings, as well as in community arts education, with particular attention to (a) research-based practices; (b) professional standards; (c) students’ cognitive, artistic, and social growth; (d) career education; and (e) future directions for research and practice in special education and arts education. To address cultural relevance and differing perspectives within the context of a multicultural society, we also asked authors to incorporate material related to cultural, gender, and linguistic diversity. We have organized the handbook into five sections. Some issues do not have a specific chapter devoted to them because they are addressed within many chapters. Readers should not assume that if a topic does not have a dedicated chapter, the handbook does not address it. The first section sets the context for educating students with disabilities in the arts by examining the current landscape, historical foundations, professional standards, and collaborative approaches as well as definitions and attitudes related to creativity, disability, diversity, and inclusion. The second section provides a foundation for ensuring an appropriate education for students with disabilities in the arts by exploring the legal foundations of special education, the use of evidence-based practice, approaches to teacher preparation, and paraeducator guidance. The third section examines learning opportunities for special education students, with chapters devoted to the topics of visual arts, music, dance, and theater as well as chapters on arts integration and arts therapies. The fourth section is devoted to arts education and community living, examining ­community-based arts learning opportunities, the experiences of young artists with disabilities, the perspectives of family members, careers in the arts for youth with disabilities, and the perspectives of arts and special education teachers engaged in an inclusive international development project. The fifth section examines emerging trends in technology, including media arts, the need for research and evaluation, and a final chapter on trends and issues that are influencing the future of arts education for students with disabilities. Although we attempted to address important issues at the intersection of arts education and special education, we know there is always more to say. Our hope is that this collection of chapters will help to link research with the practice of engaging young people with disabilities in learning through the arts in their schools and communities. We thank our chapter authors for working across disciplines with us on this project. Their efforts were central to this compilation of research-based information to guide informed decisions about arts education for special education students. Their dedication to this project allows us to contribute a percentage of proceeds from the book to the Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education of the Council for Exceptional Children in support of an award for researchers whose work advances the education of students with disabilities in the arts. Finally, we express appreciation for the encouragement and support of our editor at Routledge, Alex Masulis, who suggested this project to us, supported us in the process, and encouraged us in our desire to contribute to the advancement of arts education and special education, informed by the wisdom of practice and the power of educational research. Editorship for this volume was shared equally between us, with each assuming leadership in different aspects of development. JBC SMM ix

Preface

References Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2016). National Core Arts Standards: A Conceptual Framework for Arts Learning. Dover, DE: State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/Conceptual%20Framework%2007-21-16.pdf

x

Contributors

Mary Adamek, University of Iowa, School of Music; Music Therapy Program Director Alida Anderson, American University, School of Education; Special Education Sally Bailey, Kansas State University, School of Music, Theatre, and Dance; Director of ­Graduate Studies in Theatre; Drama Therapy Program Director Katherine A. Berry, University of Texas at Austin, College of Education; Special Education Michael Blakeslee, National Association for Music Educators; Executive Director and CEO Diane Carroll, Metropolitan State University of Denver, School of Education; Special Education Ritu V. Chopra, University of Colorado, Denver, School of Education and Human D ­ evelopment and The Paraprofessional Research and Resource (PAR2A) Center; Executive Director Bryan G. Cook, University of Hawaii at Manoa, College of Education; Special Education Lysandra H. Cook, University of Hawaii at Manoa, College of Education; Special Education Jean B. Crockett, University of Florida, College of Education; Special Education Alice-Ann Darrow, Florida State University, College of Music; Music Therapy and Music Education Donald DeVito, Sidney Lanier Center; Director of Music and Special Educator Juliann B. Dorff, Kent State University, College of the Arts; Art Education Alice M. Hammel, James Madison University, School of Music; Music Education

xi

Contributors

Michael W. Harvey, Pennsylvania State University, College of Education; Workforce Education and Development Donalyn Heise, University of Memphis, College of Communication and Fine Arts (retired); Art Education; Artist and Consultant Erin J. Hoppe, VSA Ohio; Executive Director Robert Horowitz, Teachers College, Columbia University, Center for Arts Education ­Research, and Arts Research; Associate Director Ryan M. Hourigan, Ball State University, School of Music; Director Karen Keifer-Boyd, Pennsylvania State University, School of Visual Arts; Art Education and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies John D. Kemp, Esq., The Viscardi Center; President and CEO Michelle Kraft, Lubbock Christian University, J. E. & Eileen Hancock College of Liberal Arts and Education; Art Education; Assistant Dean Kimberly McCord, Illinois State University, School of Music; Music Education Sharon M. Malley, Arlington, Virginia; Arts and Special Education Consultant Sharon K. Manjack, Chicago Public Schools; Special Education Teacher and Art Educator Jenny Seham, Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences; National Dance Institute Jamie Simpson-Steele, University of Hawaii at Manoa; Performing Arts Education

xii

Section I Setting the Context for Educating Students with Disabilities in the Arts

Encouragement does not necessarily lead to creativity. Collisions do—the collisions that happen when different fields of expertise converge in some shared physical or intellectual space. That’s where the true sparks fly. The modernism of the 1920s exhibited so much cultural innovation in such a short period of time because the writers, poets, artists, and architects were all rubbing shoulders at the same cafes. ( Johnson, 2010, p. 163)

The authors contributing chapters to this section and throughout the handbook have willingly rubbed shoulders with each other in sharing their various perspectives from the fields of arts education and special education. The commonality among them is their commitment to designing equitable and high-quality learning opportunities in the arts for young people with disabilities. These authors have come together, some co-authoring chapters with colleagues across disciplines, to explore the research and suggest how the evidence might be used to enhance practice and policy. At times, the language used to describe the concept of disability, or, for some authors, (dis)ability, shifts across chapters, generally reflecting the authors’ theoretical grounding in special education or in disability studies and reflecting different models of defining disability for medical, educational, legal, ethical, or cultural purposes (Smart, 2016; Turnbull & Stowe, 2001). Engaging in this interdisciplinary work (Klein, 1990), these authors address complex questions and broad issues, explore professional relations, and analyze problems beyond the scope of only one discipline toward the goal of achieving a greater unity of knowledge at the juncture of arts education and special education. In this section, Jean Crockett and Michael Blakeslee (Chapter 1) frame the chapters that follow with an exploration of the current landscape, examining opportunities for all students to participate in arts education, with a special focus on equitable opportunities available to students with disabilities. Collaborating across their respective fields, these authors discuss the importance of arts education, along with the importance of providing appropriate learning opportunities for students with wide-ranging abilities to develop artistic literacy and to engage in artistic processes within their schools and communities. Crockett and Blakeslee address the question of whether high-quality arts instruction is available to all students as well as the important roles played by advocacy and policy in changing the landscape of arts education in our nation’s schools. Sharon Malley (Chapter 2) addresses how societal attitudes about people with disabilities and the value of arts education have influenced the conceptual and historical evolution of educating

1

Setting the Context for Educating Students with Disabilities in the Arts

students with disabilities in and through the arts. Malley traces the progression of US education across three historical periods: from Colonial America through the 1800s, from 1900 to 1950, and from 1950 to the present. Within each time period, she examines developments in general education, with an emphasis on arts education, advancements in educating students with disabilities, and the status of arts education for these students. By taking a retrospective view, Malley’s exploration reveals a rich account of how the arts have provided a means for expression and growth when other opportunities were lacking for students with disabilities as well as how, through the arts, teachers and others have realized their students’ humanity and creative potentials. Teacher preparation and professional learning are foundational to sound practice, and Malley (Chapter 3) examines how different professional standards influence collaboration between special education and arts education teachers. Although both arts educators and special educators are expected to advance the knowledge of students, preparing them for adulthood, their professional preparation and practice follow a different approach. Arts educators must know and be able to teach the content of their subject matter, specifically dance, media arts, music, theater, or visual arts, to all students. In addition to following professional education standards required of all teachers, they are guided by program or student proficiency standards particular to their arts disciplines. Similarly, special educators must follow general professional education standards but must also possess the knowledge and skills to teach students with disabilities across the curriculum. In this chapter, Malley explains the standards that guide the practice of special educators and arts educators, and provides guidelines for their collaborative efforts in teaching students with disabilities in and through the arts. Concluding this section, Karen Keifer-Boyd (Chapter 4) examines foundational concepts of creativity, disability, diversity, and inclusion. Noting how disabilities studies theory focuses on changing attitudes and environments to create an inclusive world of difference, she encourages arts educators to design experiential activities that enable and empower cultural narratives that make the inclusion of difference possible. Keifer-Boyd describes four orientations to diversity (culturally responsive, critical multiculturalism, oppositional, and post-oppositional), providing critical contemporary foundations from which to build curricula and develop teaching strategies that include difference. Crip theory, introduced in this chapter, challenges societal parameters of the normative, which have been formed from racism, imperialism, colonialism, and other acts of hierarchical power. Understanding diversity awareness theory and crip justice education informs activities that can help learners reflect upon their perceptions of normalcy and difference to engage, problematize, and transform concepts of normalcy. To foster disability as a site of creativity, Keifer-Boyd argues that arts educators must build sense-abilities, response-abilities, and translate-abilities among a community of learners. She challenges educators to nurture students’ creativity, to engage them in constructive social participation, and to promote the inclusion of difference.

References Klein, J. T. (1990). Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press. Smart, J. (2016). Disability, society, and the individual. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Turnbull, H. R., & Stowe, M. J. (2001). Five models for thinking about disability: Implications for policy responses. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 12(3), 198–205.

2

1 The Changing Landscape of Arts Education and Special Education Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

I do not choose to be a common man. It is my right to be Uncommon, if I can.... I want to take the calculated risk to dream and to build, to fail and to succeed. It is my heritage to stand erect, proud and unafraid, to think and act for myself, enjoy the benefit of my creations and to face the world boldly and say “this I have done.” For our disabled millions, for you and me, all this is what it means to be an American. (Henry Viscardi, 1967, as cited in Burgdorf, 1980, pp. 1–2)

By most measures, Henry Viscardi was not a common man. Born in 1912 with a congenital malformation of his legs, Viscardi spent his first six years in a hospital and the balance of his 91 years as an international advocate for the rights of people with disabilities. He was a business executive, an author, a father, and an advisor on disability and employment to every American president, from Franklin Delano Roosevelt to Jimmy Carter ( Jones, 2004). Viscardi was also an artist—a painter—who deeply understood the basic human need to express, to build, and to create. In the 1960s, at a time when students with physical and health conditions similar to his own were typically excluded from public education, Viscardi started a special school, which now bears his name, where the arts remain central to the culture and the curriculum: In music, in art, in whatever form of creativity their artistic talents led them, we wanted these children to have a chance to see, to know, to reach down these avenues... in terms not of paper cutouts but of art, poetry, and beauty. (Viscardi, 1964, p. 173) Children would benefit, he wrote, because of the provocative nature of art—not to give answers but to pose questions that develop judgment, understanding, problem-solving, and aesthetic sensibility, which would help them live a richer life. Contemporary champion for the arts Rocco Landesman echoed Viscardi’s sentiments 45 years later by writing, “when a school delivers the complete education to which every child is entitled— an education that very much includes the arts—the whole child blossoms” (Landesman, 2012, p. 5). In his role as Chairman of the National Endowment for the Arts, Landesman (2012) believed investment in the arts had the power to bring economic and personal dividends to communities and their citizens. “Art works,” he said, “let’s make sure it works for our country’s students” (p. 5). In the 21st century, through the tireless work of many arts, education, and disability advocates, 3

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

providing all students with a well-rounded education that includes the arts and music has become a tenet of American education. With the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), it is now acknowledged as a matter of federal policy that all students, regardless of their abilities, need opportunities to learn in and through the arts. In schools, however, belief in the value of arts education does not necessarily result in its provision. Arts education has been a part of American schooling since the early 19th century, but evidence indicates that it is not available to all students equally, and, where it does exist, its quality varies widely (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). To reap its artistic, as well as academic and social, benefits, all students, including those with disabilities, need access to high-quality arts education and cultural activities, opportunities to develop appropriate skills, and instruction provided by educators who are prepared to teach them (The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, n.d.). In this chapter, we focus on the involvement of all students in arts education, with a special focus on the inclusion of students with disabilities. We begin by examining the importance of arts education and then look closely at the opportunities for students with disabilities to engage appropriately in the arts in their schools and communities. We next address the broader issue of access to high-quality arts education for all students and how advocacy and policy can play important roles in changing the landscape in our nation’s schools.

Arts Education for All Learners The term arts education encompasses a variety of approaches. Education in the arts engages students in artistic literacy and creative practices that foster their artistic development. These practices enable and empower them to create, perform, present, produce, respond, and connect with others through participation in dance, drama, music, and the visual and media arts (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, n.d.). Education through the arts refers to arts integration, providing students with opportunities to deepen their understanding by engaging in a creative process that connects an art form to an area of the curriculum (i.e. science, mathematics, l­anguage arts, social studies, foreign languages, etc.) and meets learning objectives in both the arts and the subject matter (Anderson & Berry, 2018; Burnaford, Aprill, & Weiss, 2009; Silverstein & Layne, 2010). Through the practice of creative arts therapy, various arts disciplines can also be integrated into therapeutic programs to enhance students’ physical and psychological well-beings (Adamek & Darrow, 2018). An emerging body of research supports investments in art education with evidence of students’ growth across various domains (Winner, Goldstein, & Vincent-Lancrin, 2013). Arts education facilitates curiosity and imagination, problem-solving, connections between abstract and concrete concepts, self-knowledge, and recreation (Ho, 2010; MacLean, 2008), which are essential skills for educating the whole child in the 21st century. A history of in-depth arts involvement is linked to better academic outcomes, including higher grades and college enrollment for teenagers and young adults with low socioeconomic statuses. Intensive arts experiences in high school are also linked to civic-minded behaviors, such as volunteering, voting, and engaging in school or local politics (Catterall, Dumais, & Hampden-Thompson, 2012). Participation in the arts during a child’s earliest years (from birth to age eight) has yielded gains in social skills and emotional regulation for children who are typically developing as well as for young children with autism (­Menzer, 2015). For older students with varying abilities who struggle to succeed in other areas of the curriculum, arts education provides opportunities to convey sophisticated ideas and experience personal validation (MacLean, 2008). The power of arts education in the lives of special education students is also supported by emerging evidence that links its positive impact on academic and social/emotional domains (e.g. Hillier, Greher, Poto, & Dougherty, 2011; Kempe & Tissot, 2012; Mason, Steedly, & Thormann, 2008). Engaging in the arts can also stimulate students to

4

The Changing Landscape of Education

act on and remake their own personal, communal, and objective realities (Fleming, Bresler, & O’Toole, 2015), and given its social and collaborative nature, “education in and through the arts invites and assists young people to come together in order to remake their worlds” (p. 5). Young people in today’s schools come together from a diversity of backgrounds and with a diversity of learning needs related to disability, poverty, and cultural and linguistic differences. The international movement toward inclusive schooling stands for some of the best human values—a belief in equal opportunity, in education, in human dignity, and in hope (Crockett, in press). Inclusion also challenges arts educators to recognize and respond to students’ wide-ranging needs and to collaborate with special educators in providing appropriate education in the arts to students with disabilities, who are increasingly included in their classes.

Including Special Education Students Educational opportunities have expanded greatly for children and youth with disabilities over the past 50 years. In the early 1970s, almost two million children with disabilities were excluded from public schools because of their significant learning differences. Many of the three million children enrolled in school with more mild or moderate learning difficulties were taught inappropriately in ways that disregarded their learning differences or in ways that separated them from their friends and communities unnecessarily. In response, parents across the United States advocated powerfully for their children to receive a free, appropriate public education, emphasizing special education and related services based on their individual learning needs. The advocacy of parents contributed in large part to the passage of the federal Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975 (Yell, 2016), and special education is now provided nationwide and governed by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Since its initial passage, the law’s Least Restrictive Environment provisions have encouraged schools to educate all children together as much as is appropriate, and as a result, the number of students with disabilities in typical schools and classrooms has grown over time. Recent data indicate that 5.9 million special education students, ranging from 6 to 21 years of age, are taught in American public schools. The majority of these students (more than 60 percent) spend at least 80 percent of their school day in regular classes (US Department of Education, 2016). That percentage translates to instruction in at least five general education classes during a six-period school day (O’Connor, 2016) and includes instruction in the arts disciplines. Students with the most complex learning profiles might spend more time in dedicated separate settings, such as special classes or schools. Wherever special education students might be taught along the continuum of alternative placements—from a regular class to a special setting—they are expected to participate in the general curriculum available to all students, and that includes instruction in the arts and music (Crockett, 2018). Not all students with disabilities are eligible to receive special education services. Some students only need environmental accommodations, such as preferential seating or extra time on tests so they can access learning as adequately as their typical classmates. Students who qualify to receive special ­education are those for whom typical instruction, even with accommodations, is not effective (Lane  & Carter, 2015). Instead, these students require more intensive, goal-directed, and specially designed instruction guided by an individualized education program (IEP). Special education students struggle in school because of one or a combination of difficulties, which include thinking, learning academic content, paying attention, behaving in class, moving, seeing, and communicating with others (Kauffman & Hallahan, 2005). Most students have mild or moderate learning difficulties; far fewer have multiple or complex challenges (US Department of Education, 2016). The specific disability categories associated with eligibility for services, such as autism and emotional disturbance, only identify general characteristics and are not intended as a means of providing educational

5

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

supports to individual students. Consequently, IEPs are essential because special education students are a heterogeneous group whose “only commonality is the presence of a disabling condition that requires specialized supports to benefit from the general curriculum” (Malley, 2014, p. 4).

Ensuring Appropriate Arts Education From an inclusive perspective, the goal of special education is “to minimize the impact of disability and maximize the opportunities for children with disabilities to participate in general education in their natural community” (Hehir, 2005, p. 49). However, for students who learn very differently to profit from instruction in the general education curriculum—including the arts ­curriculum—they need teachers who acknowledge their special learning and behavioral challenges in school (Brownell, Smith, Crockett, & Griffin, 2012) and who view all students as “capable and worthwhile contributors to the class environment” (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. ix). As a social philosophy, inclusion means valuing differences and fostering acceptance, belonging, and community for a diversity of students and families (Brownell et al., 2012). Adopting an inclusive philosophy might be thought of as the first step in providing appropriate arts instruction to students with disabilities because the way teachers think about disability can influence how they interact with students included in their classrooms. For example, some teachers ignore serious learning problems when students look like everyone else. When a disability is not observable, such as depression or dyslexia, some might assume students are lazy or unwilling and think it unfair to provide them with special treatment. It is also not unusual for students who are identified as having disabilities to be held to expectations that are too low or unreasonably high. Research narratives told by students with disabilities also “speak to the deep cultural prejudices against disability that they had to endure from an early age—an assumption that disability was negative and tragic and that ‘overcoming’ disability was the only outcome” (Hehir, 2012, p. xii). Negative attitudes can produce negative results when teachers misunderstand meaningful learning differences among their students and fail to dignify disability as a natural part of the human experience. Unintentional discrimination can result from ableism, a term referring to attitudes that disregard human capabilities by insisting that people with disabilities do things in the same way as those without disabilities (Hehir, 2002). In schools, disregard for disability takes several forms, including assertions that “it is better to walk than to roll, speak than sign, read print than read Braille, spell independently than use a spell check, and hang out with non-disabled kids as opposed to other disabled kids” (p. 3). Schools can minimize ableism and maximize opportunities for students to learn in and through the arts by using practices which “reduce the negative impact of disability and celebrate the positive impact of disability” (Hehir, 2012, p. xi). Guiding principles for teachers in the arts include: (a) commitment to high expectations; (b) promotion of communicative competence so students, including those who use assistive devices, can exchange information with others; (c) use of the principles of the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to maximize classroom opportunities for all students to receive, express, and engage in instruction in different ways; (d) skill in differentiating instruction appropriately for individual students; (e) commitment to collaborative practice and professional learning; and (f ) use of evidence-based practices for teaching and assessing students with different learning abilities (Brownell et al., 2012; Malley, 2014). These components form the basis for successful teaching and learning in classrooms and in art studios that welcome an increasing diversity of children and youth.

Examining the Intersection of Arts Education and Special Education Special education and arts education might be described as complementary disciplines. Each comes from a different knowledge tradition, yet both play an important role in helping students

6

The Changing Landscape of Education

with disabilities benefit from a well-rounded education (Crockett, Berry, & Anderson, 2015). Anderson and Berry (2018) described contemporary special education as “a diverse field, which encompasses multidisciplinary perspectives on development and learning from psychology, ­linguistics, sociology, medicine, and education” (p. 198). As a social science, special education is grounded in pragmatic principles that advance the opportunity of individuals with disabilities to live i­ndependently, to be economically self-sufficient, to pursue further education after high school, and to participate fully in the lives of their communities (IDEA, 2004; Silverstein, 2000). These instrumental values are complemented by aesthetic and intrinsic principles embedded in the National Core Arts Standards, which guide arts educators in teaching students artistic literacy and artistic processes to create, perform, present, produce, respond, and connect with others through participation in the arts disciplines (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, n.d.). Aesthetic education with its own “amalgam of cognitive, emotional, and sensory understanding” (Fleming et al., 2015. p. 5) can be puzzling to educators from traditions that are more practical. However, special education and arts education share hybrid aspirations for educating individuals by promoting full participation, greater independence, self-determination, and the development of personal and artistic competencies as well as the motivation to succeed in further education, careers, and community living (Adamek & Darrow, 2012; Wehmeyer, 2015).

Working in the Third Space Collaboration among those who work at the intersection of two fields is sometimes described as occurring in the third space, defined as a metaphorical place “where two scripts or two normative patterns of interaction intersect, creating the potential for authentic interaction and learning to occur” (Gutiérrez, Baquedano-López, & Tejeda, 1999, p. 372). Thought of in this way, the third space provides opportunities for arts educators and special educators to examine their practices at the intersection of their fields, creating “a place of reflection, renewal, and change in which two supposedly oppositional worlds are re-imagined in order to identify tensions, conflicts, exaggerations of distance, commonalities across domains, sources of insight, and inspiration for action” (Flessner, 2014, p. 236). Working in this collaborative and integrated space allows arts and special educators to sharpen their awareness of the interplay between a student’s individual profile and the demands of the arts curriculum, to hone their skills in using evidence-based practices to make instruction more accessible and effective for students with different abilities, and to facilitate positive interactions among classmates with and without disabilities. Third space theory provides a way to redefine and recreate the intersection of arts education and special education beyond the silos of separate disciplines. In this space, innovative ideas can be generated (Flessner, 2014) and false dichotomies, such as false splits between the intellectual and the sensory or the importance of knowledge and personal expression, can be challenged (Burnaford et al., 2009). With regard to shared work in this space, however, there is much to be learned. To date, there is only emerging evidence to support the impact of arts education on the learning and life outcomes of students with disabilities (Crockett et al., 2015; Horowitz, 2018; Mason et al., 2008). Also, little is known about how students with disabilities are actually ­engaging in arts education.

Access to Arts Education for Special Education Students Several large-scale national databases funded by the US Department of Education—the Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study (SEELS), conducted from 2000–2006; and the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS-2), conducted from 2000–2010—provide modest data on nationally representative samples of special education students related to their opportunities to

7

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

participate in arts education. These data are generalizable to students with disabilities and to each of the disability categories covered under the IDEA (Levine, Marder, & Wagner, 2004). An analysis of SEELS data indicated that at the start of the 21st century, 96 percent of special education students, aged 6–13 years, had opportunities to receive instruction in art and music. Students with disabilities in grades 4 and 5 had the greatest access to arts education at 99.3 percent; those between the ages of 13 and 14 years had the least at 87.4 percent. Fewer special education students in elementary and middle schools had access to band, chorus, drama, or other performance outlets. Only 82 percent had opportunities to participate, and this percentage varied by disability category, ranging from •

• •

more than 80 percent of students receiving services for specific learning disabilities; other health impairments, including significant attention deficits and hyperactivity; traumatic brain injury; emotional disturbance; and visual impairments; more than 70 percent of those receiving services for speech impairments, hearing impairments, orthopedic impairments, and autism; to 69 percent of students with multiple disabilities (Crockett & Ferrell, 2014).

A different snapshot of access to arts education for older youth and young adults emerged from the analysis of the NTLS-2 data, which indicated that only 49 percent of special education students at the secondary school level had the chance to receive instruction in art, music, and drama. Access to arts instruction was highest at 77 percent for students in grade 7 but dropped to 44 percent for those in grades 11 and 12. Data also suggested that students with autism, multiple disabilities, and deaf-blindness were more likely to receive arts instruction in high school than students with emotional disturbance or traumatic brain injury. At the postsecondary level, however, youth with autism and traumatic brain injury were more likely to follow a course of study in the arts, including drama, dance, music, graphic design, graphic arts, and fashion (Crockett & Ferrell, 2014). Both the SEELS and NLTS-2 are extant data sets based on a sample of students receiving special education services from 2000 to 2010. During this time frame, the data revealed no differences in access to creative arts instruction for special education students based on their gender, race/ethnicity, or placement in separate or inclusive instructional settings. The data also suggested that rural high school students had more limited opportunities for arts education than urban students; yet, regardless of location, as students’ grade levels increased, their access to creative arts instruction decreased (Crockett & Ferrell, 2014). Unfortunately, these data do not indicate whether students with disabilities actually participated in these activities, but only that opportunities to participate were available in their schools. These data also reveal nothing about the quality of the arts education available to these students and their classmates with typical abilities.

Do Students Have Access to a Quality Arts Education? Though it might seem that the answer to the question of whether students have access to a quality arts education should be a simple one, the reality is that any answer is elusive at best. This is the case because the idea of quality is subject to interpretation that may vary in different communities and is actually quite difficult to measure. The ideal measure of a quality education of any sort should be based on the outcomes desired. For a quality music education, for example, the outcome posited by the most recent National Core Arts Standards, launched in 2014, is summarized in the phrase arts literacy, with details provided in the Standards themselves and fleshed out with examples through the Model Cornerstone Assessments being developed to accompany the Standards. The idea of music literacy is not meant only for students identified as talented. Instead, teachers, including arts teachers, are expected to value the differences each learner brings to the learning

8

The Changing Landscape of Education

experience (Council of Chief State School Officers, 2011). In doing so, they need to use appropriate standards to maintain high expectations for all students, including students from all backgrounds, with all levels of preparation and all levels of ability. However, the extent to which arts standards are being met in schools across the United States is not known—let alone the extent to which the art standards are being met by students in all subgroups within those schools.

Student Achievement The most reliable data on the music education achievement of students in the United States come from the results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP, often called “America’s Report Card”). NAEP assessments have been conducted by the US Department of Education periodically since 1969 and are a nationally representative measure of student achievement in various subjects. In the past 20 years, NAEP assessments in art education were conducted in 1997, 2008, and, most recently, 2016. NAEP arts assessments are administered to a nationally representative sample of eighth-grade public and private school students in music and visual art, and in 1997, a non-randomized, selected sample of theater students was included. The 1997 NAEP assessed students on their abilities in three different processes aligned with the framework of the 1994 National Core Arts Standards (a fourth artistic process, Connecting, is used by most art disciplines but was not part of the NAEP framework): Creating refers to expressing ideas and feelings in the form of an original work of art, for example, a dance, a piece of music, a dramatic improvisation, or a sculpture. Performing refers to performing an existing work, a process that calls upon the interpretive or re-creative skills of the student. Responding refers to observing, describing, analyzing, and evaluating works of art. (Persky, Sandene, & Askew, 2001, p. 1) The results for each of the artistic processes cannot be combined across arts areas, but the music results, for example, indicated that when measured against the maximum scores possible, eighthgrade students on average scored 35 percent for items related to Creating and 34 percent for items related to Performing, and averaged 150 out of a possible 300 points for items related to the process of Responding (Persky et al., 2001). These results provide a baseline for further comparisons, but whether they represent the results of a quality arts education is a matter for debate. With regard to variables of access to the arts, the results for music revealed a form of inequity that is part of the arts education landscape in the US: the differential availability of private music instruction outside of school and the effect of that availability on student achievement. In 1997, 11 percent of students reported taking private singing or instrumental music lessons, and students with this extra tuition scored significantly higher on both Performing and Creating items than students without access to those lessons (Persky et al., 2001, p. 41). In 2016, 14 percent of eighthgrade students (including 15 percent of the assessed students with disabilities) reported taking private music lessons, and once again, this group scored significantly higher in Responding, the only tested area of music for the 2016 assessment, than those without access to private lessons (US Department of Education, 2017). The 1997 NAEP scores of ethnic and racial subgroups are also relevant to the analysis of equity in arts education. Generally, white music students had higher average scores than Hispanic students for Creating, Performing, and Responding; white students also had higher scores in Responding and Performing (but not Creating) than black students. Asian students had higher average Responding scores than black and Hispanic students. The patterns were generally similar

9

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

for students in the visual arts; the sample size for theater students was too small from which to draw conclusions. In 1997, scores were not reported separately for students with disabilities (SD) or limited English proficiency (LEP) who used accommodations in the assessments; those “students for whom recommended SD/LEP accommodations could not be made were classified as ineligible for the assessment” (Persky et al., 2001). The 2008 NAEP revealed broadly similar results, both with respect to the adequacy of responses where comparisons were available and to the performance by subgroups of students (Keiper, Sandene, Persky, & Kuang, 2009). For budgetary reasons, the 2008 NAEP results applied only to music and visual arts; the study did not include dance or theater, and the music assessment was limited to the artistic process of Responding. In 2016, the NAEP arts assessment was also limited to music (Responding) and visual arts (Creating), and the results were expanded to include the scores for additional demographic groups, including students with disabilities and English Language Learners. In the 2016 NAEP report card, the average Responding scores for eighth graders in both tested areas were not significantly different compared to 2008. In music, the average score was slightly higher for Hispanic students compared to 2008, while the average score for male students declined. Results for other demographic groups indicated no significant change in the average score in music or visual arts compared to 2008 (e.g. in music, the average score only declined by one point, and in visual arts, the average score declined by three points for students with disabilities). However, in 2016, the average score was higher in visual arts for students eligible for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) (US Department of Education, 2017).

Availability of Instruction The NAEP reports contain, in addition to student outcome data, information on the context for arts learning. Key among this information is the statistic on the number of students whose schools provide time for music and art instruction. The percentage of eighth-grade students who took a music class fell slightly from 64 percent in 2008 to 63 percent in 2016; the percentage of students who took an art course fell from 45 percent in 2008 to 42 percent in 2016. Although there has been some fluctuation, there has been no significant change in these percentages over the three administrations of the NAEP assessments since 1997. Although availability of instruction is no guarantee of quality of instruction, this key measure is certainly relevant. Time for instruction is probably the most precious of resources in education, and for those students without as much access, we can surmise that their instruction, even if it is based on the best pedagogy, cannot be sufficient. These results are consistent with the report on Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools 1999–2000 and 2009–2010 (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012), the other main source of data on arts education from the US Department of Education. This study produced some troubling results, indicating declines in access to arts education for students in both elementary and secondary schools. For example, at the elementary level, data revealed the following downward trends in access: • • • •

94 percent of elementary schools offered music in both 2000 and 2010; 87 percent of elementary schools offered visual arts in 2000, with 83 percent in 2010; 20 percent of elementary schools offered dance in 2000, dropping to 3 percent in 2010; 20 percent of elementary schools offered theater in 2000, dropping to 4 percent in 2010.

The declining percentages in dance and theater are concerning, although more than half of the schools reported that both of these two arts disciplines were incorporated into other subject areas.

10

The Changing Landscape of Education

With regard to time for instruction, these data indicate that in 2010, 73 percent of students received arts instruction only one or two times per week. Ten years earlier, the percentages for time of instruction were reported in terms of aggregate hours per year, indicating that in 2000, roughly 50 percent of students received more than 41 hours of instruction per year—a figure comparable to the 57 percent of students with access to instruction three or four times per week in the NAEP survey. In sum, these data suggest that only about half of students in American schools receive what could be called a credible arts education. But questions remain, such as which half of American youth are receiving this instruction, how valid are these figures, and are there any identifiable trends in the provision of arts education?

Equity of Access to High-Quality Arts Instruction Data from these national reports reveal that, as with other subject areas, students from higher socioeconomic households had higher achievement scores. One interesting result reported by Parsad and Spiegelman (2012) related to teachers who taught music full-time in schools with low percentages of students eligible for free or reduced price lunch compared with their colleagues in schools with high percentages of relatively impoverished students. On measures ranging from class size to availability of planning time, the level of support received by teachers in both settings seemed to be relatively similar. However, the very availability of these specialist teachers, teaching only music, was somewhat less frequent in schools with higher percentages of disadvantaged students. These data suggest that if roughly half of American students get what might be called a credible music education, it can be said provisionally that those attending schools in areas of higher wealth tend to be in the winning half, but the data do not show a high degree of certainty. For more detail, anecdotal information is necessary. Anecdotally, school districts that have a tradition of strong arts programs have, on the surface, at least, maintained those programs. Difficulties remain below the surface, however, in ways that are not always reflected in data collection but that stem from the use and misuse of data in evaluating education. That is, although advocates have been able to convince most communities of the value of arts education, the effect may have been the retention of stability in the most used ­opportunity-to-learn measures (those serving the local political need for maintenance of good ­programs) while simultaneously prompting a trend toward the “hollowing out” of those programs. In the past decade, overarching educational outcomes, as defined by the now superseded No Child Left Behind (NCLB) statute, basically ignored the ways that arts education helps students grow and develop (Sabol, 2013). This narrow approach to accountability led, in at least some cases, to schools’ maintaining the structures for arts programs while impeding the way that those programs could and should actively function. Routine pullouts for high stakes testing and test preparation, lack of commitment to reasonable scheduling, demands that arts courses adopt less than thoughtful approaches to integrative learning, and other issues created problems on the ground, while the structures for arts education stayed in place. The good news is that because the structures for arts classes are still in place, districts can move forward in filling in those hollowed-out spaces with arts experiences that support the overall goal of helping students thrive. Further, current federal law (ESSA) addresses some of these issues, including placing significant emphasis on a well-rounded education and actively discouraging pullouts from arts instruction. Many, if not most, school districts are not in a situation in which arts education was totally eliminated in recent years. They are simply in a situation in which the benefits of the arts have not been adequately recognized on an operational level. It is essential to follow through on ensuring that all students have access to a high-quality arts education because numerous studies and hundreds of years of experience prove the point that arts

11

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

education is good for students and for schools. The definition of quality may vary from community to community, as will the exact pedagogy and curriculum used, but a few simple questions can be asked to determine whether the basic conditions are in place: 1 Is a sequential program of arts instruction available to all students? Exclusion of any group of students from access, whether because of scheduling, faculty preparation, or any other reason, is simply not acceptable. 2 Is arts instruction actually part of the educational experience of all students? This goes beyond the question of access to one of ubiquity. In elementary school, each student should take part in high-quality arts experiences in each art discipline. In secondary school, where arts experiences are by tradition elective, curricular requirements and scheduling should unite so that each student has at least some significant experience in at least one art form. 3 Is the arts instruction provided in the school sufficiently broad as to provide a real path to arts literacy? That is, although an individual lesson, course, or even grade level will almost necessarily provide a limited part of all that is possible in the arts, students’ experiences through the course of their schooling should provide a meaningful background in creating, performing (or presenting or producing), and responding to the arts as well as to understanding the connections between the arts and the world.

A Call to Action Advocacy is needed from arts educators and special educators working together in the third space so that students of all abilities have access to high-quality education in and through the arts. In well-resourced schools, arts have for some time been well supported by parents and community advocates. This local-level advocacy needs to be maintained with a clearer vision as to what is needed and what is possible. The Opportunity-to-Learn Standards promulgated by professional associations of arts educators (notably the National Art Education Association and the National Association for Music Education) are very useful in this regard, providing a level of detail closely linked to the desired outcomes set forth in the National Core Arts Standards. Professional associations of special educators have also stepped up their support. The Council for Exceptional Children, dedicated to advancing the success of children with exceptionalities through advocacy, standards, and professional development, has recently lent its strength to advancing artistic ­opportunities through its new Division of Visual and Performing Arts. For advocates, vigilance is key, even in the best school systems, with attention to the numbers of students receiving arts education, to the apparent quality of instruction, and to the outcomes evident in student work, student scores, and the development of student dispositions for learning. This work is much more difficult in communities without a strong tradition of providing arts education. These communities are often, but not exclusively, in areas with lower wealth. In schools serving these areas, boosters groups or parent-teacher associations are less likely to be able to provide adequate support. Individual parents are less likely to have the resources to fill gaps left by the schools. As a result, students go through schools with needs unmet. Recent legislative changes embodied in ESSA, which replaces NCLB, contain elements that could be helpful in this regard. Funding is designed to flow in ways that support plans developed by each state and eventually each community. But resources will only flow toward helping students through the arts if advocates who are used to making the case for their own local schools’ arts programs take part in state and local planning. The added benefit here is that advocacy by experienced, well-resourced advocates could help broaden the expectations and resources for arts education in less fortunate neighboring schools.

12

The Changing Landscape of Education

With the legislative victories for the arts in the passage of the ESSA (Zubrzycki, 2016) comes a new flexibility in determining outcomes beyond tests in mathematics and English. Also, among these victories comes the need for a concerted effort to link national advocacy (for appropriations that will allocate funding for the new law) with local activism (to make certain that expectations for curricula and resources are for all students state- or district-wide, not just for the local school or a subset of students within that school). National and local linkages can and should happen through more and better research, showing specific associations or, where possible, causal links between arts instruction and outcomes for all learners. Empirical research is needed to push knowledge forward at the intersection of arts education and special education, but “research does not speak for itself ” (Tseng, 2012, p. 1). In the political arena, the translation of important findings is key because policy makers turn to various forms of evidence when confronted with decisions about programs or reforms. Though traditional research is valuable, it often serves as backup for heartfelt, value-laden statements on the part of parents, students, and teachers in local schools (Tseng, 2012). Those of us committed to ensuring high-quality arts education for all learners need to follow the cardinal rules of education advocacy—first, do a good job of teaching, and then tell someone in power about the great work that has been done. All good education advocacy is based in good educational practice. But to have strong programs available for students, we need to advocate by identifying with stories and data the ways in which the arts can help all students create, perform, and respond as well as develop self-efficacy, cooperation, creativity, and other dispositions that contribute to a rich and fulfilling life. Where we are successful in seeing the growth of these strong programs, we need to deliver. If we have told school boards and others that arts educators and special educators will develop students’ capabilities to be creative players in the economy, we had better be ready to demonstrate teaching in ways to deliver that benefit. If we claim that experiences in performing or presenting foster confidence and cooperation with colleagues in future employment, we need to be able to at least cite anecdotes that make this assertion ring true to decision-makers. This is particularly true when we work to make certain that all students get a good education, which means an education that includes the arts. “Research, narratives, testimonies, and descriptions of successful projects and programs demonstrate that students with disabilities benefit from well-designed inclusive arts education” (Malley, 2014, p. 15). It is incumbent on all of us to gather and disseminate that research and those narratives, testimonies, and descriptions in ways that move us toward meeting our nation’s responsibilities toward all of our students.

Conclusion Years of advocacy, litigation, and legislation have changed the educational landscape and spurred reforms that have significantly changed the lives of children and youth with disabilities as well as the lives of their teachers and families ( Jellison, 2016). In today’s schools, all students, regardless of their abilities, should have opportunities to learn in and through the arts (Malley & Silverstein, 2014), to gain mastery in an art form, and possibly “discover their life’s work or their life’s passion” (Winner et al., 2013, p. 20). The arts allow a different way of encountering the curriculum “because they are an arena without right and wrong answers, they free students to explore and experiment. They are also a place to introspect and find personal meaning” (p. 20). The collaborative practice of arts educators and special educators can help young people find themselves and find a meaningful pathway to the future. This is important and exciting work because engaging students with different abilities in the arts and honoring their strengths and aspirations not only helps them get a well-rounded education, it helps them get a life—one in which they can think and act for themselves, enjoy the benefit of their creations, and, like Viscardi, face the world boldly and say, “this I have done.”

13

Jean B. Crockett and Michael Blakeslee

References Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2012). Music participation as a means to facilitate self-determination and transition to community life for students with disabilities. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), Intersection of arts education and special education (pp. 101–112). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2018). Arts in the therapeutic process: Art therapy, dance/movement t­ herapy, and music therapy in schools. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 216–231). New York, NY: Routledge. Anderson, A., & Berry, K. A. (2018). Arts integration and special education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 196–215). New York, NY: Routledge. Brownell, M. T., Smith, S. J., Crockett, J. B., & Griffin, C. C. (2012). Inclusive instruction: Evidence-based practices for teaching students with disabilities. New York, NY: Guilford. Burgdorf, R. L., Jr. (1980). The legal rights of handicapped persons: Cases, materials, and text. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Burnaford, G., Aprill, A., & Weiss, C. (2009). Renaissance in the classroom: Arts integration and meaning ful learning. New York, NY: Routledge. Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. Council of Chief State School Officers. (2011). Interstate Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (InTASC) model core teaching standards: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Author. Crockett, J. B. (in press). Foreward. In S. Blackman & D. Conrad (Eds.), Caribbean discourse in inclusive education: Historical and contemporary issues. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing. Crockett, J. B. (2018). Legal aspects of teaching students with disabilities in the arts. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 59–71). New York, NY: Routledge. Crockett, J. B., Berry, K., & Anderson, A. (2015). Where are we now: The research on arts integration and special education. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 157–188). New York, NY: Routledge. Crockett, J. B., & Ferrell, K. A. (2014). Access to arts education for special education students: Documenting data from national longitudinal databases. Presentation at Intersections: Arts and Special Education National Conference, a VSA program of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, Alexandria, VA. Every Student Succeeds Act, PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. (2015). Fleming, M., Bresler, L., & O’Toole, J. (Eds.) (2015). The Routledge international handbook of the arts and education. London, UK: Routledge. Flessner, R. (2014). Revisiting reflection: Utilizing third spaces in teacher education. The Educational Forum, 78(3), 231–247. Gutiérrez, K., Baquedano-López, P., & Tejeda, C. (1999). Rethinking diversity: Hybridity and hybrid language practices in the third space. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 286–303. Hehir, T. (2002). Eliminating ableism in education. Harvard Educational Review, 72(1), 1–32. Hehir, T. (2005). New directions in special education: Eliminating ableism in education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Hehir, T. (with Katzman, L.). (2012). Effective inclusive schools: Designing successful schoolwide programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hillier, A., Greher, G., Poto, N., & Dougherty, M. (2011). Positive outcomes following participation in a music intervention for adolescents and young adults on the autism spectrum. Psychology of Music, 40, 201–215. Ho, K. (2010). Mural painting as inclusive art learning experience. Teaching Artist Journal, 8, 67–76. Horowitz, R. (2018). Educating students in and through the arts: The need for research and evaluation. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 332–341). New York, NY: Routledge. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. §1401 et. seq. (2004). Jellison, J. A. (2016). Foreward. In D. V. Blair & K. A. McCord (Eds.), Exceptional music pedagogy for children with exceptionalities: International perspectives (pp. vii–ix). New York, NY: Oxford Press. John F. Kennedy Center. (n.d.) VSA: The international organization on arts and disability. Retrieved from www. kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/ Jones, B. (2004, April 15). Pioneer Henry Viscardi, Jr., 1912–2004: Overcame disabilities to educate. Newsday, A7, A57. Kauffman, J. M., & Hallahan, D. P. (2005). Special education: What it is and why we need it. Boston, MA: Pearson.

14

The Changing Landscape of Education Keiper, S., Sandene, B., Persky, H., & Kuang, M. (2009). The nation’s report card: Arts 2008. National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2009488 Kempe, A., & Tissot, C. (2012). The use of drama to teach social skills in a special school setting for students with autism. Support for Learning, 27(3), 97–102. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Landesman, R. (2012). Chairman’s note. In J. S. Catterall, S. A. Dumais, & G. Hampden-Thompson. The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies (p. 5). Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. Lane, K. L., & Carter, E. W. (Eds.) (2015). Framing the future: Visions from senior scholars committed to issues involving the education of persons for whom typical instruction is not effective. Remedial and Special Education [Special Issue] 36, 3–4, doi:10.1177/0741932514560026 Levine, P., Marder, C., & Wagner, M. (2004). Services and supports for secondary school students with disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/reports/2004_05/index.html MacLean, J. (2008). The art of inclusion. Canadian Review of Art Education, 35, 75–98. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding principles for teachers. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. Mason, C. Y., Steedly, K. M., & Thormann, M. S. (2008). Impact of arts integration on voice, choice, and access. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31, 36–46. Menzer, M. (2015). The arts in early childhood: Social and emotional benefits of arts participation: A literature review and gap-analysis (2000–2015). Washington, DC: Office of Research & Analysis, National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/arts-in-early-childhood-dec2015-rev.pdf National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. (n.d.) National Core Arts Standards: A conceptual framework for arts learning. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/content/conceptual-framework O’Connor, J. (2016). The general education teacher’s guide to special education: 21 essential tips. In Case, 58(2), 5–7. Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10 (NCES 2012–014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Persky, H. R., Sandene, B. A., & Askew, J. M. (2001). The NAEP 1997 Arts Report Card, Washington, DC: US Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/main1997/1999486r. asp Sabol, F. R. (2013). Seismic shifts in the education landscape: What do they mean for arts education and arts education policy? Arts Education Policy Review, 114, 33–45. Silverstein, R. (2000). Emerging disability policy framework: A guidepost for analyzing public policy. 85 Iowa Law Review, 1691. Retrieved from http://disability.law.uiowa.edu/Lhpdc/lawdisabpolicy/index. html Silverstein, L. B., & Layne, S. (2010). Defining arts integration. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org//education/partners/ defining_arts_integration.pdf Tseng, V. (2012). The uses of research in policy and practice. Social Policy Report, 26(2), 1–18. United States Department of Education. (2016). Thirty-eighth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ osep/2016/parts-b-c/index.html United States Department of Education. (2017). The Nation’s Report Card: 2016 Arts Assessment at Grade 8, summary data tables. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Retrieved from www. nationsreportcard.gov/arts_2016/files/2016_arts_appendix_tables.pdf Viscardi, Jr., H. (1964). The school. Middleburg, VT: Paul S. Eriksson. Wehmeyer, M. L. (2015). Framing the future: Self-determination. Remedial and Special Education, 36(1), 20–23. Winner, E., Goldstein, T., & Vincent-Lancrin, S. (2013). Executive summary. Art for art’s sake?: The impact of arts education. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from doi:10.1787/9789264180789-3-en Yell, M. L. (2016). The law and special education. Boston, MA: Pearson. Zubrzycki, J. (2016, January 6). Arts learning keeps toehold. Education Week, 35(15), 19.

15

2 Conceptual and Historical Foundations of Education in and through the Arts for Students with Disabilities Sharon M. Malley Societal beliefs and attitudes have primarily influenced education, services, and supports for children and youth with disabilities. Up until the latter half of the 20th century, beliefs and attitudes forming the social construction of disability negatively affected such children’s educational opportunities in that civil and societal rights were not recognized. Arts education for students with disabilities aligns historically with the trajectory of general education and special education, with particular beliefs about the nature and purpose of arts with respect to people with disabilities evolving. Responding to social pressures in the United States, beginning in the 1970s, the federal government enacted laws, most notably Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), the Education for all Handicapped Children Act (1975), and the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990), that have increased opportunities and influenced quality of services and supports affecting arts education for students with disabilities. Further, increased awareness of creativity and giftedness, as distinct from disability, has improved opportunities for children and youth who are gifted in the arts but also happen to have a disability. An examination of the conceptual and historical evolution of education, special education, and arts education and therapies provides a foundation for understanding current successes and challenges at the intersection of arts education and special education. This chapter is ordered into three historical periods in the United States: (a) from colonial America through the 1800s, (b) 1900 to 1950, and (c) 1950 to the present. Each of the historical sections is further divided into the following topics: (a) progress in general education, with an emphasis on arts education; (b) progress in educating students with disabilities; and (c) progress in arts education for students with disabilities.

Education and Arts Opportunities through the 1800s Progress in General Education through the 1800s In the United States, educational opportunities for children through the 1800s evolved from little to no formal education to widely accepted public schooling by the 1900s. However, education of children was inconsistent across the United States, depending on a number of factors, including individual family circumstances and attitudes about the worth of a public education (Simpson, 2003).

16

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

Limited Opportunities in the 18th Century In Colonial America, children’s educational opportunities were limited and dependent on social class. Children were regarded as amusing, with limited ideas and dull spirits, and were harshly disciplined by their parents and other adults. In the first half of the 18th century, children began to be valued but only for how they could contribute to the economy and military, aligning with the notion of citizenship. Child labor was not challenged. With few advances in medical care, many children died before reaching adulthood (Reiter, 2000). In the second half of the 18th century, once the colonies declared independence from Great Britain, concepts of freedom, equality, and human dignity began to influence attitudes toward children, with rudimentary understanding of the rights of children developing. However, it was not until the 19th century that states enacted laws for compulsory education, shifting the balance of power over children’s futures from parents to the government (Reiter, 2000; Simpson, 2003).

Formal Education in the 19th Century As the population of the United States grew in the 19th century, in part a result of immigration from other parts of the world to North America, the national economy gradually shifted from agrarian to industrial. Children who once would have worked on family farms now participated in piece rate manufacturing with their families. School attendance became socially accepted in some locations, although there was not yet standardization in most of the country. In the mid-1800s, Boston was the first city to offer public education with established standards. Not all children benefitted from formal schooling as it was often dependent on age, gender, race, social class, and cultural background. Many children in urban areas worked in deplorable conditions for little pay and did not attend school. Reform movements to address poverty and expand educational opportunities early in the century continued into the next (Osgood, 2008).

Early Arts Education through the 1800s The late 1800s marked the beginning of the Progressive Era in the United States, with increased efficiency in government and attention to concerns of public welfare. Local and state governments enacted laws to ensure social progress, with active interventions in the lives of private citizens having a positive effect on overall well-being. Legislation included laws that addressed child labor, poverty, and compulsory education (Osgood, 2008). Most states adopted compulsory education laws by 1900, with technical drawing and drafting included as an early visual arts education subject (Heilig, Cole, & Aguilar, 2010; Osgood, 2008; Reiter, 2000). A series of books, one for each grade, provided students with drawing exercises that required copying (Gaitskell & Hurwitz, 1970). Curricula also included music education, with singing and rhythm activities, and dance education, which emphasized poise and grace as well as folk and national dancing (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Frost, 1977).

Educating Students with Disabilities through the 1800s Attitudes concerning the worth of all children had a profound effect on the plight of children with disabilities in early America. These children were even less valued than their peers because of beliefs that they were unable to contribute economically to their communities or serve in the military. There was no investment in children with disabilities, and, like their peers, they had no rights (Reiter, 2000).

17

Sharon M. Malley

People with visible disabilities, who were deaf, blind, or physically disabled or had obvious forms of mental incapacity, were the population recognized as disabled. In general, individuals with disabilities remained in their homes with their families and were either tolerated and somewhat supported by their communities or expelled and condemned (Osgood, 2008). The movement that led to the development of large residential institutions for people with disabilities in the 19th century grew not only out of concern for those who were unable to care for themselves but as a result of the expansion of medical professionalism and the diagnoses of various mental and physical disabilities (Erikson, 1976; Nielsen, 2012). Before the establishment of institutions, communities maintained almshouses, which served as a last resort for people living in poverty, such as those who were blind, physically or mentally disabled, widowed, or orphaned (Erikson, 1976). Through public and private efforts, reformers built large almshouses, penitentiaries, and asylums, which were massive, ornate structures on beautiful campuses, designed to have a soothing effect on their residents (Erikson, 1976; Malley & Hodges, 2004; Osgood, 2008). These institutions were intended to provide one or more years of intensive, disciplined daily life and work away from the distractions of family and society while relieving families and communities of the burdens of housing such individuals (Erikson, 1976; Malley & Hodges, 2004; Osgood, 2008). Careful consideration was given to the style, dimension, and arrangement of the buildings, with symmetry providing a sense of order, following a model developed by Thomas Kirkbride (Erikson, 1976; Osborne, 2009). Some of the early institutions provided education to particular populations of children with disabilities (Nielsen, 2012). In Connecticut in 1817, Laurent Clerc and Thomas Gallaudet founded the American Asylum for the Education and Instruction of the Deaf and Dumb to transform deaf Americans from “brutes” to people with dignity (Nielsen, 2012). Samuel Gridley Howe founded the Asylum for the Blind in 1832 and the Asylum for Idiotic and Feeble-minded Youth in 1848 under the premise that “idiots” could be educated (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Nielsen, 2012). Using a physiological method for working with children with severe mental disabilities, Eduoard Seguin brought his ideas on teaching to the United States from France in 1848 (Malley & Hodges, 2004; Osgood, 2008). Seguin advocated for increased self-reliance and independence of children with disabilities. The founding of at least 70 other residential institutions in cities throughout the United States followed, using Kirkbride’s model, with an emphasis on providing a safe haven and a therapeutic regime of “moral treatment” through practical occupations, such as cooking, sewing, and grounds keeping (Erikson, 1976; Osborne, 2009).

Arts Therapies and Educational Opportunities through the 1800s By the early 1800s, arts participation for people with disabilities advanced from mere diversions to treatment. Medical specialists began to recognize that there were therapeutic components of arts engagement that would elicit positive outcomes in their institutionalized patients. Music played an important part throughout the early history of education and therapy for students with disabilities. Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard in France began using music in the early 1800s to diagnose students with speech and hearing problems and to teach students with intellectual disabilities. Students in institutions in the United States benefitted from singing, rhythm activities, and instrument playing used to reinforce achievement and facilitate learning (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). The arts were included as an aspect of treatment in the rigid daily schedules of institutions for students with severe mental disabilities. Curricula encompassed academic instruction, daily living instruction, and physiological training. Music, in the form of movement and singing, was a part of Seguin’s physiological method, along with handicrafts, playing with toys, and painting with bright colors. Similar instruction took place for students who were deaf. For blind students, residential institutions emphasized curricula addressing the consequences of blindness, including both vocal and instrumental music instruction (Osgood, 2008).

18

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

Although the arts played a role in the education and treatment of the residents of institutions, people with disabilities, especially those with mental disorders, were generally not believed to possess characteristics of creativity. However, Europeans became interested in the artwork of people with mental illness. Paul-Max Simon, a French psychiatrist, published a comprehensive series of studies on the visual art of people with mental illness in 1876 and 1888 (Malchiodi, 2007). In the seminal work Madness and Civilization, the French philosopher Michel Foucault (1965) acknowledged the creative gifts of Van Gogh and others who were deemed “mad” and indicated that the madness (in other words, the disability) is not present in the making of art (Foucault, 1965).

Education and Arts Opportunities in the First Half of the 20th Century By the early 20th century in the United States, the balance of power over the lives of children shifted, with many parents in cities adhering to compulsory education systems (Reiter, 2000). Classrooms became more standardized and rigid; in fact, Boston began standardizing curricula in 1847. By the 1900s, there were over 80,000 students enrolled in Boston public schools, a majority of them immigrants or born in the United States to immigrant parents. Rural education served as a stark contrast to that in cities, with one-room schoolhouses serving students across a range of ages and abilities. Well into the 1900s, many rural children worked for their families or as paid employees of companies and thus did not receive formal public education (Osgood, 2008).

General and Arts Education Developments, 1900–1950 With the advent of leisure time for the middle class, arts education became a curriculum goal in schools (Heilig et al., 2010) and was influenced by various educational theories and approaches that were a part of the Progressive Movement. Early psychologists began to analyze and describe the unique features of childhood and the crucial place of childhood experiences (Reiter, 2000). G. Stanley Hall advocated for a child-centered curriculum, with selection of all learning activities deriving from the study of child development. Hall’s statements “provided the groundwork for the laissez-faire methods of art instruction prevalent during the Progressive era” (Gaitskell & ­Hurwitz, 1970, p. 29). Others investigated creativity, relating the expressive aspects of art creativity to theories of personality development. The psychology theory of Gestalt strongly influenced arts education in that the learner acquires knowledge through insight, which leads to an understanding of the relationships among various aspects of the learning situation (Gaitskell & Hurwitz, 1970). Educational reformers promoted the construct of creativity as a necessary component of education. John Dewey was an early advocate of experiential education, beginning in the early 1900s. He also believed that children learn by building on prior knowledge. In doing so, they are exercising their creativity (Gaitskell & Hurwitz, 1970; Heilig et al., 2010). Dewey believed that arts education was foundational for creativity, self-expression, and appreciation of the expression of others, and that arts open up processes of inquiry that expand perceptions and contribute to understanding of the world (Heilig et al., 2010). In 1935, W. H. Kilpatrick indicated that creativity is a trait of all learning. Before his work, the popular belief was that creativity was an attribute of a few exceptional learners, not of all children (Gaitskell & Hurwitz, 1970). Thus, from 1900 to roughly 1940, arts education was less restrictive than it had been in the prior century. Arts education concepts were applied to other subject areas, a pairing with continued advocacy and success in current education. By the end of the 1920s, the arts were a widely accepted component of education curricula in the United States. The Great Depression had a negative influence on arts curricula, with thousands of schools closing and teacher pay cuts. Many arts education programs were eliminated. During World War II (WWII), the United States’s economy again forced closings and arts education eliminations in many schools (Heilig et al., 2010).

19

Sharon M. Malley

Educating Students with Disabilities, 1900–1950 Although formal public education was standard for children in the United States at the start of the 20th century, students with disabilities received limited public education. Many continued to live in residential institutions and asylums, especially when their disabilities were severe (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). During this period, institutions devolved from providing education and a means of assimilation to merely serving a custodial function (Nielsen, 2012). Beyond the institutions, however, progressive reformers identified disability as a construct that warranted attention, and public school officials considered individualized instruction of students with disabilities (Osgood, 2008). The city of Boston had established compulsory education early and, by the turn of the century, began to provide specialized segregated education addressing specific disabilities. For example, students who were deaf could attend a separate day school, and there were classes in the public schools for students identified as “mentally deficient”; those with chronic illnesses, speech disorders, vision impairments, and low English proficiency; and those who were gifted. Special education became an established educational option in Boston by the 1920s, spreading to other cities so that by the 1930s, it was standard in public urban education. For example, United States school districts had established over 4,000 special classes for “feebleminded” children by 1927. The Binet-Simon intelligence test was developed in 1916 as an early form of the Stanford-Binet intelligence test and used widely by school districts, psychological clinics, and other professional entities to identify students needing special education (Osgood, 2008). In rural locales, there was little formal identification of students with disabilities, and all students were taught together. Students with significant disabilities were likely to be admitted to residential facilities, although, by the 1930s, parent advocates began to question the purpose of institutions for students with intellectual disabilities. Residential schools for blind and deaf students fared better (Osgood, 2008). In the 1930s, the Great Depression had an impact on the resources available for education. Practical and vocational education became the focus of reformers, many of whom were self-­ advocates, with sheltered workshops, prevocational training, and specific job training important aspects of education for students with disabilities (Nielsen, 2012; Osgood, 2008). Practical skills and job preparation, for students with intellectual disabilities in particular, remains a curriculum focus in special education to this day (CEC, 2013). Reformers focused on equality and the potential of individuals with disabilities. Goodwin Watson, an educational psychologist, indicated that there are two opposing perspectives on the worth of individuals in society: Either people are considered useful because of their contributions to the competitive culture or all people are considered worthy, regardless of their contributions. Watson believed that society should recognize the capacities of all people, regardless of their levels of accomplishment, and that all children had the ability to contribute to society (Watson, 1938). Margaret Neuber, a pioneering special educator, focused on the possibilities of all children and indicated that all children were exceptional (Neuber, 1940). In 1945, Harrison Allen Dobbs challenged the notion of deficit thinking, indicating that all children deserved full services and supports from society (Osgood, 2008). However, little changed for students with disabilities in public schools until the 1970s.

Arts Therapies and Educational Opportunities, 1900–1950 Early arts opportunities for students with disabilities in the United States were offered as a form of therapy or rehabilitation, loosely supporting remediation goals in residential settings. Arts activities began to be more formalized in conjunction with the formation of the field of occupational therapy. In 1911, the Maryland Psychiatric Society focused its efforts on examining aspects of

20

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

occupational therapy, including studying the practicality of an arts and crafts program within a mental hospital’s occupational therapy offerings. In residential settings for students and adults with disabilities, occupational therapy, incorporating arts as a component of treatment, continued to evolve well into the mid-20th century. During WWII, with the return of veterans who were hospitalized, artists of all media were employed to work with both children and adults in hospital settings (Erikson, 1976).

Origins of Art Therapy Art therapy’s roots developed from Sigmund Freud’s observations that many of his patients responded to visual images when describing their experiences and feelings. Additionally, Freud used children’s drawings in psychoanalysis. Based on his work, psychiatric clinicians would suggest that patients draw, incorporating visual art into their treatment. In New York City in 1914, Margaret Naumburg, considered the founder of art therapy, established the Walden School, a school with an emphasis on the arts as a part of Freudian psychoanalytic treatment. She stressed that visual art should be used as a primary agent for treatment and diagnosis and that children should be allowed to be as spontaneous as possible in their art making. Later, she used art with children identified as emotionally disturbed in conjunction with occupational therapists at the New York State Psychiatric Institute. In the late 1940s, she began publishing case studies of her work (Rubin, 1987).

Origins of Music Therapy Music therapy grew from the early use of music in institutions. By the 1940s, treatment approaches shifted to more holistic philosophies, especially in psychiatric settings. Music therapists and music therapy volunteers worked part-time in various settings for children and adults with disabilities, and the profession grew to the formation of the National Association for Music Therapy in 1950 (Reschke-Hernandez, 2011).

Arts for Students with Disabilities in Public Schools Students with disabilities learning in public schools received arts programming as a form of therapy and rehabilitation as well. Day schools for students who were blind included music lessons. Students with some vision received instruction in “sight-saving” classes, and their lessons included music and sensorimotor instruction, such as painting, drawing, basket weaving, and piano tuning. Curricula for “crippled” children included vocational training in arts-related activities, such as weaving and woodworking. The School for the Physically Handicapped in Sheboygan, Wisconsin offered activities that included singing and acting in plays (Osgood, 2008). Progressive approaches continued through the 1930s, with teachers and curriculum developers incorporating visual arts, poetry, drama, and music in special education. Teachers believed that the use of drama and poetry excited the imaginations of “dull children,” helping them to rise above their “inadequacies.” From the 1940s to the 1960s, arts education for students with disabilities included puppet shows, singing and instrument playing, drama, dancing, painting, clay modeling, and construction projects. Teachers indicated that the arts brought children enjoyment as well as increased social skill development and self-confidence. Some teachers noted that when arts opportunities for “retarded” students complemented academic study, there were greater measures of success (Osgood, 2008). As the number and kinds of arts opportunities for students with disabilities grew over the first half of the 20th century, there was a level of inconsistency in attitudes and approaches, reflective of varying philosophies. With general recognition of the value of arts experiences as therapeutic

21

Sharon M. Malley

for children with disabilities, various arts therapies professions evolved. Rarely recognized was the notion that individuals with disabilities could be creative or that engaging in the arts could serve as a means of personal expressiveness beyond specified therapies (for philosophical underpinnings, see Malley, Dattilo, & Gast, 2002). However, in the 1920s, the art historian and psychiatrist Hans Prinzhorn and others recognized the giftedness of some artists with disabilities. His collection of art from European hospitals formed the basis of the phenomenon later known as outsider art (Malchiodi, 1998).

Education and Arts Opportunities, 1950 to the Present In the 1950s, the United States economy was booming, and with increased funding for education, arts programs benefitted. When the Soviet Union launched the satellite Sputnik in 1957, internal challenges to the effectiveness of United States educational systems ensued, resulting in greater emphasis on math and science education and reduced funding for arts education (Heilig et al., 2010; Lark, 2011). When arts educators appealed to the federal government for more support, the US Office of Education responded with funding for visual, literary, and performing arts education research and curriculum development between 1963 and 1968. In addition, the US Department of Health, Education, and Welfare stressed, in a comprehensive report, the need for arts programming for all children and proposed the allocation of arts spaces in public schools (Heilig et al., 2010).

General and Arts Education Developments, 1950 to the Present From 1950 to the present, the arts education professions progressed with increased government funding. Theories of child development, influential in educational reform, continued to provide foundations for arts education practice.

Visual Arts Education Viktor Lowenfeld, who became chair of the Department of Art Education at Pennsylvania State University in 1956, demonstrated how knowledge of psychology supported visual arts teachers’ understanding of children’s growth potential through their visual art. He developed visual-haptic theories in the 1940s, indicating that visual children closely observe their environments, work primarily from a perceptual base, and report what they see, whereas haptic children place themselves in the center of action, work primarily from a sensory base, and report what they feel (Gaitskell & Hurwitz, 1970). The text Creative and Mental Growth (Lowenfeld & Brittain, 1947) remains the most influential book in visual arts education, and Lowenfield’s theory of stages in artistic development continues to serve as a reference for visual arts teachers and therapists (Fussell, 2011).

Music Education A primary focus in music education in the second half of the 20th century was on the development of high school bands and choruses. Emphasis was on learning how to play instruments and perfecting skills. However, in 1967, The Tanglewood Symposium led to a declaration that music should be an aspect of the core curriculum and that a variety of musical styles and traditions, including contemporary and popular music, belong in the curriculum. The declaration included the need for teachers to be prepared to teach very young students, adults, and students with disadvantages and emotional disturbances (Gary & Mark, 2007).

22

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

Dance Education Psychological theories influenced dance education beginning in the 1950s, with emphasis on developing self-esteem and the “whole child” through child-centered approaches. By the 1980s, dance curriculum books were using the term “movement” as they began to address the issues of sedentary activities and childhood obesity. Funding challenges beginning in the 1980s and 1990s have had a major impact on the availability of dance education in public schools (Reedy, 2009). Until 1994, dance education was included in physical education curricula in public schools rather than as a part of the arts curricula, even when dance educators were employed. Finally, in 2002, federal legislation required qualifications for dance educators (Bonbright, 2007).

Theater and Drama Education Winifred Ward, whose work with children’s theater began in the first half of the century and who founded the National Children’s Theater Conference in 1944, pioneered approaches to drama education still used today. Her philosophy of creative dramatics emphasized creativity, with students developing and performing in their own plays (Northwestern University, 2003). The availability of drama education as an independent component of public elementary school curricula has remained scarce. In the 1999–2000 school year, 20 percent of elementary schools offered drama during the school day, and in the 2009–2010 school year, only 4 percent of elementary schools offered drama. However, 46 percent of elementary schools reported integrating drama into other subjects. About half of secondary schools offered drama in the 1999–2000 and 2009–2010 school years, and of those, half reported dedicated rooms to hold classes (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012).

Arts Education Advocacy The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) was formed in 1965, but it supported visiting artists and arts programs in schools rather than arts education teachers and their programs (Heilig et al., 2010). This led to dissatisfaction on the part of arts educators, most of whom worked with limited budgets. Thus, in the 1990s, certified arts teachers began advocating for arts education inclusion in federal lists of basic subjects. Highly qualified arts teachers and professionals wrote the first standards in 1994 for music, dance, theater, and visual arts, with support from the US Department of Education, NEA, and the National Endowment for the Humanities. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act, enacted in 1994, included arts as challenging subject matter in which all students should demonstrate competency (Heilig et al., 2010). In the 1980s and 1990s, student demographics in public schools evolved socially and economically, with a larger proportion of students living in poverty and/or being culturally linguistically diverse. To address the issues of failing schools challenged to meet the needs of students from a range of backgrounds and abilities, the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) was enacted in 2002. The act provided for higher standards in curricula, test-based accountability in reading and math, and the ability to transfer out of failing schools (Lark, 2011). The NCLB did not address education in the arts (Heilig et al., 2010). An updated set of voluntary educational standards, the National Core Arts Standards, was completed in 2014, led by a coalition of arts education professional organizations and the State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. The field of media arts was added to the arts ­education disciplines of dance, music, theater, and visual arts. Most notably, a team of arts and special education professionals contributed to the writing, with intentional use of language addressing differences in student abilities and resources made available for teaching students with disabilities in the arts (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, n.d., 2014). The enactment of the Every

23

Sharon M. Malley

Student Succeeds Act in 2015 furthered federal government support of the inclusion of students with disabilities in arts education by, first, holding all schools accountable for the progress of all students and, second, by indicating that arts education is part of the definition of a “well-rounded” education that should be made available to all students (White House, 2015; Zubrzycki, 2015).

Educating Students with Disabilities, 1950 to the Present In the last half of the 20th century, major changes in societal attitudes led to inclusive practices in educating students with disabilities. Changes did not happen overnight or without a struggle as self-­ advocates, parents, and others organized to alter perceptions and challenge well-established mores.

The Deinstitutionalization Movement In the 1940s and 1950s, institutions for people with disabilities continued to grow in population as they deteriorated physically and programmatically (Malley & Hodges, 2004; Osgood, 2008). People with intellectual disabilities received the worst treatment. By the early 1960s, there were 738 public and private residential institutions for students and adults with disabilities in the United States (Osgood, 2008). In 1967, the number of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities in state institutions peaked at 194,000 residents (Malley & Hodges, 2004). Widespread degradation prompted parents and advocates of residents to petition for changes to the system, demanding that federal and state funding support special education in schools. Students with less severe disabilities were already receiving special education but in segregated classes, with little contact with general education students (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Malley & Hodges, 2004). Major shifts in public attitudes about disability took place in the 1960s and 1970s, laying the foundation for current practices in special education. Bengt Nirje’s normalization principle developed in reaction to the institutionalization of children and adults with intellectual disabilities and represented a transformation in understanding and supporting their needs. Nirje (1969) described the normalization principle as “making available to the mentally retarded patterns and conditions of everyday life that are as close as possible to the norms and patterns of the mainstream of society” (pp. 180–181). Normalization, in this context, means that every individual has the right to experience the normal rhythms of the day, including leisure activities in a variety of places; a normal rhythm of the year, including celebration of holidays and days spent with family and friends; vacations away from one’s work; and economic self-sufficiency (Malley & Hodges, 2004). Wolf Wolfensberger (1972) expanded on the importance of self-determination, advocating for the need to respect the preferences, choices, and personal goals of people with mental retardation. Hence, the normalization principle provided a philosophical and moral basis for deinstitutionalization (Malley & Hodges, 2004).

The Disability Rights Movement The disability rights movement grew concurrently with the civil rights movement, beginning with Edward Roberts, a polio survivor, who filed suit against the University of California, ­Berkley, in 1962 for admittance access. Roberts used a wheelchair and an iron lung machine, and, once admitted, was assigned to live in the infirmary. With other students with disabilities, he advocated for barrier-free access to the university campus and local community, and began a national network for independent living centers to facilitate independent living for people with disabilities (Nielsen, 2012; Shapiro, 1993). Federal legislation followed the activities of Roberts and others, beginning with the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. Under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (1973), no otherwise qualified

24

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

person with a disability in the United States is to “be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance” (29 U.S.C. § 794). The Rehabilitation Act established a precedent for the inclusion of students with disabilities in public schools in that all public schools received federal funding and thus all were required to admit and provide services to all students with disabilities (Aron & Loprest, 2012). The Americans with Disabilities Act, which became law in 1990, extended civil rights protection against the discrimination of people with physical and mental disabilities (Shapiro, 1993). The law ensures equal access and opportunities for people with disabilities in employment, local and state government services, public accommodations, transportation, and commercial entities (US Department of Justice, n.d.). Since its enactment, entrances to buildings and mass transportation are almost universally accessible to people with physical disabilities; private businesses cannot discriminate against people with disabilities in transactions and hiring; and government services have improved, with community-based supports targeting individualized needs (Burgdorf, 2015). Students with disabilities are now afforded equal access to postsecondary education, extending their educational opportunities and supports beyond that which is covered in the special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) (Heyward, 2011).

Special Education Roots In 1961, John F. Kennedy formed a President’s Panel on Mental Retardation and, in 1963, appointed members to the panel and formed a Division of Handicapped Children and Youth within the US Department of Education. The National Association of Retarded Children, which became the National Association of Retarded Citizens (NARC), and the Council for Exceptional Children were among advocacy groups within the disability rights movement. NARC (which is known today as the ARC) worked closely with Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson to advocate on behalf of children with intellectual disabilities, contributing to the eventual closing of many institutions (Osgood, 2008). The numbers of students and teachers, and the amount of funding for special education, increased significantly in the 1960s and 1970s. The Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon administrations continued to expand the federal role in addressing disability, leading to the passage of PL 94–142, known as the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Osgood, 2005, 2008). The law established principles for special education services, most notably that all children with disabilities must receive a free and appropriate public education, with individualized services developed to meet their needs in the least restrictive environment (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). After the passage of PL 94–142, special education implementation in public schools posed a challenge in the late 1970s and into the 1980s. Meanings of the phrase “least restrictive environment” and “mainstreaming,” intended to include students with disabilities in regular classrooms whenever appropriate, were widely debated (Osgood, 2005).

Inclusion in Education In the early 1980s, more students with disabilities began to receive integrated educational services, and these types of supports have continued to be developed into the present. Later in the 1980s and into the 1990s, the Regular Education Initiative (REI) model was introduced to eliminate the two systems, general education and special education, and unite them. Discourse on the merits of such a unified system led to special education reform, and debates centered on issues of inclusion continue today (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Osgood, 2005). Collaboration among professionals and other stakeholders was paramount to the success of inclusion. Special education and general education teachers as well as administrators and related

25

Sharon M. Malley

service personnel began to work in teams to provide appropriate services, a practice that is mandated in special education law today (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). The 1990 reauthorization of PL 94–142 changed the title of the law to IDEA and expanded services to children with disabilities, adding conditions such as autism and traumatic brain injury to disability categories identified in the law (Osgood, 2005). The 1997 reauthorization emphasized greater access to the general curriculum. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEIA) of 2004 expanded parental involvement and emphasized the use of research-based practices. Now, most students begin education in general classrooms and are evaluated for supports as needed. Strong efforts must be made to educate students appropriately in inclusive settings, and students are provided with increasingly specialized supports and settings only if they are unable to benefit from general classroom settings (Adamek & Darrow, 2010).

Arts Education and Therapies for Students with Disabilities, 1950 to the Present Arts therapies expanded in scope and practice to reach a broad range of individuals with illnesses and disabilities beginning in the latter half of the 20th century. Pioneering therapists developed philosophies of practice based on direct work with patients. In her seminal book Activity, Growth, and Recovery, Joan Erikson (1976) described the activity therapies program she developed at Austen Riggs Center, which included an art studio, craft shop, and theater, to ultimately serve 41 psychiatric patients, all under the age of 30. Although none of the activities offered were labeled or even considered as therapy, Erikson recognized the inherent therapeutic aspects of work that fully engages the individual: But the arts have met the needs of human beings for centuries, inspiring, nourishing, cathartic, a means of searching out truth, of acquiring insight, of experiencing aesthetic delight. They are valid in their own right as bonds between human beings and as the tried values in which we find strength for living. To use them explicitly for therapeutic ends, such as socialization or attitude change and adjustment, and to measure their value according to how these ends are met, is to relegate the arts to the status of medicines. (p. 55) The 1960s through the 1980s in particular were a period of recognition and growth in arts ­therapies and programming for children with disabilities in the United States. Several practitioners p­ rovided theoretical and programmatic guidelines for working with children with d­ isabilities in visual arts, music, creative arts, dance, and drama. (See, for example, AAHPER, 1977, 1980; ­Gaitskell & ­Hurwitz, 1970; Gaston 1968; Goldstein, 1964; Levy, 1988; McClintock, 1984; Nordoff & ­Robbins, 1977; Schattner, 1967; Stevens & Clark, 1969; Tilley, 1975; Uhlin 1972, 1979.) The work of these pioneering practitioners provided a foundation for later work by therapists and educators, both in and out of school settings.

Music for Students with Disabilities Opportunities for students with disabilities in music education and therapy expanded greatly in the second half of the 20th century. Professionals serving children with disabilities in ­music adapted with each change within the field of special education, expanding their services (Adamek  & ­Darrow, 2012). The National Association for Music Therapy was founded in 1950, with one of its goals being to promote research on the therapeutic uses of music. Research was identified as providing a foundation for the establishment of clinical treatment models that would lend credibility to the profession (Moore, 2015).

26

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

Because music was considered nonthreatening to such students, Paul Nordoff and Clive ­Robbins (1977) developed creative music therapy techniques for children with autism, many of whom were identified as gifted, and for students with other developmental disabilities. From the 1940s through the 1980s, other music therapists worked with a range of students on various techniques, including improvisational therapy, adapted music education, and therapy that targeted specific goals in communication skills, social skills, motor skills, behavior, and cognition. After the enactment of PL 94–142, music was included in the interdisciplinary approaches to the treatment of autism and other disabilities. Therapeutic approaches and the development of functional assessments continued into the 1990s. Since the most recent reauthorization of IDEA (2004), music therapists and educators have focused on evidence-based practices in their work (Reschke-Hernandez, 2011).

Visual Arts for Students with Disabilities Visual art therapy developed in partnership with medicine and psychiatry. Naumburg wrote the first art therapy book for children and adults in 1950, and she aligned her work with psychoanalytic theory and psychiatry (McNiff, 2004). The National Art Therapy Association was founded in 1969 (Anderson, 1994). Art therapy continued to be aligned with a medical model, resulting in therapists working in hospitals, day treatment centers, and children’s clinics in the 1970s and 1980s (McNiff, 2004). Some progress was made in the 1990s, for example with Francis Anderson (1994), indicating that art for children with disabilities could be incorporated into academic subjects and included in a child’s Individualized Education Program. Although some art therapists were practicing in school settings, they did not have a strong alliance with special education. Indicating that many art therapists strive to maintain professional distinctions, Shaun McNiff (2004), along with other contemporaries, believed that there should not be boundaries between education and therapy. Since the passage of PL 94–142, and the increasing inclusion of special education students with disabilities in general education classrooms, visual arts educators have been responsible for teaching students with disabilities. The preparation of visual arts educators now incorporates strategies for addressing the needs of a broad spectrum of students, with particular attention to students with disabilities (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013).

Dance for Students with Disabilities Dance/movement therapy began in the 1940s as a profession primarily practiced in psychiatric hospitals. By the 1950s, therapists began practicing in private studios. The American Dance Therapy Association (ADTA) was founded in 1966, with Marian Chace as its first leader. Her work with psychiatric patients and mentorship of other therapists led to the development of professional practices and an eventual graduate program at Hunter College in 1971 (Levy, 1988). Concurrently, the ADTA developed high standards for professional and academic training and practice (Armeniox, 1998). In the 1970s, dance educators and therapists worked with students with disabilities, developing their practices in studios, gymnasiums, schools, and other available spaces. Mainstreaming was an important component of the work (AAHPER, 1980). Since then, dance educators and teachers affiliated with dance companies have provided opportunities for students with disabilities within the frameworks of their communities’ offerings (see, for example, Seham, 2012).

Drama for Students with Disabilities Lewis Barbato first used the term “drama therapy” in the United States in 1945. His work drew upon psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. The psychodrama techniques of Jacob Moreno influenced

27

Sharon M. Malley

subsequent work in the United States. Practitioners in the United Kingdom developed dramatherapy for children beginning in the 1960s and founded the Association for Dramatherapists in 1976. The profession continued to advance in practices, but it was not until the late 1980s that publications emerged (Holmwood, 2014). The North American Drama Therapy Association (NADTA) began in 1979 and continues to support the work of drama therapists with children in various mental health, educational, community, and after-school settings (NADTA, n.d.).

Arts Therapies and Education in the Community for Students with Disabilities, 1950 to the Present From the 1950s to 1970s, many of the offerings in the arts for children with disabilities outside of school settings were in the form of therapies. In the mid-1970s, Jean Kennedy Smith founded the National Committee on Arts for the Handicapped (NCAH), recognizing that children and adults with disabilities should have equal access to arts participation in communities. A conference convened by NCAH in 1977 examined, among other topics, the federal role in the development of research to support the provision and efficacy of programs in the arts for people with disabilities. In the 1980s, NCAH held nationwide Very Special Arts festivals for people with disabilities, with 450 festivals held in 1985 alone. The organization then became known as Very Special Arts and supported the work of state affiliates throughout the country. It is now known as VSA under the auspices of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts (Finley, 2013). One form of creative arts therapies grew out of community-led social activities for young adults. Based on the theories of Alfred Adler, considered the father of modern forms of social and group therapy, Rose Garlock (1987) developed and led the first therapeutic social club for young patients at a mental hygiene clinic in the 1950s. The program included the use of visual art therapy, dance therapy, music therapy, vocational guidance, poetry, and psychodrama. It grew considerably during the 19 years of Garlock’s leadership and served as a model for subsequent therapeutic clubs incorporating the arts around the country. In the 1960s and 1970s, separate rather than integrated arts activities remained the norm. A 1969 study revealed that out of approximately 200 communities in the United States, 87 percent provided free, segregated programs for children and adults with disabilities, which included arts and crafts, drama, and music (Malley & Hodges, 2004). Unfortunately, the intent of many of the community agencies was to provide diversionary activities as a respite for caregivers rather than to integrate people with disabilities meaningfully into community arts activities. In a follow-up study of 400 communities, conducted 15 years later, 57 percent of the agencies were still providing segregated arts programming for people with intellectual disabilities (Malley & Hodges, 2004; Schleien & Werder, 1985). By the 1980s, a few community programs were addressing the needs of children and adults with disabilities from an ecological perspective by changing the environment to meet individual needs (Malley & Hodges, 2004). For example, in surveying the needs of 6,000 people with disabilities, recreation therapists in Montgomery County, Maryland, found that 90 percent preferred to participate in inclusive, generic recreation programs. In response, the therapists developed a support system, using companions to support people in the activities they wanted to pursue, including arts activities (Richardson, Wilson, Wetherald, & Peters, 1987). Communities continue to provide specialized supports for students and adults with disabilities in the arts and arts education, with leadership by VSA, other local nonprofits, and local government entities. Recognition that individuals with disabilities can possess gifts in the arts, in other words, that disability does not cancel out creativity, has enabled the growth of opportunities in and through the arts for students and adults in some communities (Malley, 2017). Students with disabilities have limited opportunities for employment after graduation from high school as compared to their peers without disabilities (Aron & Loprest, 2012). With increased opportunities to

28

Conceptual and Historical Foundations

learn in and through the arts, and supports from communities in arts employment, it is hoped that students with disabilities can enter arts fields alongside their peers without disabilities in increasing numbers.

Conclusion Since the country’s founding, a public educational system has evolved, reflecting the changing values and needs inherent in a democratic society. Despite the democratic aspirations of public education, it was not until the 1970s that federal law mandated the inclusion of students with disabilities, with appropriate services and supports. A rich history of providing therapy and education in and through the arts for students with disabilities has paralleled the evolution of treatment and general education for such students. Not only have the arts provided a means for expression and growth when other opportunities were lacking for students with disabilities, but through the arts, teachers and others have realized their students’ creative potentials and humanity. The history of arts education for students with disabilities has not followed a consistent timeline of progress, but it is likely that the individual experiences of students and their providers has not differed from decade to decade, century to century. That experience—revealing that engaging in the arts is fundamental to our very existence, and that regardless of society’s notions of abilities, all people have a tendency towards expressiveness and creativity—has provided the foundation for ongoing advances in arts education for students with disabilities.

References AAHPER. (1977). Materials on creative arts (arts, crafts, dance, drama, music, bibliotherapy) for persons with handicapping conditions. Washington, DC: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation. AAHPER. (1980). Focus on dance IX: Dance for the handicapped. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, and Recreation. Adamek, M. S., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: The American Music Therapy Association. Americans with Disabilities Act. (1990). 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq. Anderson, F. E. (1994). Art-centered education and therapy for children with disabilities. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Armeniox, L. F. (1998). Dance/movement therapy: A unique career opportunity. Unpublished manuscript, University of North Carolina, Greensboro. Retrieved from files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED425393.pdf Aron, L., & Loprest, P. (2012). Disability and the education system. The Future of Children, 22(1), 97–122. Bonbright, J. (2007). NDEO works! Making a difference in dance education. National Dance Education Organization (NDEO). Retrieved from www.ndeo.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=893257& module_id=94031 Burgdorf, R. L. (2015, July 24). Why I wrote the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Washington Post. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/07/24/why-the-americans-with-­ disabilities-act-mattered/?utm_term=.d2ec9be05d69 Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). (2013). Life centered education: Skills for the 21st century. The teacher’s guide. Arlington, VA: Author. Education for All Handicapped Children Act. (1975). Pub. L. No. 94–142, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. Erikson, J. M. (1976). Activity, growth, and recovery: The communal role of planned activities. New York: W. W. Norton. Finley C. (2013). Access to the visual arts: History and programming for people with disabilities. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt Kennedy Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities. Foucault, M. (1965). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. New York, NY: Random House. Frost, R. B. (1977). Encyclopedia of physical education, fitness and sports: Sports, dance and related activities. Sponsored by American Alliance of Health, PE, and Recreation. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

29

Sharon M. Malley Fussell, M. (2011, June 20). The stages of artistic development [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://­ thevirtualinstructor.com/blog/the-stages-of-artistic-development Gaitskell, C. D., & Hurwitz, A. (1970). Children and their art. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World. Garlock, R. (1987). A program of creative arts therapies based on the theories of Alfred Adler. In J. A. Rubin (Ed.). Approaches to art therapy: Theory and technique (pp. 139–148). Bristol, PA: Brunner/Mazel. Gary, C. L., & Mark, M. L. (2007). A history of American music education. Plymouth, UK: The National Association for Music Education. Gaston, E. T. (Ed.). (1968) Music in therapy. New York, NY: MacMillan. Goldstein, C. (1964). Music and creative arts therapy for an autistic child. Journal of Music Therapy 1(4), 135–138. Heilig, V. J., Cole, H., & Aguilar, A. (2010). From Dewey to No Child Left Behind: The evolution and devolution of public arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111(4), 136–145. Heyward, S. (2011). Legal challenges and opportunities. New Directions for Higher Education, 2011(154), 55–64. Holmwood, C. (2014). Drama education and dramatherapy: Exploring the space between disciplines. London: Routledge. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004). 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Lark, S. T. (2011). The call to duty: An historic overview of how education responds to changes in the economy. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?q=+History+of+Education+America&ft=on&id=ED546462 Levy, F. J. (1988). Dance/movement therapy: A healing art. Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, National Dance Association. Lowenfeld, V., & Brittain, L. W. (1947). Creative and mental growth. New York, NY: Prentice Hall. Malchiodi, C. (2007). The art therapy sourcebook. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Malley, S. M. (2017). Mentoring artists with developmental disabilities in transition: A community integration model. Unpublished manuscript. Malley, S. M., Dattilo, J., & Gast, D. (2002). Effects of visual arts instruction on the mental health of adults with mental retardation and mental illness. Mental Retardation, 40(4), 278–296. Malley, S. M., & Hodges, J. S. (2004). Developmental disabilities and therapeutic recreation: Moving beyond programming to individualized supports. In M. A. Devine (Ed.), Trends in therapeutic recreation (pp. 147–175). Ashburn, VA: National Recreation and Park Association. McClintock, A. B. (1984). Drama for mentally handicapped children. London: Souvenir Press. McNiff, S. (2004). Art heals: How creativity cures the soul. Boston, MA: Shambhala. Moore, K. S. (2015). Music therapy advocacy for professional recognition: A historical perspective and future directions. Music Therapy Perspectives, 33(1), 76–85. National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. (n.d.). [Website]. Retrieved from http://nccas.wikispaces.com/ National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. (2014). National Core Arts Standards. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover: DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/ Neuber, M. A. (1940). Believe it or – or not. Exceptional Children, 7(2), 48–50. Nielsen, K. E. (2012). A disability history of the United States. Boston, MA: Beacon. Nirje, B. (1969). The normalization principle and its human management implications. In R. Kugel & W. Wolfensberger (Eds.), Changing patterns of residential services for the mentally retarded (pp. 180–188). Washington, DC: President’s Committee on Mental Retardation. Nordoff, P., & Robbins, C. (1977). Creative music therapy: Individualized treatment for the handicapped child. New York, NY: John Day. North American Drama Therapy Association (NADTA). (n.d.). Drama therapy with children and adolescents [Fact sheet]. Albany, NY: Author. Retrieved from www.nadta.org/assets/documents/ children-­adolescent-fact-sheet.pdf Northwestern University. (2003, Winter). Theater for children. Northwestern University Magazine. ­Evanston, IL: Northwestern University. Retrieved from www.northwestern.edu/magazine/northwestern/­ winter2003/features/communication/sidebar1.htm Osborne, L. A. (2009). From beauty to despair: The rise and fall of the American state mental hospital. Psychiatric Quarterly, 80, 219–231. Osgood, R. L. (2005). The history of inclusion in the United States. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. Retrieved from Project MUSE database https://muse.jhu.edu/ Osgood, R. L. (2008). The history of special education: A struggle for equality in American public schools. Westport, CT: Greenwood. Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10 (NCES 2012–014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics,

30

Conceptual and Historical Foundations Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/ pubs2012/2012014.pdf Reedy, P. (2009, December 1). A mini history of dance education. In Dance [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://dancersgroup.org/2009/12/a-mini-history-of-dance-education/ Reiter, S. (2000). Society and disability: A model of support in special education and rehabilitation. Focus on Exceptional Children, 32(8), 1–14. Reschke-Hernandez, A. E. (2011). History of music therapy treatment interventions for children with autism. Journal of Music Therapy, 48(2), 169–207. Richardson, D., Wilson, B. Wetherald, L., & Peters, J. (1987). Mainstreaming initiative: An innovative approach to recreation and leisure services in a community setting. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 21(2), 9–19. Rubin, J. A. (1987). Freudian psychoanalytic theory: Emphasis on uncovering and insight. In J. A. Rubin (Ed.). Approaches to art therapy: Theory and technique. (pp. 7–25). Bristol, PA: Brunner/Mazel. Schattner, R. (1967). Creative dramatics for handicapped children. New York: John Day. Schleien, S., & Werder, J. K. (1985). Perceived responsibilities of special recreation services in Minnesota. Therapeutic Recreation Journal, 29(3), 51–62. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. (1973). 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq. Seham, J. (2012). Dance partners: A model of inclusive arts education for children and teens with different abilities. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 81–100). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Shapiro, J. P. (1993). No pity: People with disabilities forging a new civil rights movement. New York: Times Books. Simpson, B. D. (2003). Compulsory education in America: Its history and determinants. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Auburn University, Auburn, AL. Stevens, E., & Clark, F. (1969). Music therapy in the treatment of autistic children. Journal of Music Therapy, 6, 98–104. Tilley, P. (1975). Art in the education of subnormal children. London, UK: Sir Isaac Pitman and Sons. Uhlin, D. M. (1972, 1979). Art for exceptional children. Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown. United States Department of Justice. (n.d.). Information and technical assistance on the Americans with Disabilities Act [Website]. Retrieved from www.ada.gov/2010_regs.htm Watson, G. (March 1938). The exceptional child as a neglected resource. Childhood Education, 14, 296–297. White House. (2015, December 2). Fact sheet: Congress acts to fix No Child Left Behind. The White House Office of the Press Secretary. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2015/12/03/ fact-sheet-congress-acts-fix-no-child-left-behind Wolfensberger, W. (1972). The principle of normalization in human service. Toronto, ON: National Institute on Mental Retardation. Zubrzycki, J. (2015, December 15). In ESSA, arts are part of ‘well-rounded education’ [Blog web post]. Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/curriculum/2015/12/esea_rewrite_retains_support_f.html

31

3 Collaboration between Special Education and Arts Education Negotiating Standards for Teachers and Students1 Sharon M. Malley

The development and revision of educational standards tends to follow a trajectory coinciding with emergent national priorities. Standards for teaching professions in various disciplines can include professional education standards and student proficiency standards. One goal of standards revision is to respond to unmet targeted outcomes within educational systems. Additional objectives for developing new professional education standards or new student proficiency standards include guiding professional responsibility and practice, identifying what teachers or students should know and be able to do in particular subject areas, setting a framework for curricular content, and providing guidelines for student assessment (CEC, 2015; NCCAS, 2016). Because roles and responsibilities differ for teachers of special education and arts education, standards for teaching differ as well, establishing what teachers need to know and be able to do in the context of their area of certification. Although both arts educators and special educators are expected to advance the knowledge of students, preparing them for adulthood, their professional preparations and practices follow a different approach. Arts educators must know and be able to teach the content of their subject matter, specifically dance, media arts, music, theater, or visual arts, to all students. In addition to following professional education standards required of all teachers, they are guided by programs or student proficiency standards particular to their subject matters. Special educators must also follow professional standards required of all teachers and possess a knowledge base about and be able to teach students with disabilities across the curriculum. Collaboration between arts educators and special educators can result in positive outcomes for students with disabilities by facilitating opportunities for full participation, increased independence, the development of artistic and personal competencies, the conveying of sophisticated ideas, and advancements in academic and social/emotional skills (Crockett, Berry, & Anderson, 2015; Malley & Silverstein, 2014). In addition, students without disabilities benefit from engagement in arts learning with students with disabilities, developing increased respect and understanding (Malley & Silverstein, 2014). How well teachers deliver content, services, and supports to students with disabilities in arts education relies on the quality of and adherence to professional and program standards, the ability of teachers to translate standards into practice, and the

32

Collaboration between the Educations

opportunity for teachers to learn from one another. This chapter examines the set of K-12 student proficiency standards that provide a teaching framework for arts educators and the professional standards of practice particular to special education. These two types of standards reveal the depth of knowledge and professional approaches expected of teachers and provide a framework for collaborative efforts.

What Arts Students Should Know and Be Able to Do: Student Standards in Arts Education The 2014 National Core Arts Standards (NCAS) serve as a revision of the first set of student proficiency standards in dance, music, theater, and visual arts education, released in 1994. The carefully crafted approach to rewriting the student standards included particular attention to the needs of students with disabilities. The standards guide teachers in each arts discipline by identifying learning desired for all students (NCCAS, n, d.).

Historical Perspective In the 1950s, after the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik, arts educators, working collectively to represent the various arts disciplines, mounted concerted lobbying efforts in reaction to the US government’s new emphasis on science and mathematics programs. Arts education funding in schools continued at the state and local levels, with only a small percentage of expenditure allocated by the federal government (Heilig, Cole, & Aguilar, 2010). In 1987, Frank Hodsoll, as head of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), noted the organization’s role in promoting the work of visiting artists in schools over that of arts teachers. Aligning with certified teachers, he advocated for professional standards to include improved teacher quality and recruitment, sequential curricula, comprehensive testing, improved data gathering, and increased educational responsibility (Heilig et al., 2010). In 1988, the NEA reported on the status of arts education as mandated by Congress. The report indicated that arts education was under-resourced compared to other core subject areas and offered recommendations for arts education curricula; testing and evaluation; teacher preparation and certification; research priorities; and national, state, and local leadership responsibilities (National Endowment for the Arts, 1988). Federal involvement in public education increased in the 1990s, particularly with the passage of the 1994 Goals 2000: Educate America Act. Title II of the Educate America Act set forth a National Education Standards and Improvement Council, with the task of identifying professional organizations and leading educators to develop educational standards. The overall purpose of the standards was to define what students should know and be able to do so that they could “learn to use their minds well… to be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and productive employment in our nation’s modern economy” (NCCAS, 2016, p. 5). National arts education associations were lobbying for inclusion in lists of required basic subjects, and through their efforts, the act included arts education as challenging subject matter in which all students should demonstrate competency (Heilig et al., 2010). Impelled by Goals 2000, service organizations, educators, and professionals representing dance, music, theater, and visual arts education wrote the first national voluntary arts education standards, known as the National Standards for Arts Education, in 1994. The standards provided achievement expectations for students in grades 4, 8, and 12. Over time, they were adopted or adapted by many states, and other states developed standards independently, leaving only one state—Iowa—without state arts standards (Arts Education Partnership, 2014; ­NCCAS, 2016).

33

Sharon M. Malley

Developing the National Core Arts Standards The National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS) arose out of an initial meeting of 50 arts education organizations, researchers, and other stakeholders to determine a plan of action for revising the 1994 standards in 2010. The State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education hosted the meeting in response to the release of the Common Core State Standards in English language arts and mathematics, revisions underway in national science and social studies standards, and the anticipated release of the Arts Skills Map by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (NCCAS, n.d.). Work on the Conceptual Framework for Arts Education began within a year in 2011, with members of the newly formed coalition including professional organizations representing arts educators across disciplines. Media arts were represented by the Media Arts Committee or MAC. This small group of individuals included in NCCAS provided parity for the discipline as no professional service organization for media arts education existed. First, NCCAS contracted a national expert in arts education as project director, and then writing chairs for each arts discipline were identified. In December 2011, writing teams comprised of national leaders and master teachers in the five arts disciplines of dance, media arts, music, theater, and visual arts were announced. The project director, chairs, and writers relied on the conceptual framework to guide writing of the grade-by-grade standards. In 2013, a series of three public reviews informed revisions of the standards, and they were launched in June of 2014. The NCAS, a comprehensive set of grade-by-grade student proficiency standards for each of the five arts disciplines, are available on an interactive website, www.nationalartsstandards.org (NCAS, 2014).

Philosophy and Knowledge Bases Informing Arts Education Standards The overarching goal of the 2014 NCAS is to identify learning desired for all students and guide key concepts, processes, and outcomes in each arts discipline (NCCAS, 2016). According to the Department of Education’s report on the status of arts education in public schools during the first decade of the 21st century, arts education infrastructure is well established, but there are vast discrepancies across the US in availability (NCCAS, 2016; Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). Revision of the 1994 standards was necessary in part because of immense changes in art making and tools available for teaching in all art forms (NCCAS, n.d.). Access to an array of art making tools stems from technological advances, which have resulted in widespread development and use of personal computers, blended platforms for creating a variety of media, and multiple worldwide communication modes—hence, the identification of a new arts discipline, media arts, to encompass the art emerging from many of the new technologies. Another reason for revision of the standards arose from a policy perspective to affirm arts education as a core academic subject (NCCAS, n.d.). This was substantiated with the passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015), in which arts education is included in a “well-rounded education.” The NCCAS included the College Board, which conducted six research projects to inform development of the standards. Projects examined international arts education standards, college learning in the arts, and child development and arts education, and reviewed connections among the Common Core State Standards and arts learning as well as arts education standards and 21st-century skills. Philosophical foundations and lifelong goals that lead to artistic literacy form the basis of the standards in the following areas: (a) the arts as communication; (b) the arts as creative personal realization; (c) the arts as culture, history, and connectors; (d) the arts as means to well-being; and (e) the arts as community engagement (NCCAS, n.d.). At the core of the standards is a structure that allows educators to give all students key arts experiences that facilitate artistic literacy. Students’ artistic literacy requires their authentic

34

Collaboration between the Educations

engagement in artistic creation processes and their using arts materials and tools in appropriate spaces. Students and teachers must engage fully in arts activities that allow for creative practices of imagination, investigation, construction, and reflection, expressing their unique experiences. The standards allow for and encourage creative thinking, logical reasoning, and metacognition, providing students with opportunities to realize their creative potentials. By studying the work of others and their own art, students can explore and strive to understand the broad human condition (NCCAS, 2016).

Structure of the Arts Education Standards The design of the NCAS is based on measurable and attainable learning events rather than a provision of lists of what students should know and do. The Understanding by Design© Framework by McTighe and Wiggins served as a model for structuring the standards in that educators are guided to identify important outcomes of learning, determine the evidence for attainment, and then design the path for achievement. The standards progress across grades and levels in a sequential approach designed to take place within the context of rich, rigorous, and supportive learning environments (NCCAS, n.d.). Artistic processes of creating, performing/presenting/producing, responding, and connecting unify the standards across and within arts disciplines. Anchor standards across arts disciplines deconstruct the artistic process and describe actions required for each of the arts processes. Performance standards translate the anchor standards into measurable goals and are unique to each of the arts disciplines. Instructional resources for each of the standards include enduring understandings, essential questions, model cornerstone assessments, and process components. Overall, the standards provide a logical, sequential map for engaging all students in authentic, meaningful pre-K through grade 12 arts education experiences (McCaffrey & Malley, 2015). The model cornerstone assessments (MCAs) for grades 2, 5, 8, and high school in each arts discipline are curriculum-embedded, authentic, and make use of genuine performance rather than summative testing of knowledge (NCCAS, n.d.). They provide examples of authentic assessments and demonstrate how the standards can be implemented. The MCAs were released at the same time as the standards so that teachers could see the connection between the standards and assessment tasks (Shaw, 2014). With the support of two grants from the National Endowment for the Arts, the coalition piloted the MCAs at the elementary and secondary levels. Benchmarked student work associated with the MCAs is available on the NCAS website. The coalition engaged several hundred educators during the period of administering the assessments. Ongoing improvements were made to the performance tasks based on the results of the national pilots. This major undertaking provided verification that the MCAs provide a sound means of evaluating the quality of instruction and learning in arts education. The NCAS website is designed for cross-referencing so that teachers can access material based on more than one criterion. Search options include artistic processes, anchor standards, arts discipline, process components, grade level, and more. Thus, teachers can identify criteria that fit their requirements and create a customized handbook for their purposes. Additional resources include a glossary for each of the arts disciplines, an assessment glossary, and links to the College Board research studies.

Considerations for Inclusion of Students with Disabilities in the Arts Education Standards A key component of the NCAS is the intentional use of language that allows for inclusion of all students, regardless of their abilities, within the standards themselves. This sets a precedent in developing instructional subject matter standards. The process for the development of the Common

35

Sharon M. Malley

Core State Standards (CCSS), launched in 2009 and released in 2010 (CCSS Initiative, 2016), did not intentionally include students with disabilities; however, special education stakeholders were tasked with addressing their inclusion in the CCSS after their completion. The resulting document provides succinct guidance for including students with disabilities in the CCSS and emphasizes the importance of high expectations at grade-level instruction for all students (CCSS Initiative, n.d.). Since the release of the Common Core, special education leaders and state and local educational organizations have responded by providing numerous resources for teachers and working to interpret the standards for instructing and providing alternate assessments for students with significant disabilities (see, for example, California Department of Education, n.d.; National Center and State Collaborative, n.d.). The NCCAS invited a team of arts and special education leaders under the direction of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Art’s VSA to review each iteration of the standards during the writing process. Approaching the language from a universal design for learning perspective, the team provided feedback that facilitated broadly written standards, enabling multiple means of engaging in the artistic processes. In addition, the team provided inclusion strategies for each of the model cornerstone assessments and resources included on the website. An accompanying document provides general guidance to arts teachers working with students with disabilities when implementing the standards (Malley, 2014). Taken together, the body of work on inclusion in the NCAS represents the extent to which arts educators seriously consider their responsibilities to all students, with particular considerations for students with disabilities.

Expectations for Implementation of the Arts Education Standards Ahead of the release of the NCAS, all of the states but one—Iowa—had established elementary and secondary arts education standards. Of those states, 27 defined the arts as core or academic subjects, and 33 had either revised their standards or adopted them for the first time since 2006. In 2010, the same year that the CCSS in mathematics and English language arts were launched, 11 states revised or adopted their arts standards. However, considering a state’s number of policies and adoption of standards does not accurately reflect actual support for arts education. Some states rely on local control, and others provide extensive resources without legal mandates (Arts Education Partnership, 2014). Policy for arts education is most effective when framed within the overall context of state goals and priorities for K-12 education. The 2009–2010 federal survey of public elementary and secondary schools revealed that there are still millions of elementary students not receiving arts instruction as a part of their regular education (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). These students disproportionately attend high-poverty schools, likely with a higher number of English-language learners and students with disabilities who could benefit from education in and through the arts (Arts Education Partnership, 2014). Adoption of the NCAS by states addresses discrepancies revealed in the 2009–2010 survey by providing a comprehensive, systematic foundation across arts disciplines for states to reference or utilize. As of January 31, 2017, 15 states had adopted the standards or adapted a version of the standards. Nineteen states were in the process of revising their state arts standards and basing new arts standards on or aligning prior state arts standards to the NCAS (M. McCaffrey, personal communication, March 3, 2017; NCCAS, 2017).

What Special Educators Should Know and Be Able to Do: Professional Standards in Special Education Special education professional standards have undergone a recent revision, with the first set of standards established in 1984. The standards for practice set forth the knowledge and skills special educators need in the delivery of individualized educational services and supports to students with disabilities (CEC, 2015). These services include providing consultation and resources to other educators.

36

Collaboration between the Educations

Historical Perspective Founding of the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), a professional association of educators dedicated to advancing the success of students with exceptionalities, occurred in 1922, with advancement of professional standards one of its primary goals (CEC, 2016). Standards for special educators were not intentionally addressed again until 1965, when CEC hosted a national conference focused on the topic of professional standards. It was not until 1981, however, that the organization initiated the development of written professional standards for special educators (CEC, 2015). Formalized professional standards in special education evolved from educational reform movements in the 1970s and 1980s. Reforms in the 1970s centered on the transformation of schools into academic centers of excellence, employing top-down learning based on mandated state and national standards for curricula and testing, and teacher promotion and retention. In the 1980s, reactions to the structures in place from earlier reforms led to emphasis on processes over outcomes, with bottom-up approaches that included school-based management, teacher empowerment, and professionalization. Thus, educators began to collaborate and build communities of practice within their schools, and outcomes were de-emphasized (Boscardin, 2011). At the same time, evidence indicated little coordination and collaboration between general education and special education teachers, resulting in less than desirable learning opportunities for students with disabilities. With an emphasis on the inclusion of students with disabilities in general education, the role of special educators became more complex as they were expected to have knowledge and skills to address the needs of students with disabilities as well as work alongside general education teachers (McCray, Butler, & Bettini, 2014). Recognizing that teachers’ preparation and knowledge had direct effects on the quality of students’ learning, CEC’s Delegate Assembly in 1981 initiated the development of teacher preparation and certification standards and a professional code of ethics for special educators (CEC, 2015). In 1984, CEC published the first set of standards, which were revised over time to include 10 Initial Specialty Sets and 12 Advanced Specialty Sets to reflect different disability areas, state licensure structures, and advanced roles of special educators. These sets of criteria for knowledge and skills at the initial and advanced level were used to review special education teacher preparation programs until 2004. Then the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) review process prioritized performance-based measures, requiring CEC to develop a single set of initial and advanced preparation standards. This set is no longer used for program review but continues to provide the foundation on which CEC bases the current initial and advanced preparation standards (CEC, 2015). A more recent development in educational reform occurred with the passing of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB, 2002). A new era of accountability, marked by federally mandated student assessments and teacher performance standards, seemed to be yet another pendulum swinging in reaction to prior practices. Expectations for student achievement and teacher practices alike were historically higher under the No Child Left Behind Act than in any other time in US history, raising new concerns about the link between teaching and student learning (Boscardin, 2011; Boscardin & Lashley, 2012). Most students with disabilities continued to demonstrate poor academic performance under NCLB, and multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS), such as School-wide Positive Behavior Supports for students with behavioral challenges and Response to Intervention for students with academic challenges, have been developed to address their needs (McCray, Butler, & Bettini, 2014). Now, with the passage of the ESSA (2015) in response to the limitations and accountability mandates of NCLB and advocacy at the state level for more control over student standards and testing options, a new era of reform centers on assuring equitable learning among all students. The new act empowers state and local districts to focus on school improvement based on goals

37

Sharon M. Malley

rather than test scores and specifically addresses ways to redirect resources for struggling schools and students who are most vulnerable, such as students with disabilities. The ESSA requires states to develop meaningful goals for the progress of all students, with a focus on equitable education to ensure that every student subgroup, including students with disabilities, has opportunities to achieve college and career readiness (White House Press Office, 2015).

Developing the Current CEC Professional Standards The current revision of professional standards for special educators was completed in 2012, following the guidelines for educational program standards established by the Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP), which became the accrediting body after the merger of NCATE and the Teacher Education Accreditation Council. The process for revising the prior 2009 standards was collaborative and member-driven, representing the broad constituents of CEC. Thousands of practicing special educators, along with the CEC Knowledge and Skills Subcommittee, contributed to the revision (CEC, 2015).

Philosophy and Knowledge Bases Informing the Standards for Special Educators Developers of the revised standards used a rigorous consensual validation process based on a thorough review of current empirical research, disciplined inquiry, and informed theory and practice, to update the Specialty Sets that serve as a foundation for the standards. Surveys of stakeholders ensured rigor and essential elements for beginning practice (CEC, 2015). The standards are intended to serve as a benchmark for skills and knowledge needed by all special educators at entry-level and advanced practice. They serve as criteria for professional practice and for developing and revising policy and procedures for program accreditation. The revised standards are based on current best practices and reflect sensitivity to the diversity of students. Underlying the standards is research-based knowledge that “well-prepared special education professionals are the cornerstone of the delivery of quality evidence-based practices to individuals with exceptionalities” (CEC, 2015, p. 19).

Structure of the Standards for Special Educators There are two sets of standards: professional ethical principles and practice standards, and professional preparation standards. The professional ethical principles and practice standards provide guidance for how special educators should practice in a way that is respectful of all students with exceptionalities. The professional preparation standards delineate the knowledge and skills needed by special educators for safe and effective practice. Within the professional preparation standards are two sets, Standards for Initial Preparation of Special Education Professionals and Standards for the Preparation of Advanced Special Education Professionals. The advanced standards are for those special educators training for new roles, such as transition specialists or special education administrators. All of the standards are based on the CEC Specialty Sets. There are now 11 Initial Specialty Sets and 11 Advanced Specialty Sets. There are seven Initial Preparation Standards within the following categories: (a) learner development and individual learning differences, (b) learning environments, (c) curricular content knowledge, (d) assessment, (e) instructional planning and strategies, (f ) professional learning and ethical practice, and (g) collaboration. In addition, there are seven Advanced Preparation Standards within the following categories: (a) assessment; (b) curricular content knowledge; (c) programs, services, and outcomes; (d) research and inquiry; (e) leadership and policy; (f ) professional and ethical practice; and (g) collaboration (CEC, 2015). All of the special education specialty sets and standards can be found at www.cec.sped.org/Standards.

38

Collaboration between the Educations

Expectations for Implementation of the Standards for Special Educators CEC has worked to ensure that standards for special educators provide a framework for state teacher licensure and are used in the national accreditation process. State adoption of the standards addresses three challenges within the special education profession: the shortage of qualified special educators, an unequal distribution of qualified special educators across the US, and working conditions that affect the retention of well-qualified special educators (CEC, 2015). The standards are meant to serve special educators throughout their professional careers, ensuring that they have “the necessary expertise to practice safely, ethically, and effectively” (CEC, 2015, p. 14). Special education teacher preparation programs are accredited through CAEP, which partners with CEC to ensure that the programs meet the Initial and/or Advanced Preparation Standards. Currently, over 1,000 special education preparation programs have been accredited. Additionally, most states align licensing requirements for special educators with the CEC standards (CEC, 2015).

Arts Education and Special Education Standards Guiding Collaboration The purpose of arts education is to provide students a means to artistic literacy through engagement in authentic creative practices, which include an awareness of cultural and historical context. Student proficiency standards provide a framework for the delivery and assessment of arts education and inform policy makers about the value and implementation of arts programs (NCCAS, 2016). The purpose of special education is to apply specialized knowledge and skills to individualize learning for students with exceptionalities, in both specialized and general education curricula (CEC, 2015). The professional standards for special educators inform and guide professional practice so that students with exceptionalities can fully engage in and access learning. Taken together, these two sets of standards inform arts curricula content and delivery for all students and professional practice for students with particular needs.

Collaboration Guidelines All students have the right to the same educational goals and standards, including students with disabilities (ESSA, 2015). Thus, all teachers, including arts teachers, are required to teach students with disabilities and have access to specific knowledge and skills drawn from the field of special education (Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, 2001). In addition, students with disabilities must be appropriately accommodated to participate in general education curricula and assessments (IDEA, 2004).

Special Educators To support students in arts education, special educators are guided by the Initial Preparation Standard 7: Collaboration under the Initial Common Specialty Items (CEC, 2015). The knowledge needed for collaboration related to working with arts education teachers includes understanding of (a) models and strategies of consultation and collaboration; (b) roles of individuals with exceptionalities, families, and school and community personnel in the planning of an individualized program; and (c) culturally responsive factors that promote effective communication and collaboration with individuals with exceptionalities, families, school personnel, and community members (CEC, 2015, p. 44). The skills needed to collaborate with arts education teachers include the ability to (a) maintain confidential communication about individuals with exceptionalities; (b) collaborate with families and others in the assessment of individuals with exceptionalities; (c) foster respectful and beneficial relationships between families and professionals; (d) collaborate

39

Sharon M. Malley

with school personnel and community members in integrating individuals with exceptionalities into various settings; (e) use group problem-solving skills to develop, implement, and evaluate collaborative activities; (f ) model techniques and coach others in the use of instructional methods and accommodations; and (g) communicate with school personnel about the characteristics and needs of individuals with exceptionalities (CEC, 2015, p. 44). Simonsen et al. (2010) indicated that a special educator’s role should be redefined as that of an interventionist, working across tiers of instruction to “collect and interpret data,… collaborate effectively with general education teachers,… and ensure fidelity of evidence-based instructional methods” (p. 20). In this role, special educators serve “as trainers, consultants, and collaborators with general educators to implement universal supports” (p. 21). Often, special educators serve in this capacity, although the responsibilities might not be specifically delineated. The role of interventionist is one way of ­articulating how special educators can support the needs of students with disabilities in arts classrooms.

Arts Educators Certain actions by arts educators can facilitate collaborative efforts with special educators. Arts educators should take ownership for the learning of all students and consider the specific needs of students with disabilities. When arts educators plan lessons in advance of classes, special educators are able to work with them to plan strategies and provide meaningful accommodations and modifications. Arts educators should maintain open communication and participate in regularly scheduled meetings to discuss student progress and needs with special educators (McCray et al., 2014). Additional guidance for arts teachers working with students with disabilities is encompassed in six guiding principles published as NCAS resources, which form a basis for collaboration among arts teachers, special education personnel, and administrators (Malley, 2014). These principles reflect best practices inherent in both the student proficiency arts standards and special education standards. Arts teachers are expected to understand and use the principles through collaborative efforts made by special educators who have been well prepared to teach students with disabilities via their professional standards. Special educators provide information and technical assistance so that students with disabilities might have access to the same arts education goals as all other students. The six guiding principles are: (a) maintain high expectations, (b) promote communicative competence, (c) use the principles of universal design for learning, (d) know how to select and use appropriate accommodations for individual students, (e) make use of evidence-based practices, and (f ) target instruction and use formative indicators of student performance (Malley, 2014). Maintain High Expectations

Foremost in collaboration is that all teachers maintain high expectations of all students. Working toward grade-level standards applies to all students, and most students with disabilities will be able to achieve them with appropriate supports (Thompson, Morse, Sharpe, & Hall, 2005). The NCAS adhere to this approach through rigorous, unified sets of key concepts and processes. These are structured to allow teachers to design instruction and materials that enable students with wide-ranging abilities to interact with content. Arts teachers ensure that all students are working toward grade-level standards, with special educators collaborating to provide strategies for specially designed instruction and accommodations (Malley, 2014). Promote Communicative Competence

The NCAS are structured to facilitate dialogue among students and teachers. They are written to allow for multiple means of communicating in that responses from students can be in different

40

Collaboration between the Educations

formats. Most students, regardless of the severity of their disabilities, have a means to communicate. Communication is a priority for engaging in all other educational activities. All students should be able to express their needs and desires and relay questions and comments about themselves and their daily activities (Kleinert, Kearns, Quenemoen, & Thurlow, 2013; Malley, 2014). To promote communicative competence so that all students and teachers are communicating with each other throughout lessons, arts teachers must know, understand, and make full use of students’ communication styles and supports. Special education teachers, along with related personnel, ensure that arts teachers know and use the communication supports implemented in all other classrooms (Malley, 2014). Use the Principles of Universal Design for Learning

When teachers design instruction based on a universal design for learning framework (CAST, 2011), they create an environment in which all students are likely to benefit, alleviating the need, in some cases, for individual accommodations (Fuelberth & Laird, 2014, Malley, 2014). Universal design for learning (UDL) principles were used by special educators to inform their review of the NCAS during the writing process. Hence, the language of the standards encourages representations in multiple formats and media, means of students’ actions and expressions, and ways of engaging students’ interests and motivations. Special educators and arts teachers can work together to reinforce these concepts, with arts teachers designing their classroom environments and lessons within the framework of UDL (Malley, 2014). Know How to Select and Use Appropriate Accommodations for Individual Students

Some students with disabilities require additional approaches and supports beyond those of UDL. Rather than lowering expectations, weakening the curriculum, or changing the standard, teachers should make use of appropriate accommodations (Malley, 2014; Thurlow, 2011; Thurlow & Quenemon, 2011). Arts educators contribute to and are informed by students’ Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) in developing accommodations. Arts teachers’ contributions are essential to ensure the correct accommodations for their specific subject matters. Special educators and related personnel, working with arts teachers, are in a position to design appropriate accommodations as needed (Malley, 2014). Make Use of Evidence-Based Practices

Special educators adopt evidence-based practices for students needing specific strategies and interventions. For example, a strategy might assist a student in maintaining his or her schedules and routine throughout the day, or an intervention might help a student self-monitor a particular behavior that inhibits learning. Teachers must fully understand and implement such practices to elicit the best outcomes for students. Special educators prepare and work with arts teachers to ensure that students are consistently receiving strategies or interventions as set forth in their IEPs (Malley, 2014). Target Instruction and Use Formative Indicators of Student Performance

Arts teachers should be intentional in presenting materials and pay particular attention to how students respond to them within the context of UDL. The NCAS provide a framework for progression

41

Sharon M. Malley

within standards so that teachers can scaffold instruction. Arts teachers build formative indicators into curriculum and instruction, target instruction, and adjust materials and procedures when needed. Special educators can collaborate with arts teachers to meet the particular needs of students with disabilities within the context of formative instruction and evaluation (Malley, 2014).

Collaborative Methods Collaborative efforts among teachers delivering arts education to students with disabilities can occur across different settings and levels of involvement. Special educators serve as resources to arts educators, consulting on general and individualized approaches to working with students on their caseloads. Arts and special education teachers communicate frequently on strategies and the progress of their students, problem-solving and sharing information and ideas (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Dorff, 2012). Another collaborative method is co-teaching in the arts curriculum, with special educators and arts educators working in tandem in the classroom. When there are several students with disabilities in the classroom, this approach can create options for all students and maximize applications of evidenced-based practices, targeted instruction, and formative evaluations (Friend & Bursuck, 2012; Malley, 2014). An arts integrative approach, with arts teachers working with special educators in areas of the academic curriculum, provides a third method of collaboration. In all cases, students can benefit from collaboration when teachers work toward common goals and share resources, problem-solving, responsibilities for key decisions, and accountability for outcomes (Friend & Bursuck, 2012).

Administrators’ Responsibilities Teachers work within the context of the whole school environment, and administrators are essential to the success of the collaborative efforts of special educators and arts educators. The implications of the guiding principles set forth in the NCAS are that administrators will create a positive school climate of high expectations, facilitating collaboration across disciplines. They build time into teachers’ schedules for collaborative planning and support teachers’ efforts. To promote communicative competence among teachers and students, administrators should know and implement the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act requirements and support special education efforts within arts education disciplines. Administrators should also know and encourage the use of UDL principles across classrooms and recognize the importance of including arts teachers on IEP teams, assuring their participation in the IEP process. Administrators also need to understand and enforce the use of evidence-based practices in arts classes, as indicated by IEPs. Lastly, administrators can advance collaborative practice by arranging professional development for teachers on such topics as UDL, evidence-based practices, and targeting instruction for students with disabilities (Billingsley, McLeskey, & Crockett, in press).

Conclusion Traditionally, student proficiency standards for arts educators and professional standards for special educators have provided a framework within which teachers have focused on their respective responsibilities with little overlap. Initially, proficiency standards for implementation by arts teachers were not particularly focused on approaches to including students with disabilities in their instruction. In addition, the implementation of professional standards for special educators in most states has focused on renewed pressure for students with disabilities to succeed in core academic subjects (Leko, Brownell, Sindelar, & Kiely, 2015). The passage of the ESSA (2015), however, indicating that the arts are part of a well-rounded education and that all students, including most students with disabilities, are to be held to the same educational goals and standards, provides opportunities for linking the arts and special education, as does the development

42

Collaboration between the Educations

of the NCAS, which include students with disabilities in their framework. Collaboration between arts educators and special educators can ensure the inclusion of students with disabilities in arts education so that all students can achieve a personal level of artistic literacy in preparation for adulthood. Standards in both professions support the goal of positive learning and life outcomes, establishing a promising future in arts education for students with disabilities.

Note 1 The author wishes to thank Marcia McCaffrey, Arts Education Consultant, New Hampshire Department of Education, and National Coalition for Core Arts Standards Leadership Team facilitator, for her review of an earlier version of this chapter.

References Adamek, M. S., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: The American Music Therapy Association, Inc. Arts Education Partnership. (2014, March). A snapshot of state policies for arts education. Washington, DC: Author. Billingsley, B., McLeskey, J. L., & Crockett, J. B. (in press). Conceptualizing principal leadership for inclusive and effective schools. In J. B. Crockett, B. S. Billingsley, & M. L. Boscardin, (Eds.). Handbook of leadership and administration for special education (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. Boscardin, M. L. (2011). Using professional standards to inform leadership in special education. In J. M. Kauffman & D. P. Hallahan, (Eds.). Handbook of special education (pp. 378–390). New York, NY: Routledge. Boscardin, M. L, & Lashley, C. (2012). Expanding the leadership framework: An alternate view of professional standards. In J. B. Crockett, B. S. Billingsley, & M. L. Boscardin, (Eds.). Handbook of leadership and administration for special Education (pp. 37–51). New York, NY: Routledge. California Department of Education. (n.d.). Common core resources for special Education [Website]. Retrieved from www.cde.ca.gov/sp/se/cc/ CAST. (2011). Universal design for learning guidelines version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author. Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2016). About the standards [Webpage]. Retrieved from www. corestandards.org/about-the-standards/development-process/ Common Core State Standards Initiative. (n.d.). Application to students with disabilities. Retrieved from www.corestandards.org/assets/application-to-students-with-disabilities.pdf Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). (2015). What every special educator must know: Professional ethics and standards (7th ed.). Arlington, VA: Author. Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). (2016). Standards [Website]. Retrieved from www.cec.sped.org/ Standards Crockett, J., Berry, K. A., & Anderson, A. (2015). Where are we now? The research on arts integration and special education. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 157–188). New York, NY: Routledge. Dorff, J. (2012). The importance of collaboration in art classrooms for success of students with special needs. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 10–18). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). (2015). PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. Friend, M., & Bursuck, W. D. (2012). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Fuelberth, R. V., & Laird, L. E. (2014). Tools and stories: Preparing music educators for successful inclusive classrooms through Universal Design for Learning. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 159–182). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Heilig, V. J., Cole, H., & Aguilar, A. (2010). From Dewey to No Child Left Behind: The evolution and devolution of public arts education. Arts Education Policy Review, 111, 136–145. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). (2004). 20 U.S.C. §1401 et. seq. Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium. (2001, May). Model standards for licensing general and special education teachers of students with disabilities: A resource for state dialogue. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Retrieved from http://serge.ccsso.org/about.html

43

Sharon M. Malley Kleinert, H., Kearns, J., Quenemoen, R., & Thurlow, M. (2013). NCSC GSEG policy paper: Alternate assessments based on Common Core State Standards: How do they relate to college and career readiness? Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota, National Center and State Collaborative. Leko, M. M., Brownell, M. T., Sindelar, P. T., & Kiely, M. T. (2015). Envisioning the future of special education personnel preparation in a standards-based era. Exceptional Children, 82(1), 25–43. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding principles for teachers. ­Washington, DC: John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. McCaffrey, M. & Malley, S. M. (2015, July 21). Fundamentals: Big ideas from the National Core Arts Standards and guiding principles for teachers of students with disabilities [Webinar]. Retrieved from http://education. kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/webinars.cfm McCray, E. D., Butler, T. W., & Bettini, E. (2014). What are the roles of general and special educators in inclusive schools? In J. McLeskey, N. L. Waldron, F. Spooner, and & B. Algozzine (Eds.). Handbook of effective inclusive schools: Research and practice (pp. 80–93). New York, NY: Routledge. National Center and State Collaborative. (n.d.). Resources [Website]. Retrieved from www.ncscpartners.org/ resources National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2016). A conceptual framework for arts learning. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover, DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards. org/sites/default/files/Conceptual%20Framework%2007-21-16.pdf National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2017, January 31). The status of arts standards revision in the United States since 2014. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/The%20 Status%20of %20Arts%20Standards%20Revisions%20in%20the%20United%20States%20Since%20 2014%20FINAL.pdf National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (n.d.). History [Website]. Retrieved from http://nccas. wikispaces.com/History National Core Arts Standards (NCAS). (2014). National Core Arts Standards. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover, DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/ National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). (1988, May). Toward civilization: A report on arts education. ­Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=uiug.3011200161397 2;view=1up;seq=2 No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. (2002). Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425. Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10 (NCES 2012–014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Shaw, R. D. (2014). An interview with Marcia McCaffrey about the Core Arts Standards: Implications for arts teacher evaluation. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 104–108. Simonsen, B., Shaw, S. F., Faggella-Luby, M., Sugai, G., Coyne, M. D., Rhein, B., …Alfano, M. (2010). A schoolwide model for service delivery: Redefining special educators as interventionists. Remedial and Special Education, 31(1), 17–23. Thompson, S. J., Morse, A. B., Sharpe, M., & Hall, S. (2005). Accommodations manual: How to select, administer, and evaluate use of accommodations for instruction and assessment of students with disabilities. Washington, DC: Council of Chief State School Officers. Thurlow, M. L. (2011, August). Common Core State Standards: Implications for students with disabilities. Presentation at the regional meeting of National Association of State Boards of Education, Las Vegas, NV. Thurlow, M. L., & Quenemoen, R. F. (2011). Standards-based reform and students with disabilities. In J. M. Kauffman & D. P. Hallahan (Eds.). Handbook of special education (pp. 134–146). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. White House Press Office. (2015, December). Fact sheet: Congress acts to fix No Child Left Behind. Retrieved from www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/12/03/fact-sheet-congress-acts-fix-no-child-left-behind

44

4 Creativity, Disability, Diversity, and Inclusion Karen Keifer-Boyd

This chapter is for educators who want to nurture students’ creativity to take a constructive and socially participatory form. To do so, educators need to investigate disability as a site of creativity. Disability is a legal designation that provides necessary resources to those labeled as such, as well as a social designation of stigma. Many US residents live with this contradiction. The following questions focus the chapter: • • •

How does media represent disability? How does this differ from ADA definitions? How is exclusion and inclusion sustained or disrupted? How is disability marked or signified?

The chapter begins with a discussion of disability identity and representation, followed by a section on strategies to creatively deconstruct disabling narratives. The third section examines diversity awareness education approaches: culturally responsive, critical multicultural, oppositional, and post-oppositional. The final section of the chapter calls for the inclusion of difference.

Crip Identity and Media Representation of Disability The contemporary art world and beyond can begin to shift negative perceptions and meanings of the disabled body in order to make room for its more nuanced, complex representation across diverse artistic fields. (Cachia, 2013, p. 30) This section provides a multivocal discussion of disability identity and representation by those involved in disability (i.e. Crip) justice and cultural work. In the political reclaiming of the ableist derogatory term cripple, Crip identity is an active stance toward an inclusive disability culture, acknowledging the entanglement of other identity positions that have been historically marginalized, oppressed, made invisible, and ignored:

45

Karen Keifer-Boyd

Disabled people are as equally socialised into seeing disability as negative as those who are non-disabled, and their own images of themselves can tend to concentrate upon their own personal triumphs or tragedies, images for which there is a ready market. (Darke, 1997, p. 14; see also Benin & Cartwright, 2006; Charlton, 2006; Chivers, 2001; Derby, 2011) Therefore, crippin’ media representation of disability would need to present disability identity in a way that disrupts habitual ways of thinking about disability. Through cultural and material productions of difference, Crip theory challenges societal parameters of the normative, informed by histories of racism, imperialism, colonialism, and related assemblages of hierarchical power. Crip theory is a transdisciplinary theory of disability justice that is formed from intersections of critical disability, feminist, queer, and critical race/ethnic studies (Annamma, Connor, & Ferri, 2013; Connor & Gabel, 2013; Erevelles, 2012; Kafer, 2013; McRuer, 2005, 2006; Piepzna-Samarasinha, 2012). Disability justice scholar Nirmala Everelles explained “crippin’ care” as an “authentic caring praxis [that] necessitates confront[ing] the limits of one’s ignorance and ventur[ing] into spaces where diverse bodies are enabled to forge relations that are disruptive of the norm” (2012, p. 44). Crip theory is critical disability consciousness. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) designations of disabilities were formulated and signed into law in 1990, with the intention to provide accommodations, treatments, and resources to people legally defined as disabled. ADA determinations of disability used for legal, medical, and institutional purposes emphasize disorders, deficits, and impairments. While Crip justice dismantles notions of the normative body, ADA is necessary “as a civil right for all—the right to be ill, to be infirm, to be impaired without suffering discrimination or oppression” (Davis, 2002, p. 1). In a poem she wrote and performed, titled “P,” Dani Montgomery (2010) spoke about her emotional disease’s being officially designated “disabled” and her appreciation for the lifetime support that the “P” designation of “permanently disabled” would provide. In an excerpt from her performed poetry, she stated, Got my very own ID card. … What caught my eye was in the corner, P. P was for permanent, as in permanently disabled. … I felt so grateful, I felt saved, and I felt sad. … It used to be what I could do. Then it became about what I couldn’t do. (Montgomery, 2010)

The making and experiencing of art can promote Crip justice education, with attention to learning about the sources, processes, and consequences of oppression as well as to recognizing one’s own relationship to being a part of changing the conditions of oppression. Some artists create art that presents incongruences that destabilize notions of loss, lacking, and deficiencies associated with being disabled. For example, filmmaker Jonathan Novick (2014), in his film Don’t Look Down on Me, concluded, Next time you see someone who is different than you, think about what their day may be like, think about all the events of their lives leading up to that point, then think about their day, and then think about what part of their day do you want to be. Using Novick’s film as catalyst, an arts activity might begin by identifying dominant culture narratives that sting with discriminatory, belittling, and harassing intent. Then, through group-selected narratives, participants might imagine together the experience of being a part of the scenario and

46

Creativity, Disability, Diversity, & Inclusion

what to do in that context. Participating in the activity is a way to discover that normal is relative to one’s own experiences and to counteract narrow perspectives of what it means to be human. “The body is never a single physical thing so much as a series of attitudes toward it” (Davis, 2002, p. 22). Experiencing chronic pain, fatigue, depression, and other conditions “is truly problematic but cannot be separated from the discrimination that compounds the ‘impairment’ at every turn” (Sayce, 2000, p. 134). Participatory performances with the intent of decentering normal are a form of embodied and engaged learning that has proven effective in changing students’ attitudes to help them value their own and others’ differences. To foster Crip creativity as social process, arts educators need to build sense-abilities, response-abilities, and translate-abilities among a community of learners (Keifer-Boyd, Trauth, & Wagner-Lawlor, 2015). Sense-ability refers to collective affect dispositions toward inclusion and equity. “To sense disability is to transcend identity politics in the search for inclusive societies, but it is also to challenge those who claim to have the authority in the philosophical interpretation of disability” (Cachia, 2013, p. 47). Eliot Eisner’s (2006) lifetime work as a visual arts education researcher emphasized the role of the senses in cognition and the idea that the arts develop sensory ability for keen differentiated attention and awareness of the world. In his speech titled What Do the Arts Teach? (2006), Eisner stated, “We want to help youngsters to refine their sense-abilities (let me put it this way) that they can get turned on to things that would otherwise allude them” (23:58 min.). Response-ability is to be critically conscious of contributing to the well-being of all, feeling empathy and opening up reciprocity. Translate-ability is being able to communicate across difference. The Oregon-based Disability Art and Culture Project (DACP, 2016) is exemplar of Crip justice education and Crip creativity. From an explicitly anti-oppression stance, Kathy Coleman, Erik Ferguson, and Jody Ramey founded DACP in 2005 “to further the artistic expression of people with both apparent and non-apparent disabilities.” DACP’s mission statement continues, We view disability as a natural and valuable variation of the human form. We believe affirmative disability identity is intertwined with racial, gender, social, and economic justice. DACP accomplishes this mission by supporting the creative expression of people with disabilities. DACP utilizes the performing arts as a method of examining disability in relation to society. DACP also supports established and emerging artists, as well as the community at large, in developing knowledge and expression of disability culture and pride. (Coleman, Ferguson, & Ramey, 2005, pp. 1–3) DACP does anti-oppressive work with all ages through art installations, dance, poetry, life drawing open sessions, conferences, Internet projects, and research. DACP uses social media (e.g. Facebook) to share the work beyond the local to learn from the perspectives of individuals’ experiences of disability identity. The following is one of the drawings, made and described by Cheryl Green (2013): This is a colorful, whimsical drawing from the second open art session! The image is a drawing of a woman, sitting with one leg over the other in a very lightly sketched power chair, with her legs, shoes, skirt, striped shirt, and bright red lipstick outlined more heavily than the rest of her. There are orange, green, red, blue, and purple alternating lines radiating from around her, within a rectangle that is drawn with four tiny purple wheels; she could be sitting in front of a wall, or she could be reclining on a wheeled beach blanket. Below the sketch of the radiant woman are wavy blue lines, and above and to the right, a sketchily colored in orange-and-red sun. The picture is bright and cheerful. Best part? Alexis’s chair

47

Karen Keifer-Boyd

was reclining, and her head was tilted back dreamily. My visual skills are so off that I drew her body nearly straight up, and her chair leaning forward instead of tilting back. The ocean waves were actually there, though. (with Alexis Jewell [model] and Cheryl Green [artist]) The vivid description attends to every detail, offers two different interpretations of mobility, and critiques Cheryl’s drawing skills from her keen observation. The power chair and Alexis’s arms are conjoined and almost invisible as both are the only elements in pencil, encircled by the bright colorful energy lines surrounding Alexis. What new perspectives does the drawing offer? The environment is alive with movement, and the radiant woman, Alexis, is central to the rhythms of life.

Creatively Deconstruct Disabling Narratives There is never a single story or version of reality about any place or people. An inclusive arts curriculum inspires participatory forms of art that highlight difference and challenges the hegemonic global, contemporary, and cultural terrain. This goal aligns with what novelist Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie (2009) so eloquently called for, that is, diversity of multiple narratives to diminish “the danger of a single story.” The San Francisco-based multidisciplinary performance project Sins Invalid “incubates and celebrates artists with disabilities, centralizing artists of color and queer and gender-variant artists as communities who have been historically marginalized” (2016, p. 2). Sins Invalid is “conceived and led by disabled people of color, … where normative paradigms of ‘normal’ and ‘sexy’ are challenged, offering instead a vision of beauty and sexuality inclusive of all individuals and communities” (2016, p. 2). Videos of performances are available on Sins Invalid’s website, which provides curricular material for arts educators to motivate students with compelling works of art that erode master narratives of disability. The movements in a dance performance by Mat Fraser (2009) convey Fraser’s emotive response to things he has heard throughout his life: “I don’t see you as disabled, maybe a little different, did your mother feel guilty, you must need help, it must be awful …” His movements are in response to the multiple overlapping voice soundtrack, which is patronizing and repulsed at disability, punctuated with music. As leering laughter fills the space, Fraser’s movement suggests a body continually punched by society until he falls, motionless, and is dragged from the stage. How can educators foster, in their teaching and curricula, critical consciousness as the capacity for critical reflection of the social forces that propagate inequality and the development of upstander action to challenge injustice? An upstander intervenes in oppressive situations in everyday experiences, such as bullying, master narratives, marginalization, and exclusion, to promote the inclusion of difference. Empathy is crucial for upstander behavior to occur. Arts educators can facilitate art projects that challenge master narratives of oppression and produce multivocal cultural narratives, helping students to learn about lives that are different from their own. Research at Stanford University showed “how simple story-telling can trigger the release of neurochemicals in the brain—an example of a measurable media effect” (Ferguson, 2012). The arts can re-present life experiences, and the study of artists who have had experiences with disabilities can offer role models and change attitudes about disability. Stories that are about their everyday life (e.g. ­challenges with environmental barriers and social stigmas, and finding value in humans as unique individuals contributing within a community), whether told through prose, poetry, visual form, or movement, can evoke questions about notions of normal and produce empathy and upstander behavior. Drawing on Disabilities Studies theory, in which the focus is on changing attitudes and environments to create an inclusive world of difference, arts education can explore narratives of disability,

48

Creativity, Disability, Diversity, & Inclusion

informing attitudes, representations, and role models. Experiential activities creating art can be designed to be enabling and empowering narratives that make possible the inclusion of difference. The activities can help learners reflect upon their perceptions of normalcy and difference to engage, problematize, and transform concepts of normalcy. For example, collaboratively creating an interactive story game using Twine, Inklewriter, or Storyboard That, open-source tools for sharing nonlinear stories, can show the possibility of becoming an upstander. Agency is a foundational concept of interactivity and the currency of game design. Game creation provides opportunities for collaborative creativity as a social process. After playing the multimedia Bea the Upstander game (Rapaccioli, 2016) or trying other interactive story games, students can begin their own games by brainstorming and storyboarding together with collage or drawing. See Figure 4.1 for a visualization to start brainstorming with a group of students or with oneself or another individual. Provide time for group feedback identifying and reworking disability clichés and master narratives, and then create an interactive story to share online with others. EMPOWERMENT VISUALIZATION Relax, find a comfortable position, close your eyes if comfortable doing so as you begin to explore the past, present, and future. Nothing you think about now needs to be shared with anyone else. 1. FOCUS ON SPECIFIC EVENT Focus on a specific disempowering place, image, text, action, or sound that you experience almost everyday. Search your memory for the mundane, your typical everyday way of being to locate a vivid everyday experience that may seem small and inconsequential but in some way instigates or perpetuates stereotypes, misunderstanding, intolerance, oppression, distrust in learning with others about each other. Is there a loss, a displacement, an absence, or did someone or something appear that changed the situation in a way that you did not want changed. Keep searching through your daily experiences starting from today and travel back in time until one place, image, text, action, or sound that you hear or see or experience almost daily that stands out to you as particularly disempowering. 2. SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE EXPERIENCE Where are you in this situation? What is going on around you? Who else is there? Are you doing something? What is it? How are you feeling? Are others sharing your feelings, or are you alone with them? What are you feeling in this very specific disempowering experience? 3. TRANSITION TO MAKING CHANGE Re-envision your experience, changing everything that made it uncomfortable, belittling, sad, or awful into comfort and strength. Share with others who can benefit from your vision. Examine the disempowering experience and transform every inch of its negative reach to an empowered space, an empowering situation. If you were to communicate the transformed event, what would you do? How would you create an experience for others that both reveals disempowerment and empowerment? 4. PREPARE TO CREATE When you start your work where will you begin? Will you begin by searching for some images or information? Will you talk to others? Will you draw what you saw, or your thoughts, or feelings? Reflect and make visual your reflections in some way, whether text, drawing, images, or gathering data.

Figure 4.1  Empowerment visualization Source: Keifer-Boyd and Maitland-Gholson (2007).

49

Karen Keifer-Boyd

Storyline Stereotypes: Disenabling Narratives To change perceptions of disability as abnormal, arts educators can look for media that challenge and reclaim what disability means. Disability activist Alice Wong (2014, 2016), who was born with spinal muscular atrophy, founded “The Disability Visibility Project” to challenge misconceptions about disabilities in the mainstream media and to change how people with disabilities are portrayed in visual culture narratives. One misconception that disturbs Wong is the pervasive storyline that characters with disabilities are portrayed as feeling like their lives aren’t worth living and are bitter, suicidal, and feel sorry for themselves. Begun in 2014, Wong’s project has encouraged people with disabilities to record their own histories at StoryCorps, which has grown into a vibrant online community. Recognizing storyline stereotypes of disability in popular culture media is necessary to dismantling stereotypes of people with disabilities. The arts provide opportunities for people with disabilities to create from their experiences, which differ from dominant cultural narratives of disability.

Diversity I think people with disabilities really challenge the idea of what is ‘normal’ and what is ‘diversity.’ (Alice Wong, 2016) Diversity is a political, economic, social, and environmental necessity. Yet diversity is feared by some, in part because socially constructed divisions exclude people while granting others power and privilege. Diversity awareness is to confront the injustice of exclusion, power, and privilege, particularly in relation to marginalized identities that are socially, historically, politically, and psychologically constructed as different from identities that are privileged. Pedagogical issues posed by diversity confront arts educators. In the following, four orientations to diversity provide critical contemporary foundations from which to build curricula and develop teaching strategies that include difference.

Culturally Responsive Discrimination is an act of differential treatment toward a group or an individual as a member of a group that usually creates a disadvantage for that individual or group. Whether rooted in racial, gender, sexual, religious, or class differences, or other forms of exclusion, discrimination functions to disempower those who do not fit into what mainstream or dominant culture maintains as the “norm.” … Instead of treatment based on individual merit or specific circumstances, prejudice and bias may act as barriers to their full inclusion and integration in society. (Montreal City Mission, 2014, p. 7) Aimee Mullins (2009) redefined the body with changeable prosthetic legs that she has had designed: more than a dozen pairs for running, extra height, and a variety of fashion statements. With her public appearances as an athlete, model, and activist, as well as her visits to K-12 classrooms, she challenges dominant societal assumptions of disability and beauty and socially constructed notions of the normal body. Disability studies scholar Rosemarie Garland-Thomson (2002) referred to this social construct as the normate body. When Mullins meets a class of young students, she asks the adults to wait outside the classroom so that children are uninhibited to examine and

50

Creativity, Disability, Diversity, & Inclusion

ask questions about the display of her numerous prosthetic legs, exhibited on the tables as works of art. The message is that there are aesthetics of difference, that it is acceptable to be curious and open about difference, and that narrow definitions of the body limit the potential of the unique differences of all people. Mullins’s approach is culturally responsive, encouraging students to explore their own beliefs and fears about disability and then to (re)consider their ideas of normalcy from broadened views of difference. Culturally responsive teaching strategies aim to include students’ cultural references, histories, and experiences in all aspects of learning (Glimps & Ford, 2010; Knight, 2015).

Critical Multiculturalism Critical multiculturalism is a critique of institutionalized power systems and educational inequity and a disruption to cultural subjection (Kraehe & Acuff, 2013). In practice, the work is meant to reveal power and privilege that institutionalize racism, ableism, classism, and sexism (Ashby, 2012; Derby, 2016; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Lawrence-Brown & Sapon Shevin, 2013; Wexler, 2016). For example, artist aleXsandro Palombo (2014) draws in the style of Disney characters and offers online a series of illustrations of Disney princesses, such as Cinderella in a wheelchair at the bottom of the grand ballroom stairs and, in another artwork, Cinderella being fitted with a shoe on her prosthetic foot. Using the popularity of Disney films and characters, Palombo raises awareness of the absence of protagonists who experience disability in cultural narratives. There are several performance and dance troops as well as organizations, such as Unlimited Access, Candoco Dance Company, That’s Life, and Ignite, who critique the absence of artists with disabilities due to cultural and educational inequities by creating arts education and performance opportunities. These critical multicultural projects disrupt cultural subjection by nurturing the creative capacities of people experiencing disabilities.

Oppositional Key to anti-oppressive work, an oppositional position, is listening to the people who experience oppression and working together to end that oppression. Rather than a proponent approach (e.g. being for inclusion), oppositional work is about being against marginalization, disenfranchisement, exclusion, and violence, whether micro- or macro-aggressions. Oppression is a systematic phenomenon that operates through power and privilege. An individual who experiences discrimination while in a position of power is not oppressed because society grants that individual both the expectation and capacity for recourse. Those who are oppressed, on the other hand, experience discrimination within a context of culturally imposed powerlessness. This may lead to situations in which they do not even see their own oppression, creating a culture of stigma, shame and social acceptance. (Firestorm Collective, 2014, p. 4) Oppression can occur in art in many forms. It can include: using language that is offensive to a marginalized group, reinforcing stereotypes, making broad statements about a particular group, jokes from groups you do not identify with, racial slurs, stories that do not ­include input from the marginalized groups that the story is about, putting down people in a ­m arginalized group because they are “not trying hard enough,” microaggressions, exceptionalism of yourself or a specific person, etc. (Coleman et al., 2005, p. 9)

51

Karen Keifer-Boyd

Diversity awareness to change oppressive language can be taught with examples that students encounter in critiques of art. For example, I noticed that an art critic’s review of an exhibition about including difference concluded with “and come back from such private mysterious experience to see normally again, in a different way.” This final sentence in the review takes away from the potential of reading the exhibition and the article from an including difference lens. The ableist language of “see normally again” assumes the reader is able to see now and at some time prior and that there is a “normal” way to see. I suggested changing from ableist language to enable narrative of difference with the revised sentence: “This show gives you the opportunity to experience ­prosopagnosia and come back from perceiving another’s experience to understanding the world in a different way” (Guest Writer, 2014, p. 8). The art critic made the change in the online published review of an art exhibition. Arts educators might ask students to gather from the media material that seems to contain specific signifiers or codes of disability. The process might reveal to the students that there is an absence or invisibility of disability with which they are most familiar, or they might find stereotypes and clichés. Creating art that takes the cultural narratives of disability that the students find (or don’t find) and places them into different contexts or situations, whether through performance, poetry, visual art, or other art forms, is a way to raise diversity awareness and shift oppressive contexts to value difference.

Post-Oppositional Analouise Keating (2013) advocated that educators move beyond oppositional consciousness to approaches that embrace interconnectivity as an educational framework for inclusion of difference. Post-oppositional work raises questions about the relationship between interdependency and independence. In a society and educational system that values independence, people with disabilities who need support systems will be viewed as not achieving goals of independence. However, from a post-oppositional diversity theoretical frame, interdependence is the goal that each participates in to contribute to the well-being of others.

Inclusion of Difference We are all different from one another. In other words, a person who is perceived as having a dis/ability is no more or less different from someone who is considered nondisabled than that nondisabled person is different from him/her. Yet, the person with the dis/ability is perceived as the one who is inherently different. However, there can be no difference without a norm, upon which difference is measured. (Annamma et al., 2013, p. 10) The concept of measuring up to social norms has much to do with the development of statistics applied to human features. Leonard Davis (2013) described the concept of norm as having “only been in use [in European cultures] since around 1855” and historically entangled with eugenics (p. 3). Eugenic policies have led to the loss of genetic diversity and violations of human rights when selected human traits, determined by those with sociopolitical power, are perceived as ­d iseased and abnormal. What does including difference mean to you? Inclusion? Difference? Who is marked as different and in what context? Who has power and privilege to be unmarked (that is, race, class, gender, sexuality, and ability are not an issue) and in what context? Whose theories, ideas, beliefs, art, histories, and lives are integral to what and how and who you teach through the visual, spoken, written, and performed culture that you present every day? Micki Nyman (2013) posited,

52

Creativity, Disability, Diversity, & Inclusion

Difference is both a process and product; it characterizes how we process reality as well as how exterior forces and energies work upon us. In this vein, one can perceive disabilities as ever changing forces rather than as fixed structures, in a relationship of reciprocity and agency rather than inequality and predetermined response. (Nyman, 2013, p. 3) A critique of media representation of disabled bodies investigates how bodies are positioned and enacted in specific practices. “Differences, it is argued, are not given ‘entities’ out there, awaiting discovery; rather they are effects that come about in relational practices” (M’charek, 2010, p. 307). Unfortunately, one such effect is that children born with physical or intellectual disabilities are far more likely to end up in prison than their able-bodied peers, due in part to a lack of support systems. … More than 750,000 people with disabilities are currently imprisoned in the United States. (Woodruff, 2016, p. 1) RespectAbility, a nonprofit disability group, is working to counter the injustice encountered by “more than half-a-million with cognitive impairments, at least 250,000 with mobility problems, and 140,000 who are blind or have vision loss,” who are imprisoned in the United States as of 2016. RespectAbility’s particular focus is on how to scaffold for success upon their being released from prison and on intervention to stop the prison pipeline for those with disabilities intersected with other marginalized identities. Given that people with disabilities comprise about 20 percent of the US population and 30 percent of the prison population (Woodruff, 2016), there needs to be awareness of difference and opportunity for individuals to be included in society. The arts can contribute to diversity awareness and provide modes of communication to understand difference.

References Adichie, C. N. (2009). The danger of a single story. TEDGlobal. Retrieved from www.ted.com/talks/ chimamanda_adichie_the_danger_of_a_single_story?language=en Annamma, S., Connor, D. J., & Ferri, B. A. (2013). Dis/ability critical race studies (DisCrit): Theorizing at the intersections of race and dis/ability. Race Ethnicity and Education, 16(1), 1–31. Ashby, C. (2012). Disability studies and inclusive teacher preparation: A socially just path. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 37(2), 89–99. Benin, D., & Cartwright, L. (2006). Shame, empathy and looking practices: Lessons from a disability studies classroom. Journal of Visual Culture, 5(2), 155–171. Cachia, A. (2013). Talking blind: Disability, access, and the discursive turn. Disability Studies Quarterly, 33(4). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3758/3281. doi:10.18061/dsq.v33i3.3758 Charlton, J. I. (2006). The dimensions of disability oppression: An overview. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The ­disability studies reader (2nd ed., pp. 217–227). New York, NY: Routledge. Chivers, S. (2001). The horror of becoming “one of us”: Tod Browning’s Freaks and disability. In A. Enns & C. R. Smit (Eds.), Screening disability: Essays on cinema and disability (pp. 57–64). Blue Ridge Summit, PA: University Press of America. Coleman, K., Ferguson, E., & Ramey, J. (2005). Disability art and culture project: About us. Retrieved from https://dacphome.org/about/ Connor, D., & Gabel, S. (2013). “Cripping” the curriculum through academic activism: Working toward increasing global exchange to reframe (dis)ability and education. Equity & Excellence in Education, 46(1), 100–118. Darke, P. (1997). Everywhere: Disability on film. In A. Pointon & C. Davies (Eds.), Framed: interrogating disability in the media (pp. 10–14). London, UK: The British Film Institute. Davis, L. (2002). Bending over backwards: Disability, dismodernism and other difficult positions. New York, NY: NYU Press.

53

Karen Keifer-Boyd Davis, L. J. (2013). The disability studies reader (4th ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis. Derby, J. (2011). Disability studies and art education. Studies in Art Education, 52(2), 94–111. Derby, J. (2016). Confronting ableism: Disability studies pedagogy in preservice art education. Studies in Art Education, 57(2), 102–119. Disability Art and Culture Project. (2016). Retrieved from https://dacphome.org/ Eisner, E. (2006). Prof. Eliot W. Eisner: “What Do the Arts Teach?” [Lecture at Vanderbilt University.] Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=h12MGuhQH9E#t=999 Erevelles, Nirmala. (2012). “What...[thought] cannot bear to know”: Crippin’ the limits of “Thinkability” Review of Disability Studies: An International Journal, 8(3), 35–44. Ferguson, K. (Producer & Editor). (2012). Future of storytelling: Paul Zak. Retrieved from www.­brainpickings. org/index.php/2012/10/03/paul-zak-kirby-ferguson-storytelling/ Firestorm Collective. (2014). Anti-oppression statement. Retrieved from www.firestorm.coop/anti-­oppression. html Fraser, M. (2009). Mat Fraser performs “No Retreat, No Surrender” at Sins Invalid 2009 at Brava Theater in San Francisco, October 2–4, 2009. Music composed by Steve Angstrom. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/ watch?v=Gkf hwGuCd4w Garland-Thomson, R. (2002). Integrating disability, transforming feminist theory. NWSA Journal, 14(3), 1–32. Glimps, B. J., & Ford, N. F. (2010). White power and privilege: Barriers to culturally responsive teaching. International Journal of Educational Policies, 4(1), 39–52. Green, C. (2013, February 11). Photos from DACP’s open art sessions at the Project Grow Gallery at Port City (Photo 7 of 20). Retrieved from www.facebook.com/DisabilityArtandCultureProject/ photos/?tab=album&album_id=10151788549132224 Guest Writer. (2014). The exhibition that mistook his wife for a hat. Arte Fuse: New York, Reviews and Photo Stories. ­Retrieved from http://artefuse.com/2014/09/30/the-exhibition-that-mistook-his-wife-for-ahat-123565/ Kafer, A. (2013). Feminist queer crip. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Keating, A. (2013). Transformation now! Toward a post-oppositional politics of change. Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois Press. Keifer-Boyd, K., & Maitland-Gholson, J. (2007). Engaging visual culture. Worcester, MA: Davis Publications. Keifer-Boyd, K., Trauth, E., & Wagner-Lawlor, J. (2015). STEAM embodied curricula: Creativity through translate-ability, sense-ability, response-ability. In F. Bastos & E. Zimmerman, Connecting creativity research and practice in art education: Foundations, pedagogies, and contemporary issues (pp. 88–94). Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association. Knight, W. B. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching in art education. The International Journal of Art Education, 13(1), 70–89. Kraehe, A. M., & Acuff, J. B. (2013). Theoretical considerations for art education research with and about “underserved” populations. Studies in Art Education, 54(4), 294–309. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association. Lawrence-Brown, D. & Sapon Shevin, M. Eds. (2013). Condition critical: Key principles for equitable and inclusive education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. http://store.tcpress.com/0807754765.shtml M’charek, A. (2010). Fragile differences, relational effects: Stories about the materiality of race and sex. European Journal of Women’s Studies, 17(4), 307–322. McRuer, R. (2005, Winter). We were never identified: Feminism, queer theory, and a disabled world. In T. Meade & D. Serlin (Eds.), Feature issue on Disability and History. Radical History Review, 94, 148–154. McRuer, R. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York, NY: NYU Press. Montreal City Mission. (2014). Anti-oppressive practice policy. Retrieved from www.montrealcitymission.org/ en/policies/anti-oppresive-practice Montgomery, D. (2010). P. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=Axvw2jV0_2M Mullins, A. (2009). My 12 pairs of legs. Retrieved from www.ted.com/talks/aimee_mullins_prosthetic_ aesthetics?language=en Novick, J. (2014). Don’t look down on me. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=mD_PWU6K514 Nyman, M. (2013). Interpretation makes it real: Disability and subjectivity in biopics of three women artists. Disability Studies Quarterly, 33(4). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/1777/3259 Piepzna-Samarasinha, L. L. (2012). The Art and Practice of Disability Justice Going from a Point to a Sphere - Disability Justice and Cultural Work. Retrieved from https://prezi.com/yjav3hpgxz01/ the-art-and-practice-of-disability-justice/

54

Creativity, Disability, Diversity, & Inclusion Palombo, A. (2014). Humor chic equal rights – disabled Disney princesses “Which Disney princess are you?” ­Retrieved from http://humorchic.blogspot.com/2014/01/humor-chic-equal-rights-disabled-disney.html Rapaccioli, J. (2016). Bea the Upstander [Interactive game.] Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/ file/d/0B4lyoukZcogPeVQ4cWpXQWkwODg/view Sayce, L. (2000). From psychiatric patient to citizen: Overcoming discrimination and social exclusion. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press. Sins Invalid. (2016). An unshamed claim to beauty in the face of invisibility: Our mission. Retrieved from http:// sinsinvalid.org/mission.html Wexler, A. (2016). Autism in a decentered world. New York, NY: Routledge. Woodruff, J. (2016, June 21). Broken justice: Prisoners with disabilities lack ‘scaffolding for success.’ Retrieved from www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/prisoners-with-disabilities-lack-scaffolding-for-success/ Wong, A. (2014). Disability visibility project: Recording disability history, one story at a time. Retrieved from https://disability­v isibilityproject.com/ Wong, A. (2016, June 30). Life stories. Retrieved from http://nbcnews.to/29dj4aO

55

Section II Ensuring an Appropriate Education in the Visual and Performing Arts

In the United States, the public education of students with disabilities is governed by federal policies that promote school improvement, protect students from discrimination, and provide those who need it with special education and related services to meet their individual needs. Special education, inspired by the vision of a brighter future for children and youth with disabilities, is intended to provide an individually appropriate public education to students who need more than typical instruction to be successful. This section of the handbook is dedicated to issues of educational policy relevant to stakeholders, especially teachers and administrators working at the intersection of arts education and special education. Contents in this collection of chapters address legal and instructional aspects of educating students with disabilities in and through the arts; the preparation of arts educators; and the effective utilization of paraeducators, who increasingly assist in the delivery of art instruction to students with disabilities. Jean Crockett (Chapter 5) begins this section by explaining the legal aspects of instructing students with disabilities within the context of arts education. She features perspectives of parents in framing this discussion to emphasize the hard-won victories they secured for their children with disabilities through their vision and advocacy. The legal foundations of special education are described to help educators understand how student achievement for all learners is promoted through the Every Student Succeeds Act, how students’ individual access to the arts curriculum is protected under Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, and how appropriate arts instruction for special education students is ensured under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. In the process of explaining these legal foundations, Crockett provides multiple examples to make them relevant to teachers working with students with disabilities in arts settings. Bryan Cook, Jamie Simpson-Steele, and Lysandra Cook (Chapter 6) extend the focus on providing appropriate educational opportunities by addressing how the influential policy construct of evidence-based practice is supported by both the Every Student Succeeds Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. The authors describe evidence-based practice as referring to a multi-step process of instructional decision-making that involves prioritizing practices identified as effective by sound research. Cook and his colleagues argue that engaging in the process of evidence-based practice has the potential to improve learning outcomes for all students and is especially important for students with and at risk for disabilities, who require the application of highly effective instruction to succeed. Writing from the perspectives of teacher educators in special education (Cook & Cook) and performing arts education (Simpson-Steele), these authors

57

Ensuring an Appropriate Education in the Visual and Performing Arts

describe the importance of evidence-based practice, explain what evidence-based practice and evidence-based practices (EBPs) are, highlight resources for identifying EBPs for students with disabilities, and provide practical examples in two vignettes of educators engaging in evidence-based practice with students with disabilities as they integrate the arts into their daily instruction. Writing from the perspective of a university educator who supervises field experiences for aspiring visual art teachers, Juliann Dorff (Chapter 7) addresses diversity in pre-K-12 classrooms and the practical necessity of preparing her students with strategies and methods to teach all learners. No longer can teacher education programs rely solely on capstone student teaching experiences to adequately prepare arts educators to excel in the classroom, she argues. Dorff offers guidance on implementing effective teacher preparation programs in the arts through an infusion approach in all arts-specific and general teacher preparation courses, enhancing teaching methods and strategies to meet the needs of all students in arts classes. A summary of the research addressing past and current practice in teacher preparation programs in the arts is included, along with an examination of strategies, providing teacher candidates with the skills required for successful classroom practice. Rooted in the human variation model of disability and difference, this chapter encourages pre-service arts educators to examine their personal attitudes toward disability. Concepts such as collaboration, universal design for learning, differentiated instruction, and evidence-based practices are addressed, along with suggestions for implementing authentic experiences within teacher preparation curricula. Ritu Chopra, Diane Carroll, and Sharon Manjack (Chapter 8) bring national as well as schoolbased expertise to their examination of paraeducators and ways for enhancing their support of students with disabilities in arts instruction. Drawing on their work in schools across the United States through the national Paraprofessional Resource and Research Center funded by the Office of Special Education Programs, they note that paraeducators often have no formal preparation and typically receive limited supervision from special education and/or art teachers for their role in supporting students with disabilities. Drawing upon existing literature, these authors discuss past and present challenges, and effective practices for paraeducators to use in supporting students with disabilities in general education and specifically in art classrooms. Chopra and her colleagues highlight the importance of collaboration between special education teachers and art teachers in supporting the work of paraeducators to ensure increased access to curriculum and achievement of optimal outcomes of arts instruction. They also provide brief case studies, demonstrating typical challenges of and potential solutions in working with paraeducators in visual and performing arts settings as well as sample plans for utilizing paraeducators productively, which can be adapted or adopted to provide systematic guidance.

58

5 Legal Aspects of Teaching Students with Disabilities in the Arts Jean B. Crockett

Disability is a natural part of the human experience and in no way diminishes the rights of individuals to participate in or contribute to our society. Improving educational results for children with disabilities is an essential element of our national policy of ensuring equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for individuals with disabilities. (20 U.S.C. §1401(c)(1))

Federal policy in the United States, as embodied in this text from the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), recognizes disability as a natural part of life and emphasizes the values of dignity, purpose, and equality of opportunity for all. Theater critic Niel Genzlinger (2017), whose daughter lives with Rett syndrome, reflected these values in focusing on the lived experiences of people with disabilities in his review of a Broadway revival of The Glass Menagerie. In this production of the classic play by Tennessee Williams, a wheelchair was featured onstage, not as a prop but as the means of mobility for the actress Madison Ferris, who played the part of the reclusive daughter Laura, typically portrayed as walking with a limp. Genzlinger pointed out that Ferris, who has muscular dystrophy, was not pretending to have a disability when she struggled across the stage without her wheelchair. From the beginning of the play, the audience was confronted with the difficulties of having severely limited mobility as she painstakingly climbed a set of stairs to the stage. Some critics viewed casting an actress with a disability as exploitive, but Genzlinger (2017), who argues for theater to reflect the full range of human diversity, sees this as progress. “Broadway audiences are accustomed to seeing perfect bodies doing entertaining dance steps. Guess what, Broadway?” he wrote, “One in five Americans has a disability, according to the census bureau” (para 8). In challenging the view that people with disabilities should remain invisible, Genzlinger’s advocacy extends beyond aspirations for his own daughter to include the representation, in art as in life, of millions of others with disabilities.

A Tradition of Parental Advocacy The advocacy of parents inspired by the vision of a brighter future for their children with disabilities has a long and powerful tradition. In many ways, to understand special education policy is to understand the past and present aspirations of parents and the roles they have

59

Jean B. Crockett

played in advancing equal opportunities for their children (Turnbull & Turnbull, 2015). Public policies inspired by such advocacy, including the IDEA and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA, 1990, 2008), were passed by Congress to ensure people with disabilities equitable opportunities to fully participate in all aspects of community life, live independently, and achieve economic self-sufficiency through the removal of barriers that prevent their meaningful inclusion. These policies were built on previous civil rights legislation designed to eliminate the historic and pervasive isolation of people with disabilities who were viewed as objects of pity, unable to attend school or work and live on their own. These views began to change with the IDEA’s mandate that students with disabilities be educated appropriately and at public expense and by the ADA’s requirement that buildings, transportation, and services be made accessible so that people with disabilities could participate in society (Hill & ­G oldstein, 2015). Today’s young adults grew up in an ADA and IDEA world where people with disabilities were increasingly represented in all aspects of life, including on the Broadway stage. Many attended schools alongside students with disabilities, and they are used to interacting in classes, clubs, and community activities with others who consider disability a natural part of life. Despite this familiarity, many people are unfamiliar with the policies that govern special education and the principles that support the empowerment of youth with disabilities and their families. Four decades after the passage of special education law, it is still not unusual for classroom teachers and arts educators to feel confused or uncomfortable about teaching students with wide-ranging learning differences (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). In some cases, teacher candidates may not be prepared to work with a diversity of learners or to collaborate with other professionals outside their disciplines who could expand their understandings of special education policies and practices (Weiss, Pellegrino, & Brigham, 2017). To address the need for educators to feel more confident in meeting their professional responsibilities, the policies that form the foundation of teaching students with disabilities in the United States are explained in this chapter. The perspectives of parents are used to frame this discussion and to emphasize the hard-won victories secured for their children through their visions and advocacy. Federal legislation that governs the education of students with disabilities is explained first, followed by discussion of the principles for ensuring equitable opportunities for students to benefit from arts instruction.

Policies Governing the Education of Students with Disabilities In today’s schools, students with disabilities are held to high academic standards and expected to receive a well-rounded education that includes instruction in the arts and music. To be successful, students with disabilities need personalized supports and accommodations to access learning, and sometimes, they need the more intensive support of individually designed instruction or what the IDEA calls special education. To help these students learn appropriately, public schools in the United States are governed by federal policies that both protect students from discrimination and provide those who need it with special education and related services. Four federal laws form the foundation for educating students with disabilities. The Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015, referred to as ESSA, and the IDEA are both education laws that authorize funds to improve outcomes for public school students. The other two federal statutes, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, referred to as Section 504, and the ADA, are civil rights laws that apply to individuals in schools and in society. Each of these laws expands equal educational opportunities for students with disabilities in different, complementary ways. ESSA provides funds to improve learning outcomes for all students; Section 504 and the ADA protect both students and school employees from discrimination based on their disabilities; and the IDEA

60

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts

ensures eligible students with disabilities an individually appropriate special education at no cost to their parents (Yell, 2016).

An Overview of Intersecting Policies The IDEA is the most important policy governing special education. Since its passage in 1975, as the Education for All Handicapped Children’s Act, Congress has guaranteed special education students (a) the right to receive an individually appropriate public education at no cost to their parents; (b) the right to be taught in educational settings that least restrict their opportunities to associate with classmates who have typical abilities to the maximum extent appropriate; and (c) the right to be taught by qualified teachers using state-of-the-art instruction and technology (Crockett & Kauffman, 1999). Reauthorizations of the IDEA in 1997 and 2004 strengthened the alignment of special education with general education, with stipulations that required students with disabilities to have access to the general curriculum and be included in district- and state-wide testing programs. Over time, the focus on developmental progress in education policy diminished as greater emphasis was placed on academic gains (see Ballard in Hulett, 2009). When praising policy goals that foster high academic achievement for students with disabilities, advocate Joseph Ballard, who worked closely with parents and legislators in crafting the original law in 1975, also cautioned that making academics the overwhelming measure of proficiency deflects attention from a student’s comprehensive educational needs. “While attending to academic proficiency,” he wrote, “we must never let slip away the statutory language focused on the ‘other educational needs of the child’” (p. xxvi). Concerns about the education of the whole child have not been confined to special education. For more than a decade, federal education policy has focused on student achievement as measured by tested performance in reading and mathematics, “narrowing the curriculum at the expense of untested subjects like science, history, art, and music” (Darling-Hammond et al., 2016, p. 1). Under ESSA, accountability mandates have shifted to the states, along with more flexibility, authority, and responsibility for designing holistic approaches that lead to greater equity and school improvement. ESSA provides funding to improve the achievement of students, including those with disabilities, in elementary and secondary public schools. However, unlike the requirements of the IDEA, addressing students’ individual educational benefits, ESSA provisions require schools to account for the collective achievement gains of special education students as a subgroup of students that has traditionally struggled in school. The law also requires states to show how funds are used to help teachers support gifted and talented students. In a departure from previous policy under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), “ESSA establishes that every child deserves a ‘wellrounded education,’ putting music and the arts alongside reading and math in the classroom” (Darrow, 2016). ESSA’s embrace of the whole child makes it even more pressing that teachers of the arts disciplines avoid the pitfalls of unintentional discrimination against students with different abilities. The US Department of Education oversees the implementation of ESSA and the IDEA to ensure that states prioritize positive learning outcomes for both general and special education students. The Office of Civil Rights within the department enforces the relevant aspects of Section 504 and the ADA to ensure equal access to education. Congress enacted both of these laws as remedies against years of discrimination experienced by people with disabilities in housing, employment, public services, and transportation as well as education (Yell, 2016). The following sections extend the discussion of these four laws, beginning with ESSA as the policy with the broadest reach in governing public education. Civil rights protections provided by Section 504 and the ADA are discussed next, followed by an explanation of the IDEA and implications for providing students with disabilities with an appropriate education in the arts.

61

Jean B. Crockett

Improving Outcomes for All Learners ESSA (2015) addresses the improvement of learning outcomes for all students and is the primary education law, providing general funds to support K-12 public education. As the most recent re-authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, ESSA appropriates federal funds to states to provide disadvantaged children and youth with opportunities to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, regardless of race, ethnicity, disability, English proficiency, or income (Darrow, 2016; Yell, 2016). ESSA requires states to report on the academic performance of students with disabilities as it does for public school students in other subgroups, including members of racial and ethnic minorities and children living in poverty. A major goal of ESSA is to help states prepare young people to graduate from high school ready for college and careers, regardless of income, race, ethnicity, or disability status. States must report on the educational achievement of students with disabilities and conduct annual testing in designated grades for all students except those with the most significant cognitive disabilities. Consequently, most special education students are included in general assessments because no more than 1 percent of all students—or 10 percent of students with disabilities—are allowed to take alternate assessments (Yell, 2016). ESSA also requires that states develop intervention plans to reduce incidents in schools, including bullying and harassment, restraint and seclusion, and suspensions and expulsions, which disproportionately affect the educational rights of students with disabilities (Samuels, 2016b). ESSA provisions defined a well-rounded education for the first time in federal law, listing the arts and music among other subject areas in the definition “with the purpose of providing all students access to an enriched curriculum and educational experience” (ESSA, 20 U.S.C. §7801(52)). Schools are expected to assess their capacity to provide a well-rounded education and use ESSA funding to address any deficiencies that would compromise students’ opportunities for meaningful experiences in these areas of the curriculum (National Association for Music Education, 2016). As Darrow (2016) noted, “ESSA has opened the door for conversations with school officials and other stakeholders about the role of the arts in a ‘well-rounded education’” (p. 4). ESSA stipulates that whole school reform, for example, includes more than academic achievement and extends to school culture/climate, including access to the arts and music. The law encourages each school to include activities that foster a well-rounded education, including arts and music, in its schoolwide plan so that every student can succeed (ESSA, 2015). However, to be successful and to even access a well-rounded education, some students need to do things differently, and their right to use accommodations is protected by disability-specific civil rights laws.

Protecting Students with Disabilities from Discrimination Section 504 and the ADA are intended to prevent discrimination by protecting students with disabilities from being excluded from activities unfairly or from receiving inferior treatment compared to their classmates without disabilities (Umpstead, Decker, Brady, Schimmel, & Militello, 2015). The term disability is defined broadly under these laws. For example, for a student to be eligible to receive protection from discrimination under Section 504, a school-based team must determine whether a cognitive or physical impairment substantially limits his or her ability to perform one or more major life activities—including but not limited to learning—so that it is very difficult or impossible for the student to do what others with typical abilities can do without assistance. Unlike the IDEA, students do not need to be receiving special education services to be protected from discrimination, and their disability does not have to affect their educational performance (Yell, 2016).

62

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts

The provisions of the ADA and Section 504 are not limited to education, nor do they provide any funding. These civil rights laws apply primarily to employment and services to the general public, with provisions that protect children and adults from disability-based discrimination. The ADA has a broad reach and prohibits discrimination and promotes access to activities across a variety of public and private settings, including schools, services, and commercial businesses. Its application within schools, however, is mostly limited to reinforcing or extending the protections of Section 504 (Yell, 2016). Within the context of education, Section 504 applies in public and private schools that accept federal funding for any purpose (e.g. ESSA and IDEA funds, and grants to build facilities, fund libraries, or purchase technology, arts supplies, and musical instruments). Section 504 protects students with disabilities who receive special education under the IDEA from discrimination. It also protects additional students considered to have disabilities who do not qualify as eligible for s­ pecial education services but who require accommodations to access learning as adequately as their classmates without disabilities. A student covered only by Section 504 protections (see Zirkel & ­Weathers, 2016) is typically provided with an individualized accommodation plan that informs teachers and administrators about the nature of the student’s disability; the major life activity it affects; and the basis for determining the disability, its educational impact, and the individual accommodations needed by the student to receive equal access to educational activities (Yell, 2016). Typical accommodations to a student’s educational program might include classroom modifications, such as altering the physical arrangement of the classroom, reducing distractions, or providing preferential seating. Academic adjustments can be made to change the pace of instruction or increase the time needed to complete assignments. Auxiliary aids and services might also be provided, such as assistive technology devices or services, sign language interpreters, or the use of audio or visual aids. The selected accommodations would depend, of course, on the student’s individual accommodation plan. Various accommodations can be made for students enrolled in the arts disciplines. For example, a student with limited hand use might need to participate in musical activities with modified instruments or by playing traditional instruments in unconventional ways (Abramo, 2012). A dance student who has difficulties with self-control might need clear rules and expectations, regular routines, or alternative activities to access learning. Essentially, an accommodation plan helps ensure access to a well-rounded education for students with disabilities, who need to do things differently in order to succeed. In protecting students’ rights to equal educational opportunities, there are similarities between Section 504, the ADA, and the IDEA, but there are also significant differences. Section 504 ensures access to an equal educational opportunity by making it illegal to discriminate against students in schools that accept federal funds and by providing for accommodations and modifications to educational programs and services that make access to learning commensurate with that which is provided to nondisabled students. Although the ADA protects individuals with disabilities from discrimination in public and private schools from “nursery to postgraduate school” (ADA, 42 U.S.C. §12181(7)), it provides no additional rights to students with disabilities beyond those ensured by Section 504 and the IDEA. It should be noted that all students who receive special education under the IDEA are protected under Section 504, but the reverse is not the case (Yell, 2016).

Ensuring a Free and Individually Appropriate Public Education The IDEA (2004) governs special education and was originally enacted by Congress in 1975 as a remedy for excluding millions of children with disabilities from public schools. Recent data indicate that 6.5 million students with disabilities, ranging from 3 to 21 years of age, receive special education services. Of these, 5.9 million are among students 6–21 years of age who comprise

63

Jean B. Crockett

8.7  percent of the total public school enrollment in the United States. Ninety-five percent of ­special education students are taught in regular schools, and more than 60 percent are included for 80 percent or more of the school day in general education settings, which include classes in the arts disciplines (US Department of Education, 2016). The determination of eligibility to receive special education and related services under the IDEA is made on an individual basis by a multidisciplinary team, which includes the student’s parents. Eligibility is narrowly defined and linked to a set of 13 disability classifications under which special services can be funded. Although students might experience a combination of challenges, recent data reveal that (a) 20 percent of students received services related to difficulties in seeing, hearing, moving, and communicating through speech (i.e. deaf-blindness, hearing impairments, orthopedic impairments, speech/language impairments, visual impairments); (b) 61 ­percent received services related to difficulties in thinking (cognition), learning academic material (unrelated to cognitive ability), or controlling emotions or behavior (i.e. autism, emotional disturbances, intellectual disabilities, specific learning disabilities, traumatic brain injuries); and (c) 19 percent received services related to difficulties arising from a combination of complex issues related to developmental delay, multiple disabilities, and other health impairments that interfere with sustained attention to instruction (US Department of Education, 2016). Students are only found eligible for special education if their disabilities have an adverse impact on their education (Yell, 2016). With reference to arts education, it should be noted that some students with disabilities might also have extraordinary abilities and talents that distinguish their educational performance from that of their typical classmates (Kauffman & Hallahan, 2005). In these cases, parents and professionals need to consider these dual exceptionalities in designing, delivering, and evaluating the goals that guide students’ individualized education programs (IEPs) (Hammel, 2016). For students to qualify for services under the IDEA, their educational performance must be adversely affected by their specified disability, making them eligible to receive special education. The term special education is defined very specifically in the law as specially designed instruction, which extends beyond accommodations for access under Section 504 and the ADA. Specially designed instruction means adapting the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction as appropriate to the needs of an individual student to (a) address unique needs resulting from their disability and (b) ensure their access to the general curriculum (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F. R. § 300.39(b)(3)). Specially designed instruction (i.e. special education) refers to more than academic instruction, however, and extends to meeting students’ social, emotional, behavioral, physical, and vocational needs (Crockett & Yell, 2017). The development of skills in dance and the provision of movement education and vocational education are specifically identified within the definition of special education (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F. R. § 300.39(b)(2)(i)(C)(ii)). It is also important to note that this definition of special education is now linked with ESSA’s definition of a well-rounded education (see IDEA, 20 U.S.C. §1401(4)), indicating that special education students are to receive specially designed instruction from their teachers across the subject areas, including the arts and music.

The IDEA Framework The IDEA provides a framework for guiding the special education process toward a free appropriate public education (FAPE, Crockett, in press). FAPE is the goal of the IDEA and is defined in the law as “a specially designed program that meets the individual needs of students and allows them to receive educational benefit” (Yell, 2016, p. 183). The IDEA proceeds on the assumption that FAPE will be the outcome if school personnel follow the law’s procedures correctly in (a) identifying individual students who need special education, (b) fairly evaluating their unique learning

64

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts

needs, (c) collaboratively developing IEPs, (d) implementing these faithfully according to the least restrictive environment (LRE) principle, and (e) safeguarding the rights of students by ensuring their parents have the opportunities to participate as partners in making special education decisions (Crockett, in press). These principles, and the implications they hold for arts education, are described next with examples of how they applied to a first-grade student with a severe speech impairment, who was not doing well in school. In this case, the child’s parents requested that their daughter be evaluated for special education because she had become very withdrawn and self-conscious about her inability to speak clearly. She no longer interacted with classmates or adults, except during music class, where she received compliments on her singing voice. Following a comprehensive evaluation, she was found eligible to receive specially designed instruction, and an IEP was developed with her parents input to address her specific learning needs (see Crockett, in press; Turnbull, Stowe, & Huerta, 2007). Zero–Reject and Child-Find

The principle of zero-reject establishes that students, aged 3 to 21 years, cannot be excluded from instruction and are entitled to receive FAPE, regardless of the severity of their disabilities. The child-find provision of this principle also requires school districts to identify children and youth in the community who might be eligible for services so that all might have equitable access to a wellrounded education. When children in the community are suspected of needing special education, the school district is required to conduct an evaluation (Yell, 2016). Nondiscriminatory Evaluation

The principle of nondiscriminatory evaluation requires a team of qualified professionals to evaluate whether a student has a designated disability under the IDEA and whether special education is needed to address any adverse educational impact. The student’s parents must have the opportunity to give meaningful input and review any decisions about their child. The comprehensive evaluation process is essential because it generates assessments that form the basis for planning the annual goals and services that comprise the student’s specially designed instruction. For example, the first-grade student whose parents requested an evaluation was found eligible for special education. The assessments, including the information her parents provided to the team, identified three areas to be addressed in planning her program, including (a) the development of age-­ appropriate social skills, (b) the development of enunciation and communication skills, and (c) the identification of music as an area of strength and enjoyment. If creative art therapies were available as a related service in her school district, the team could also recommend an evaluation by a licensed music therapist to consider the benefits of integrating music therapy with more traditional speech/language pathology services (Turnbull et al., 2007). Individualized Education Program

The principle of the IEP ensures that a student’s special education is guided by annual goals and evaluation measures designed to provide a beneficial and meaningful education. Parents are full and equal partners with school personnel in developing an IEP, which is a written commitment that the school will provide what the student needs to receive an appropriate education. The IEP describes the student’s strengths and weaknesses and the impact of the disability on his or her learning. Measureable annual goals and the services and supports to be provided by the school district to support the student’s goal attainment are also included.

65

Jean B. Crockett

The contents of an IEP are to be shared with the student’s teachers, including educators in the arts disciplines. A student can participate more happily and successfully when special educators and arts educators collaborate in using IEP data to provide specially designed arts instruction ( Jellison, 2015). Nothing in the IDEA prevents arts educators from participating in IEP meetings and contributing relevant data about a student’s strengths and challenges at any time to the special educator managing the student’s case (Crockett, in press). The arts disciplines are often ignored in the IEP process, but this did not happen in the current example. The first-grade student’s team, which included her parents and music teacher, considered her musical strengths in addressing her communication and social skills development. When the IEP document was finalized, it also reflected support for the classroom teacher to receive training from a music specialist in ways that integrated music into her assignments as well as efforts to increase opportunities for the student to participate in extracurricular musical activities (Crockett, in press; Turnbull et al., 2007). Least Restrictive Environment

After developing a student’s IEP, the team of parents and professionals must utilize the LRE principle in deciding where the services required in the IEP can be implemented appropriately (Bateman & Linden, 2012). For example, in the first-grade student’s IEP, the LRE was considered to be placement for instruction in general education classes (including music class), where she could practice age-appropriate social skills and receive speech/language therapy. The LRE principle requires schools to educate students with and without disabilities together to the maximum extent appropriate (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300.550). Inclusion is not mandated by the IDEA but rather expressed as a preference for a student to be taught appropriately within or closest to the general education classroom on a continuum of alternative placements (Crockett & Yell, 2018). Decisions about placement must be based on individual needs, not on disability labels or on placements the school has used previously for similar students (Umpstead et al., 2015). Arts educators are in a good position to advocate for the appropriate inclusion of students in arts instruction by collaborating with special educators to adjust schedules, class arrangements, and support needs, facilitating successful instruction and engagement with classmates (Hammel & Hourigan, 2011b). Procedural Safeguards

The principle of procedural safeguards refers to an array of requirements that school personnel must follow in designing and delivering FAPE to protect the rights of students and to ensure their parents are equal participants in the special education process (IDEA Regulations, 34 C.F.R. § 300.500 et seq). When parents and school personnel disagree, these safeguards include a system for dispute resolution. Essentially, special education is team-based and child-centered, and these safeguards require parents, teachers, administrators, and other professionals to have the opportunity to make joint decisions about a student’s special education. As members of the school community, arts educators are stakeholders in the special education process who should be encouraged to voice concerns and contribute suggestions to improve the learning of their students with disabilities (Hammel & Hourigan, 2011a; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Parent Participation

The principle of parent participation is considered to be “one of the cornerstones of the IDEA” (Yell, 2016, p. 62) and reflects the important role played by parents in helping schools provide an

66

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts

appropriate education for their children with disabilities. Schools are required to involve parents as partners in the evaluation processes, IEP meetings, and placement decisions regarding their children’s special education (Yell, 2016). Although the principle of procedural safeguards protects parents’ rights, the principle of parent involvement underscores the crucial role that parents play in the successful education of their children.

Addressing the Variability of Diverse Learners Recent changes in the wording of federal laws suggest the variability of diverse learners—with and without disabilities—in American schools. A number of these changes have influenced school reforms in ways that reflect the emphasis in the IDEA and other disability-specific policies on engaging parents and recognizing and responding more specifically to the different ways in which students learn. In addition to requirements for school personnel to engage with parents, frameworks for differentiating instruction, including Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and Universal Design for Learning, are now referred to in ESSA as well as in the IDEA.

ESSA’s Parent Engagement Mandate With the passage of ESSA, school districts face new demands in showing how they are working to engage parents in their children’s education. Although not approaching the IDEA’s requirement for parental partnership with school personnel in developing a student’s special education, these demands recognize the merits of harnessing the knowledge and goodwill of those who know their children best. Under NCLB, school districts were required to set aside funds that they received for disadvantaged students to support parent and family involvement initiatives; under ESSA, however, the emphasis is on family engagement (Henderson, 2016). School districts must now join with parents in their communities in developing a written plan for outreach efforts to ensure regular two-way, meaningful communication between family members and school staff in a language that family members can understand (ESSA, Title I, Part A, Subpart 1, §1116). Funds supporting family engagement plans can be used for professional development, home-based programs to reach families in the communities where they live, the dissemination of information, the provision of sub-grants to community agencies, and other activities that foster meaningful parent and family engagement (Henderson, 2016).

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support ESSA refers to Multi-tiered Systems of Support, or MTSS, as a means for states to consider in making challenging academic standards accessible to English-language learners and students with disabilities (Samuels, 2016b). The National Association of School Psychologists (NASP, 2017) describes MTSS as a framework used for integrating multiple systems and services in schools to address the academic achievement, behavior, and social-emotional well-being of all students. The goal of MTSS is to improve student outcomes and to create safe and supportive learning environments free of bullying, harassment, and discrimination (NASP, 2017). In 2004, the IDEA introduced the concept of MTSS into federal policy by permitting states to use a method called Response to Intervention, or RTI, to distinguish students with disabilities, who need special education, from students with learning problems, who improve when they receive better instruction (Bateman & Linden, 2012). Although only mentioned for this narrow purpose in special education policy, “RTI was quickly adopted as a model for overall school improvement because of its focus on providing assistance quickly to struggling students before any academic deficits have a chance to become entrenched” (Samuels, 2016b, p. 5).

67

Jean B. Crockett

The MTSS framework typically encompasses the use of RTI to prevent academic failure, especially in the area of reading, and Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports (PBIS) to prevent inappropriate behavior. Both RTI and PBIS are grounded in differentiated instruction and use problem-solving strategies to select and implement research-based practices and collaborative, data-driven decision-making across increasingly intensive levels, or tiers, of intervention; students only receive individualized interventions at the highest tier. Special education can be provided as part of the MTSS framework, but school districts must always comply with the identification, assessment, and evaluation principles of the IDEA to determine whether a student is eligible to receive special education services (Yell, 2016). In recent years, MTSS has emerged as a new way of thinking about both disability identification and early intervention assistance for students who struggle in school. However, the basic concept of assessing a student’s responsiveness to intervention is not new, and “years of research suggest that when teachers emphasize effective practices based on data and grounded in research more students achieve benchmarks and fewer students lag significantly behind their classmates with learning delays that require special education” (Brownell, Smith, Crockett, & Griffin, 2012, p. 13). For arts educators and special educators, the problem-solving logic of MTSS, with its focus on differentiation and progress monitoring, offers opportunities to collaboratively employ instructional and assessment practices, grounded in the research of their respective fields in supporting successful learning for students with and at risk of developing disabilities.

Universal Design for Learning A great deal of legislative attention has also been paid to another framework designed to reach all learners called universal design for learning or UDL. With regard to students with disabilities, the UDL framework was a feature of the 2004 IDEA as well as the 2008 Higher Education Opportunity Act. UDL was also referred to several times in ESSA, requiring states to adhere to the principles of UDL in preparing state plans, designing assessments, developing plans for comprehensive literacy instruction, requesting student support and academic enrichment grants, and helping school districts use technology to support the learning needs of students with disabilities and English-language learners (National UDL Taskforce, 2016). As an instructional framework, UDL “supports flexible ways for educators to teach lessons, as well as multiple ways for students to demonstrate what they know” (Samuels, 2016a). A set of three principles, which fosters multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement, lies at the center of the UDL framework, and the goal is to provide universally accessible learning materials and environments that reduce barriers and support learning rather than developing accommodations after curriculum, instruction, and assessments have been implemented (Brownell et al., 2012). Access to education can be enhanced, for example, through the use of instructional videos with scripts and closed-captioning; design elements, such as images or interactive graphics, to supplement or replace text-based information; and graphic organizers to illustrate main points and relationships (National Center on Universal Design for Learning, 2014). Consequently, UDL can reduce the need for individual accommodations for students with disabilities while enhancing learning opportunities for all students (Quaglia, 2015). Recent legislative interest in parent engagement and in frameworks, such as MTSS and UDL that facilitate the differentiation of instruction for a variety of learners, have spurred school ­reforms to make variability in learning less the exception than the norm in general education classes. Students with disabilities, however, are at the margins of educational achievement, and the initiatives most recently mentioned in ESSA do not obliterate the need for the disability-specific protections of the ADA and Section 504 or the assurance of specially designed instruction ensured by the IDEA. They do, however, blur the lines between special education and general education.

68

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts

Although no substitute for FAPE, they demonstrate that designing curriculum, instruction, and assessments “that are intended to provide greater access to learners who are in the margins also benefits many other learners” (Quaglia, 2015, p. 1).

Implications for Special Education and Arts Education Throughout the history of special education, parents have been tireless change agents in proving that their children can learn and advancing reforms, supporting their right to an education. The special education to which parents continue to aspire for their children includes the assurance of FAPE in the LRE, with the use of state-of-the-art instructional practices. It also includes expectations for collaborative and trusting partnerships with educators in ethical communities, where parents and their children are treated with dignity and respect (Turnbull & Turnbull, 2015).

Building Collaborative and Trusting Partnerships In preparing arts educators to create learning environments where the contributions of all students are valued, Kraft and Keifer-Boyd (2013) encouraged the adoption of a communitarian perspective “that cultivates ownership and commitment through decision-making, as well as mutual respect for individual differences” (p. x). In a community that does not value sameness, each person, despite disabilities, is considered to have strengths. Sustained interaction with others in an interdependent community “is promoted through communicative art expression in which each learns to identify strengths in the others.... The different strengths, once identified, can be skillfully encouraged so that individual strengths contribute to the group’s goals” (p. xi). In an ethical learning community, stakeholders work together so that each student has the opportunity to participate and to contribute to the good of the whole. Productive partnerships between parents and professionals have always been central to the IDEA (Crockett, 2002), and creating learning environments “characterized by empathy, compassion, and dignity” (Turnbull & Turnbull, 2015, p. 54) has always meant taking action in driving change forward toward humanity and equality in schools and communities.

Driving Change toward Dignity for All For many years, students with disabilities have been underserved in arts education due to various reasons, including enrollment in additional academic instruction in lieu of classes in the arts (­Darrow, 2016; Jellison, 2015). As a consequence, too many students have been denied access to an area of the general curriculum that allows them to develop artistic literacy and abilities in music, theater, dance, or the visual and media arts. Students with disabilities have also had limited opportunities to interact by making art with peers or “to experience autonomy, demonstrate competence, and make a variety of choices and decisions” (Jellison, 2015, p. 56) about the role of the arts in their lives. In taking action to drive change that reduces inadvertent discrimination, both arts educators and special educators might mutually reflect on their own teaching in light of education policies and research related to teaching students with disabilities. Reflection might start with consideration of how the quality of life for students is enhanced through (a) culturally normative experiences in and through the arts, (b) the potential for positive and reciprocal interactions with same-aged peers in studios and ensembles, (c) the development of self-determination in acting on their own artistic preferences, and (d) the collaborative design and implementation of individualized arts education programs for special education students ( Jellison, 2015). From the perspective of scholar Judith Jellison (2015), whose research addresses teaching and learning at the intersection of music and special education, the concepts of quality of life, social

69

Jean B. Crockett

learning, personal growth, and collaborative practice comprise governing principles for improving the artistic lives of students with disabilities. These principles also align with the aspirations of parents, who encourage schools to adopt cultures that envision high expectations for their children with disabilities and enhance their positive contributions, build on their strengths and provide them with choices, and expand their relationships and prepare them for full citizenship as valued members of society (Turnbull, Turnbull, & Wehmeyer, 2010).

Conclusion People with disabilities now represent 20 percent of the American population, and their representation in various media and inclusion in all aspects of life reflect public policies that recognize disability as a natural part of the human experience. These policies are grounded in principles that advance the equal opportunity of children and youth with disabilities to live independently, be economically self-sufficient, pursue further education after high school, and participate fully in the lives of their communities (Silverstein, 2000). Students with disabilities, both those who receive special education and those who only receive accommodations under Section 504, now represent close to 10 percent of students enrolled in American public schools (US Department of Education, 2016). Their representation among the nation’s student body is due in large part to the powerful advocacy of parents, who not only secured their children’s right to receive an appropriate public education but who continue to press for schools that recognize and respond to the variability of learners with empathy, compassion, and dignity (Turnbull & Turnbull, 2015). Arts educators who understand the laws that govern the education of students with disabilities can extend this vision by collaborating closely with parents and other professionals in making ­substantive contributions to their students’ equitable educations and qualities of life.

References Abramo, J. (2012). Disability in the classroom: Current trends and impacts on music education. Music Educators Journal, 99(1), 39–45. doi:10.1177/0027432112448824 Americans with Disabilities Act. (1990). 42 U.S.C. §12101 et seq. Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments. (2008), 112 Stat. 3553. Bateman, B. D., & Linden, M. A. (2012). Better IEPS: How to develop legally correct and educationally appropriate programs. Verona, WI: Attainment Company. Brownell, M. T., Smith, S. J., Crockett, J. B., & Griffin, C. C. (2012). Inclusive instruction: Evidence-based practices for teaching students with disabilities. New York, NY: Guilford. Crockett, J. B. (2002). Special education’s role in preparing responsive leaders for inclusive schools. Remedial and Special Education, 23, 157–168. Crockett, J. B. (in press). Legal aspects of teaching music students with disabilities. Music Educators Journal. Crockett, J. B., & Kauffman, J. M. (1999). The Least Restrictive Environment: Its origins and interpretations in special education. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Crockett, J. B., & Yell, M. M. (2017). IEPs, Least Restrictive Environment, and placement. In J. R. Decker, M. M. Lewis, E. A. Shaver, A. E. Blankenship, & M. A. Paige (Eds.), The principal’s legal handbook (6th ed), (pp. B55–B88). Dayton, OH: Education Law Association. Darling-Hammond, L., Bae, S., Cook-Harvey, C. M., Lam, L., Mercer, C., Podolsky, A., & Leisy S­ tosich, E. (2016). Pathways to new accountability through the Every Student Succeeds Act. Palo Alto: Learning ­Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://learningpolicyinstitute.org/our-work/publications-resources/ pathways-new-accountability-every-student-succeeds-act Darrow, A. A. (2016). The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): What it means for students with disabilities and music educators. General Music Today, 1–4. doi:10.1177/1048371316658327 Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. Genzlinger, N. (2017). A wheelchair on Broadway isn’t exploitation. It’s progress. New York Times, Theater, March 24. Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2017/03/24/theater/a-wheelchair-on-broadway-isntexploitation-its-progress.html?_r=0

70

Legal Aspects of Teaching in the Arts Hammel, A. M. (2016). Twice exceptional. In D. V. Blair, & K. A. McCord (Eds.), Exceptional music pedagogy for children with exceptionalities: Instructional perspectives (pp. 16–38). New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hammel, A. M., & Hourigan, R. M. (2011a). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label free approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hammel, A. M., & Hourigan, R. M. (2011b). The fundamentals of special education policy: Implications for music teachers and music teacher education. Arts Education Policy Review, 112, 174–179. doi:10.1080/ 10632913.2011.592463 Henderson, A. T. (2016). Quick brief on family engagement in Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) of 2015. National Education Association. Retrieved from http://ra.nea.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/FCEin-ESSA-in-Brief.pdf Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. §1401 et. seq. (2004). Hill, E., & Goldstein, D. (2015). The ADA, disability, and identity. JAMA, 313(22), 2227–2228. doi:10.1001/ jama.2015.4936 Hulett, K. E. (2009). Legal aspects of special education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (2004). 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Regulations. (2006). 34 C.F.R. § 300 et seq. Jellison, J. A. (2015). Including everyone: Creating music classrooms where all children learn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Kauffman, J. M., & Hallahan, D. P. (2005). Special education: What it is and why we need it. Boston, MA: ­A llyn & Bacon. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the Least Restrictive Environment. Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association. National Association for Music Education. (2016). The Every Student Succeeds Act: What it is, what it means, and what’s next. Retrieved from www.nafme.org/wp-content/files/2015/11/ESSA-In-Plain-English FINAL-2-2016.pdf National Association of School Psychologists. (2017). ESSA and Multitiered Systems of Support for decision-makers. Retrieved from www.nasponline.org/research-and-policy/current-law-and-policypr ior ities/policy-pr ior ities/the-ever y-student-succeeds-act/essa-implementation-resources/ essa-and-mtss-for-decision-makers National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2014). UDL guidelines- -Version 2.0: Examples and resources. Retrieved from www.udlcenter.org/implementation/examples National UDL Taskforce. (2016). UDL in the Every Student Succeeds Act. Retrieved from www.udlcenter.org/ advocacy/resources Quaglia, B. W. (2015). Planning for student variability: Universal Design for Learning in the music theory classroom and curriculum. Music Theory Online, 21(1), 1–21. Samuels, C. A. (2016a). ESSA spotlights strategy to reach diverse learners. Education Week, 35(22), 24. Samuels, C. A. (2016b). Special education community gears up for advocacy. Education Week, 35(15), 21. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. § 794 et seq. Silverstein, R. (2000). Emerging disability policy framework: A guidepost for analyzing public policy. 85 Iowa Law Review, 1691. Retrieved March 20, 2014 from http://disability.law.uiowa.edu/Lhpdc/­ lawdisabpolicy/index.html Turnbull, R. H., III, Stowe, M. J., & Huerta, N. E. (2007). Free Appropriate Public Education: The law and children with disabilities. Denver, CO: Love Publishing. Turnbull, R., & Turnbull, A. (2015). Looking backward and framing the future for parents’ aspirations for their children with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36(1), 52–57. Turnbull, R., Turnbull, A., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2010). Exceptional lives: Special education in today’s schools (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Umpstead, R., Decker, J. R., Brady, K. P., Schimmel, D., & Militello, M. (2015). How to prevent special education litigation: Eight legal lesson plans. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. United States Department of Education. (2016). Thirty-eighth annual report to Congress on the implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/about/reports/annual/ osep/2016/parts-b-c/38th-arc-for-idea.pdf Weiss, M. P., Pellegrino, A., & Brigham, F. J. (2017). Practicing collaboration in teacher preparation: Effects of learning by doing together. Teacher Education and Special Education, 40(1), 65–76. Yell, M. L. (2016). The law and special education. Boston, MA: Pearson. Zirkel, P. A., & Weathers, J. M. (2016). K-12 students eligible solely under Section 504: Updated national incidence data. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 22(2) 67–75. doi:10.1177/1044207315626115

71

6 Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching Students with and at Risk for Developing Disabilities Bryan G. Cook, Jamie Simpson-Steele, and Lysandra H. Cook

Contemporary classrooms are more diverse than ever and typically include students with and at risk for developing disabilities. Because of their unique learning needs, these students present ­d istinct challenges that can be addressed by educators, including teachers in the arts, working collaboratively to provide effective instruction. In this chapter, we propose that engaging in the process of evidence-based practice can guide the selection and delivery of instruction that meets the needs of learners with and at risk for developing disabilities, including when teaching in arts settings and when integrating the arts into academic instruction. In the field of special education, evidence-based practice involves the consideration of empirical evidence when making instructional decisions. In this chapter, we consider two types or levels of evidence-based practice. First, evidence-based practice can refer to a process of instructional decision-making that involves (a) assessing the needs of learners; (b) selecting an instructional practice that meets learners’ needs and is shown to be effective by sound research evidence; (c) implementing the selected practice appropriately; (d) formatively assessing the impact of the practice on learner outcomes; and (e) continuing, adapting, or discontinuing the practice as indicated by the assessment data (Spencer, Detrich, & Slocum, 2012; Torres, Farley, & Cook, 2012). ­Evidence-based practices, or EBPs, can also refer to the instructional techniques, supported by meaningful research evidence as being effective for a population of learners, that are implemented within the larger process of evidence-based practice. To avoid confusion, in this chapter, we refer to (a) specific instructional practices supported by research as being effective as EBPs and (b) the process of instructional decision-making that considers research evidence as evidence-based practice. In the following sections, we describe the need for both evidence-based practice and EBPs in teaching special needs learners, define and make recommendations for engaging in evidence-based practice, provide resources for identifying EBPs for learners with disabilities, and offer vignettes about educators engaging in evidence-based practice for students with disabilities as they integrate the arts into their academic instruction.

The Need for Evidence-Based Practice and EBPs Evidence-based practice “has become one of the most influential policy constructs in the field of special education” (Hudson et al., 2016, p. 34). In addition to being supported in educational

72

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

legislation (e.g. Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015; Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004), evidence-based reforms are important because (a) scientific research is the most reliable method to identify effective instructional practices, (b) a gap exists between research and practice that impedes the learning of students with disabilities, and (c) informing instructional decisions with research evidence is especially critical for learners with disabilities.

The Power of Science to Determine What Works As Crockett (2004) surmised, “Science is the best trick we know for solving educational problems” (p. 189). As opposed to other ways of knowing (e.g. authority, tradition, personal experience), science has at least two advantages for reliably determining what works in education: (a) the design of experimental studies and (b) the self-correction mechanism inherent in the scientific process. Experimental research is uniquely designed to determine whether a practice causes improved learner outcomes. For example, a teacher relying on personal experience might come to believe that an instructional technique works because she perceived an increase in her students’ performance after beginning to use the practice. However, it is possible that the practice worked only for some students, something else actually caused the performance gains (e.g. a new co-teacher, introduction of new technological resources), or students were going to make those gains in performance regardless of whether the instructional practice was used. Experimental research controls for these and other alternative explanations for improved student performance by, for instance, implementing the practice with one group of randomly selected learners (the experimental group) and not using it with another group of randomly selected learners (the control group). If the experiences of the two groups are the same except for the instructional practice, then any observed differences in performance change can be logically attributed to the practice (see B. G. Cook & Cook, in press; L. Cook, Cook, Landrum, & Tankersley, 2008). Science is far from perfect; scientific research is, after all, conducted by people who sometimes imbue studies with their own biases, resulting in invalid findings (Cook, 2014). Fortunately, the iterative process of science has a self-correction mechanism (Alberts et al., 2015). Researchers refine and expand the knowledge base to more closely approximate the truth over time by conducting replication studies that re-examine the findings of previously conducted research (­Travers, Cook, Therrien, & Coyne, 2016). In this way, over time, invalid findings are recognized as such because they stand in contrast to the results of the majority of other studies conducted. This self-correcting mechanism of science was at play in recent years as researchers conducted multiple studies to disprove initial (and apparently falsified) research, showing an association between vaccinations and autism (see Godlee, Smith, & Marcovitch, 2011). Thus, using research evidence derived from multiple experimental studies is the most reliable approach for identifying generally effective practices and should be used to inform and improve practice.

The Research-to-Practice Gap In the field of special education, the long-standing research-to-practice gap (Cook, Smith, & Tankersley, 2012) is characterized by a disconnect between research knowledge and ­r ealworld practice. Considerable evidence suggests that many educators commonly use some ­u nfounded and ineffective practices and largely eschew many empirically validated practices (e.g. Boardman, Arguelles, Vaughn, Hughes, & Klingner, 2005; Burns & Ysseldyke, 2009; Carter, ­S tephenson, & Strnadová, 2011; Gable, Tonelson, Sheth, Wilson, & Park, 2012). For ­example, teacher praise, a seemingly straightforward practice with sound research support, is implemented at low rates (see Lewis, Hudson, Richter, & Johnson, 2004 for a review). Yet

73

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

instructional approaches, such as designing instruction to match students’ learning styles, are commonly implemented, despite a lack of empirical support (Landrum & McDuffie, 2010). Indeed, it appears that fads supported by pseudoscience are commonplace in teaching students with d­ isabilities (Foxx & Mulick, 2016; Kavale & Mostert, 2004; Travers, Ayres, & Simpson, 2016). Simply stated, some practices are demonstrably more effective than others; if educators are using less effective practices in lieu of more effective practices, learner outcomes suffer accordingly (Cook et al., 2012). As such, one way to increase student performance is to bridge the ­research-to-practice gap by increasing the degree to which practices shown by scientific research to be highly effective are adopted, sustained, and implemented appropriately (i.e. evidence-based practice). Although bridging the research-to-practice gap is only one factor involved in increasing learning outcomes, unlike many other factors that shape student performance (e.g. genetics, healthcare, family support), educators have considerable control over which instructional practices they use in their classrooms.

The Learning Needs of Students with Disabilities All types of learners will profit, in terms of improved educational outcomes, from bridging the research-to-practice gap and the broad implementation of evidence-based practice. However, most nondisabled students can achieve satisfactory outcomes when provided with typical instruction. In contrast, students with disabilities have unique learning needs and characteristics that adversely affect their performance (Hallahan, Kauffman, & Pullen, 2015), resulting in unsatisfactory performance, given typical instruction. Because of their learning needs, students with disabilities require the application of highly effective instruction to succeed (Vaughn & Dammann, 2001). For example, many learners with disabilities experience problems with executive function: mental processes used for planning, organizing, strategizing, and paying attention (Meltzer, 2011; National Center for Learning Disabilities, 2013). Many EBPs, such as self-regulated strategy development (SRSD), explicitly teach strategies that support learners in areas related to executive function (Graham, Harris, & Olinghouse, 2011). Thus, whereas implementation of evidence-based practice can benefit all learners, it is essential to the success of learners with disabilities because of their distinctive learning needs.

Evidence-Based Practice and EBPs Despite the potential of evidence-based reforms to enhance educational opportunities and outcomes, the devil of evidence-based practice lies in the details (Odom et al., 2005). B. G. Cook and Cook (2013) noted that considerable misunderstanding exists regarding terminology related to evidence-based practice, which impedes educators’ understanding and implementation of these reforms. In this section, we describe what two key terms—evidence-based practice and EBPs— mean, what they do not mean, and how they differ.

Evidence-Based Practice Evidence-based practice was popularized in the field of medicine, sometimes referred to as ­evidence-based medicine, as a broad term referring to one’s professional practice. Sackett, Straus, Richardson, Rosenberg, and Haynes (2000) described evidence-based practice in ­medicine as “the integration of best research evidence with clinical expertise and patient values” (p. 1). Thus, evidence-based practice balances the role of research evidence with

74

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

the expertise of the practitioner and the values and goals of consumers when selecting and ­delivering treatment. Based on a framework proposed by Spencer et al. (2012), we describe a multi-step process of evidence-based practice for teaching students with and at risk for developing disabilities that integrates (a) research evidence, (b) educators’ expertise and professional wisdom, and (c) the values and preferences of at-risk learners and their families (see also Torres et al., 2012; see ­Figure 6.1). The first step is selecting a treatment or practice to use. Initially, a practical question must be specified (e.g. using an academic example, what practice should I use to increase the low reading fluency of a third grader with learning disabilities?). The problem addressed by the practical question should be based on reliable data (e.g. the number of words Johnny reads correctly per minute is well below grade-level norms and not improving). The teacher must then identify a practice that (a) is supported as effective by meaningful research evidence for the targeted outcome area (e.g. reading fluency) and learner population (e.g. elementary students with learning disabilities), and (b) aligns with contextual variables (e.g. the teacher is able to implement the practice, given available resources and time) and learner values (e.g. the learner and the family find the practice acceptable). The teacher then uses her professional expertise to adapt the practice to best fit the local context and meet the unique learning characteristics of individual learners but still implement the critical elements of the practices with fidelity (i.e. as designed). Although adapting practices can be critical for teachers to embrace their use and to meet the individualized needs of learners, if essential aspects of practices are changed, then they may no longer be effective (see Leko, 2015, for guidelines for adapting EBPs while maintaining the fidelity of essential aspects). Finally, ongoing, formative assessment should be conducted to reliably determine the impact of the new practice on learner outcomes to inform future instruction. For example, inadequate progress suggests the need to ensure that the essential components of the practice are being implemented with fidelity; adapt the practice to meet the learner’s needs; or discontinue the practice if student performance fails to improve, despite appropriate implementation.

1.

Select a practice a.

Specify a practical question

b.

Identify practice that addresses the practical question that (a) is supported as effective by meaningful research evidence and (b) aligns with contextual variables and learner values

2.

Use professional expertise to implement selected practice appropriately a.

Adapt to fit local context and meet learning characteristics of learners

b.

Implement the critical elements with fidelity

3.

Formative assess impact of the new practice

4.

Inform future use of practice with results of formative assessment

Figure 6.1  Summary of Steps for Implementing Evidence-Based Practice in Education

75

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

Evidence-based practice, then, is not just selecting practices shown by research to work. Evidence-based practice also involves elements of effective teaching and data-based d­ ecisionmaking when selecting, implementing, and evaluating instructional practices. As such, ­evidence-based practice presents challenges on multiple levels. It entails integrating the science (evidence from research studies) and the art of teaching (e.g. professional expertise when selecting and adapting practices). Adapting selected practices so that they fit the learner and context without fundamentally changing the practice (Leko, 2015) presents additional challenges. Regularly collecting reliable formative assessment data to evaluate the impact of the practice and using that data to guide future instruction is also demanding (see Hosp, Hosp, & Howell, 2016, for guidance in using curriculum-based measurement for this purpose). It should also be recognized that determining which practices are supported as effective by the best available evidence is not always clear. To support special educators in clarifying which practices really work, professional organizations and scholars have identified a number of EBPs shown to be effective for different groups of learners with disabilities by bodies of sound research.

EBPs Although the process of evidence-based practice involves multiple steps, the aspect that has received the most attention is identifying practices supported by research as reliably improving student outcomes (i.e. EBPs). Identifying EBPs on their own can be difficult for most educators, who do not typically have (a) advanced training in research or (b) the time to search for, read, and critically analyze bodies of research studies on the instructional practices they are considering. To address this issue, professional organizations and groups of scholars have proposed and applied standards to classify the degree to which research supports instructional practices as effective. Rather than searching and evaluating the research on their own, educators can use reviews that systematically apply these EBP standards to determine which practices are supported by meaningful research as effective for learners with different disabilities. Multiple standards have been developed for classifying the effectiveness of instructional practices for use with students with and without disabilities, based on existing research (e.g. Council for Exceptional Children [CEC], 2014; Gersten et al., 2005; Horner et al., 2005; National Autism Center, 2015; What Works Clearinghouse [WWC], 2014). For example, Horner et al.’s (2005) standards classified practices as EBPs or not based on the findings of high-quality single-case design studies. In contrast, CEC (2014) uses multiple classifications—evidence-based practice, potentially evidence-based practice, mixed evidence, insufficient evidence, and negative effects—to categorize the degree to which group experimental and single-case research studies support a practice’s effectiveness. Although these EBP standards differ in many ways, they all evaluate the research design, quantity, quality, and effects of research studies conducted on a practice to classify the evidence base of a practice and identify EBPs. To identify EBPs, all of the EBP standards referenced in the previous paragraph consider only experimental research that is designed to examine whether a practice causes improved learning outcomes. As such, group experiments (randomized controlled trials, group quasi-experiments) and/or single-case design studies are considered when determining whether a practice is an EBP, but qualitative, descriptive (e.g. surveys, observational studies), and correlational research are not (B. G. Cook, Tankersley, Cook, & Landrum, 2008). Additionally, because any given study may be flawed and biased, these standards require that EBPs be supported as effective by multiple studies. For example, Horner et al. (2005) required that EBPs be supported as being effective by at least five single-case design studies. Because low-quality research is more likely to produce invalid findings, these EBP standards only consider studies that meet a number of quality indicators when identifying EBPs. Finally, EBP standards typically include criteria for establishing that EBPs have meaningfully positive effects—as opposed to small, no, or negative effects—on learner outcomes. Because EBPs have been shown by multiple, high-quality, experimental studies to have 76

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

meaningfully positive effects on student performance, educators can feel confident that they are generally effective and should be prioritized for use within the process of evidence-based practice. A number of caveats should be remembered when considering EBPs. Although EBPs have been shown by sound research to be generally effective, it is important to recognize that nothing is effective for everyone. Some students will fail to respond to any practice, even when it is implemented appropriately (which is why it is important to formatively assess the impact of EBPs on individual learners). Alternatively, just because a practice is not identified as an EBP does not necessarily mean that it is ineffective. Avoiding practices shown by multiple, high-quality, experimental studies to have no or negative effects on learner outcomes is advisable. However, just because a practice is not found on a list of EBPs does not mean that it has been shown to be ineffective. A practice may not be classified as an EBP because sufficient high-quality, experimental research has not been conducted. Additional research may result in the practice’s meeting standards for being identified as an EBP. It is also important to recognize that although many EBPs have been identified, few or no EBPs have been identified in some outcome areas for certain learner populations. Therefore, when a learner fails to respond to identified EBPs in an area or when an EBP has not yet been identified in an area, ­educators should implement “promising practices” supported by some research (but not enough to be identified as an EBP; see B. G. Cook et al., 2014). Finally, identifying EBPs is insufficient for broadly improving outcomes for learners with disabilities; EBPs need to be selected, implemented, and ­evaluated appropriately as part of evidence-based practice to result in improved learner outcomes. In summary, EBPs and promising practices should be selected and implemented within the framework of evidence-based practice. However, (a) many educators do not know where to find these practices, and (b) practices are sometimes promoted as EBPs when they are actually not. In the next section, we review EBPs and promising practices in special education identified by trustworthy sources.

EBPs and Promising Practices from Trustworthy Sources In this section, we describe EBPs and promising practices (i.e. supported as effective by research but not formally identified as EBPs) for teaching students with and at risk for developing disabilities as identified by trustworthy sources. Although we review practices from a number of sources that we, and our colleagues, have found helpful, this is not an exhaustive review of EBPs and promising practices in special education. Furthermore, we want to re-emphasize the importance of recognizing that a list of EBPs and promising practices is merely a starting point for improving learner outcomes by engaging in the broader process of evidence-based practice.

Trustworthy EBPs Several organizations have systematically reviewed research and applied standards to identify EBPs in special education. For example, the WWC (n.d.) has applied rigorous standards to research on practices and programs for students with learning disabilities, emotional and/or behavioral disorders, and young children with disabilities, identifying these practices as having positive effects (their highest classification for practices): • • •

Coping Power (for children with emotional and/or behavioral disorders in the area of external behavior [e.g. aggressive and acting out behavior]), First Steps to Success (for children with emotional and/or behavioral disorders in the area of external behavior), Social skills training (for young children with disabilities in the area of social-emotional development).

Two different organizations have identified EBPs for learners with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The National Autism Center (2015) has identified 14 established interventions (i.e. 77

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

established as effective by multiple, high-quality, experimental research studies) for improving skills and outcomes for individuals with ASD under 22 years of age (see Figure 6.2). The National Professional Development Center on ASD (n.d.) also reviewed the research literature to identify EBPs for learners with ASD. As shown in Figure 6.3, the center identified 27 EBPs for individuals with ASD, ranging from birth to 22 years (see Wong et al., 2014). Although there is some overlap between the two sets of EBPs for learners with ASD, the EBPs vary due to differences in how practices are defined and the different standards used by the two organizations. •

Behavioral interventions: Changing the environment before (i.e., antecedent interventions, such as prompting) or after (e.g., consequent interventions, such as reinforcement) a target behavior to increase or decrease its occurrence.

•

Cognitive behavioral intervention package: Manualized interventions employing the principles of cognitive behavioral therapy that should be implemented by a professional with training in this area.

•

Comprehensive behavioral treatment for young children: Intensive intervention (e.g., 25-40 hours/week) for young children employing principles of applied behavior analysis.

•

Language training (production): Strategies (e.g., modeling, prompting, reinforcement, using music) to elicit verbal communication.

•

Modeling: Demonstration of correct performance of a target behavior by a live or video model.

•

Naturalistic teaching strategies: Child-directed strategies using materials and activities in naturally occurring environments (e.g., home, community, school).

•

Parent training package: Training parents to provide interventions promoting improved child outcomes.

•

Peer training package: Interventions that involve training peers to initiate and respond to social interactions.

•

Pivotal Response Treatment®: Teaches children pivotal skills (e.g., motivation, self-initiation, self-management, responding to cues) in natural environments.

•

Schedules: Identifying and ordering activities to be completed within a

timeframe. •

Scripting: Using verbal or written scripts as a model for responding to specific situations.

Figure 6.2  National Autism Center’s (2015) Established Practices

78

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

•

Self-management: Teaching individuals to regulate their own behavior; may involve self-monitoring, self-evaluation, and self-reinforcement.

•

Social skills package: Teaching social skills (e.g., turn-taking in conversations, initiating interactions) using strategies such as modeling, reinforcement, and prompting.

•

Story-based interventions: Teaching skills by reading stories that describe situations in which the skills occur (e.g., Social Stories®).

Figure 6.2  (Continued)

•

Antecedent-based interventions: Arranging the environment before a behavior occurs to increase or decrease the behavior’s occurrence

•

Cognitive behavioral intervention: Instruction on managing one’s cognitive processes in order to change behavior.

•

Differential reinforcement of alternative, incompatible, or other behavior: Reinforcing other behaviors to reduce the occurrence of an undesirable behavior.

•

Discrete trial teaching: Typically one-to-one instruction involving repeated trials of instruction.

•

Exercise: Using physical exertion to increase or decrease behavior.

•

Extinction: Withdrawing or removing reinforcers to reduce undesired behavior.

•

Functional behavior assessment: Systematically collecting data to identify the function of a behavior.

•

Functional communication training: Replacing an undesirable communicative behavior with another behavior that serves the same function.

•

Modeling: Demonstrating a desirable behavior to increase its occurrence through imitation.

•

Naturalistic intervention: Intervention strategies occurring in the learner’s natural environment.

•

Parent-implemented intervention: Parents are trained to provide interventions.

Figure 6.3  National Professional Development Center on ASD’s EBPs Adapted from Wong et al. (2014). Copyright 2014 by S. L. Odom. Adapted with permission.

79

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

•

Peer-mediated instruction and intervention: Typically developing peers are trained to interact with or support learners with ASD.

•

Picture Exchange Communication System: Learners with ASD are trained to communicate by exchanging pictures.

•

Pivotal Response Training: Interventions target pivotal skills (e.g., motivation, self-management) in the natural environment guided by learners’ interests.

•

Prompting: Verbal, physical, or gestural prompts delivered before a behavior to change its occurrence.

•

Reinforcement: Changing the environment after a behavior occurs to increase its occurrence.

•

Response interruption/Redirection: Diverting one’s attention away from an undesirable behavior to reduce its occurrence.

•

Scripting: Using a script to practice a behavior before using it in the natural environment.

•

Self-management: Learners instructed to self-monitor, self-record, and selfreward a desired behavior.

•

Social narratives: Short narratives describing a social situation and desired behavior.

•

Social skills training: Explicit instruction in appropriate social interactions.

•

Structured Play Group: Structured activities in small groups with an adult supporting appropriate behaviors.

•

Task analysis: Breaking down a skill or behavior into small steps and teaching those steps.

•

Technology-aided instruction and intervention: Instruction and interventions prominently featuring technology.

•

Time delay: Providing a delay between the opportunity to exhibit a behavior and prompting.

•

Video modeling: Modeling using a video example of the desired behavior.

•

Visual support: Visual displays (e.g., pictures, schedules) that supports behavior change.

Figure 6.3  (Continued)

80

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

The National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (n.d.) has identified EBPs for improving outcomes for secondary students with disabilities related to transition. EBPs are noted below, with specific outcome area(s) for which the practices have been shown by research to be effective noted in parentheses: • • • • • • •

Constant time delay (food preparation and cooking skills), Published curricula (student involvement in the Individualized Education Program (IEP), Response prompting (food preparation and cooking skills), Response prompting (home maintenance skills), Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction (goal attainment), Simulations (purchasing skills), System of least-to-most prompts (functional life skills).

Finally, in addition to EBPs’ being identified by organizations and described on websites, a number of researchers have systematically applied standards to research bases to identify EBPs for students with and at risk for developing disabilities and published their findings in peer-reviewed journals. In Table 6.1, we note a number of EBPs identified for use with students with and at risk for developing disabilities in published reviews. Although educators can trust that these EBPs are supported as being effective by trustworthy bodies of research, they should, at times, also consider implementing promising practices supported as effective by some meaningful research (e.g. when no relevant EBPs have been identified, when identified EBPs have proven ineffective for a learner).

Promising Practices In this section, we provide an overview of sources that identify promising practices, which are supported by meaningful research as improving learner outcomes but are not identified as EBPs. Promising practices might not be identified as EBPs because (a) research supporting the practice’s effectiveness exists but does not meet rigorous EBP standards; or (b) a review or meta-analysis shows that the practice is supported by research as being effective, but the authors did not apply EBP standards to determine if the practice is an EBP.

EBP Reviews In addition to identifying EBPs, many sets of EBP standards are designed to identify practices that are supported as being effective by research but do not meet the rigorous criteria required for an EBP designation. For example, the WWC (n.d.) has identified 22 practices as having potentially positive effects for students and youth with disabilities. Two of the instructional programs determined to have potentially positive effects are (a) Peer Assisted Learning Strategies (on both reading fluency and reading comprehension for students with learning disabilities) and (b) The Incredible Years (on both external behavior [e.g. aggressive and acting out behavior] and social outcomes for children with and at risk for an emotional disturbance). For learners with ASD, the National Autism Center (2015) identified 18 emerging interventions; augmentative and alternative communication devices, exercise, imitation-based intervention, the Picture Exchange Communication System, and sign instruction are among the emerging interventions that are supported by at least one study as being effective. The National Professional Development Center on ASD identified 24 practices as having some empirical support (but insufficient support to be identified as an EBP; Wong et al., 2014). Among the practices with some empirical support for this population are behavioral momentum intervention, Direct Instruction, music therapy, and reciprocal imitation

81

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook Table 6.1  E BPs Identified in Reviews Published in Professional Journals Authors

EBP

Population and Outcome Area

Baker, Chard, KetterlinGeller, Apichatabutra, and Doabler (2009) Bellini and Akullian (2007)

Self-regulated strategy development 2,3

Writing for students with and at risk for developing learning disabilities

Video modeling and video self-modeling3

Behavioral functioning, socialcommunication skills, or functional skills for children and youth with ASD Picture and sight word recognition for students with severe developmental disabilities Mathematics for students with significant cognitive disabilities

Browder, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Spooner, Mims, and Baker (2009) Browder, Spooner, Ahlgrim-Delzell, Harris, and Wakeman (2008) Camargo et al. (2014)

Time delay3

Systematic instruction 3

Behavioral social skills interventions3 de Bruin, Deppeler, Moore, Antecedent-, video-, and Diamond (2013) and consequence-based interventions4 Hudson, Browder, and Embedded trial Wood (2013) instruction, using constant time delay3 Jitendra, Burgess, and Cognitive strategy Gajria (2011) instruction 2 Knight, Sartini, and Visual activity schedules3 Spriggs (2015) Losinski, Cuenca-Carlino, Self-regulated strategy Zablocki, and Teagarden development1 (2014) Maggin, Chafouleas, Token economies4 Goddard, and Johnson (2011) Spooner, Knight, Systematic instruction 3 Browder, Jimenez, and DiBiase (2011) Spooner, Knight, Browder, – Task analytic and Smith (2012) instruction with systematic prompting and feedback 3 – Use of discrete responses3 – Time delay3 Sreckovic, Common, Self-regulated strategy Knowles, & Lane (2014) development 3 Wang and Spillane (2009) Video-modeling3   Used CEC’s (2014) standards.   Used Gersten et al.’s (2005) standards. 3   Used Horner et al.’s (2005) standards. 4   Used Kratochwill et al.’s (2013) standards. 1 2

82

Social interaction skills for children with ASD in inclusive settings Skills or behaviors of adolescents and young adults with ASD in public schools Academic content for students with moderate and severe disabilities in general education Expository text comprehension for students with learning disabilities Skills for individuals with ASDs Writing for students with and at risk for emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) Students with challenging behaviors for students with challenging behaviors Science content for students with severe development disabilities Academic content (literacy, math, and science) for students with severe development disabilities

Writing for students with EBD Social skills for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

training. In addition to EBPs, the National Technical Assistance Center on Transition (n.d.) also identifies (a) research-based practices and (b) promising practices for secondary students with disabilities, based on their research support. Check and Connect (for progressing in school), Self Advocacy Strategy (for student involvement in IEP meetings), and mnemonics (for academic skills) are examples of research-based practices; Job Corps (for school completion) and computer-assisted instruction (for teaching participation in the IEP process) are examples of promising practices. EBP reviews published in professional journals, which find meaningful research support for a practice but not enough to meet rigorous criteria for the practice’s being identified as an EBP, are an additional source of promising practices. For instance, Wood, Oakes, Fettig, and Lane (2015) applied CEC’s (2014) EBP standards to the research on Umbreit, Ferro, Liaupsin, and Lane’s (2007) approach to developing functional assessment-based interventions (i.e. a systematic approach for determining the function of a behavior, which serves as a basis for an intervention) for young students with or at risk for developing disabilities. The authors found that although multiple single-case studies supported the practice as effective for improving challenging behaviors, because only 20 total participants participated in the studies, the practice was classified as potentially evidence based. Similarly, S. C. Cook, Cook, and Cook’s (2017) review resulted in Classwide Peer Tutoring’s being identified as a potentially evidence-based practice for students with high-incidence disabilities in the area of academic outcomes.

Practice Reviews In addition to publishing the results of EBP reviews using their criteria, the WWC (n.d.) has published a series of practice reviews in which distinguished scholars review the research in an outcome area and make research-based recommendations for practice. As of August 27, 2016, 20 practices guides have been made available on the WWC website, many of which focus on learners with and at risk for developing disabilities. For example, two of the practice guides focus on assisting struggling readers in the primary grades (Gersten, Compton, et al., 2009) and assisting students struggling in mathematics in elementary and middle schools (Gersten, Beckmann, et al., 2009). Each of the practice guides contains a number of specific recommendations that are supported by research as being effective for improving targeted outcomes. In the practice guide on organizing instruction and study to improve learning (Pashler et al., 2007), for instance, the two recommendations with the strongest research support are using (a) quizzes to re-expose students to key content and (b) deep explanatory questions.

Current Practice Alerts Two CEC divisions, the Division for Learning Disabilities and the Division for Research, collaboratively produce Current Practice Alerts that describe instructional practices and their effectiveness for students with learning disabilities. Practices are rated by experts in the field as either Go For It, indicating that the practice is effective based on strong research support, or Use Caution, indicating that the research does not support the practice as effective (e.g. because insufficient research has been conducted or because research indicates that the practice has small, mixed, no, or negative effects). As of August 27, 2016, 18 practices have been identified as Go For It at http:// teachingld.org/alerts, including instructional approaches, such as formative evaluation, mnemonic ­instruction, graphic organizers, functional behavioral assessment, the Self-Determined Learning Model of Instruction, content enhancement routines, and peer-mediated instruction.

Meta-Analyses Meta-analyses involve researchers’ synthesizing the findings of multiple studies by calculating an average effect size across studies. As opposed to EBP reviews, researchers typically do not

83

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

exclude studies that do not meet quality criteria or use predetermined criteria to classify the level of evidence supporting the practice when conducting meta-analyses. Dexter and Hughes (2011) calculated moderate and large effects for graphic organizers on students with learning disabilities across different outcomes, examined in 16 studies that involved 808 participants. In another ­meta-analysis, Bellini and Akullian (2007) reported that video modeling and video self-modeling were effective approaches for improving a variety of outcomes for children and adolescents with ASD across 23 single-case studies. Although meta-analyses do not result in classifying practices as EBPs per se, they are useful in identifying practices that are (or are not) shown to be effective across multiple studies. Whereas many meta-analyses examine the average effects of a particular intervention, others investigate the effects of multiple instructional practices in a content area or for a population of learners (e.g. Berkeley, Scruggs, & Mastropieri, 2010; DuPaul, Eckert, & Vilardo, 2012; Gersten, Chard et al., 2009; Therrien, Taylor, Hosp, Kaldenberg, & Gorsh, 2011). Meta-analyses are increasingly common in special education and can be found in most professional journals in the field. Identifying EBPs and promising practices is an important aspect of the larger process of implementing evidence-based practice in teaching students with and at risk for developing disabilities. In the next section, we provide two vignettes that briefly describe how two hypothetical teachers use EBPs and promising practices to appropriately implement evidence-based practice for students with disabilities in the context of the arts.

Vignettes of Evidence-Based Practice in Arts Integration We provide illustrations of two teachers engaging in evidence-based practice as they integrate the arts with academic content in teaching students with disabilities. In the first vignette, positive, inclusive peer interactions are integrated with daily drama instruction for students with ASD. In the second vignette, photography is used to help students, including those with specific learning disabilities, develop deep questioning skills to advance their understanding of social studies concepts.

Increasing Positive Social Interactions for Students with ASD Mrs. Anderson, a special education teacher, taught six third-to-sixth grade students with ASD in a fully self-contained classroom. The students had academic, behavioral, and social goals on their IEPs, and although she felt they were making real progress academically, Mrs. ­A nderson noticed that her class was really struggling with social skills. Her classroom data showed infrequent interactions, despite her prompting and reinforcement. To promote positive peer interactions, Mrs. Anderson reviewed the EBPs and resources at The National Professional Development Center on ASD (n.d.) website. She found a module on Peer Mediated Instruction and Intervention (PMII; AFIRM Team, 2015), a practice shown by research to effectively address her students’ needs, which was feasible for her to implement and consistent with the values of her students and their families. “PMII involves systematically teaching peers without disabilities ways of engaging learners with ASD in positive and meaningful social interactions” (AFIRM Team, 2015, p. 2). She reviewed the content of the online module to learn how to utilize PMII in her classroom and decided that her daily drama activity would be the perfect time to implement PMII. Mrs. Anderson started by recruiting 12 typically developing children from other classes. She utilized the peer selection checklist from the module to ensure the students were a good fit for the intervention. She reached out to general education teachers at her school and asked for suggestions of children who were strong communicators, took initiative, were good problem solvers in social situations, and had regular attendance. Mrs. Anderson met with the peers as a group to prepare

84

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

them as coaches. She used the template in the module to create scripts for reinforcing and giving appropriate feedback in response to targeted positive (e.g. appropriate response to peer greeting, turn-taking) and undesired (e.g. nonresponse to peer greeting, failure to take one’s turn) behaviors. Mrs. Anderson paired each of her students with two peer coaches. She planned a series of drama sessions for the peer coaches and students with ASD to experience together. In the first session, Mrs. Anderson played gentle music and began with a mirrors exercise. Children sat in triads (two peer coaches, one student with ASD), facing Mrs. Anderson. As the music played, she used her face, arms, and upper body to slowly model the exaggerated actions and emotions that occurred in the story she read, Where the Wild Things Are. All the children ­m irrored her, moving simultaneously to show exaggerated versions of mischief, hope, fear, revelry, and loneliness. Next, in their triads, students faced each other to practice mirroring. First, a peer coach initiated the scripted greeting: “Hi, we are excited to work with you today. Are you ready to start?” The other peer coach reinforced (“Nice job responding to”) or prompted (i.e. “Please answer, are you ready to start?”), as appropriate. The peer coaches took the lead and moved slowly and carefully as their group members followed along. For each prompt, Mrs. Anderson provided an image with a word on it; for example, the “joy” card showed a brightly smiling girl. Finally, the peer coaches followed their peers with ASD, who initiated the movements based on emotion prompts. The coaches had been taught to mirror any movement, including small shrugs or weight shifts to show that they were watching, listening, and responding. Next, the triads practiced creative movement together. They focused on the beginning of the story: “A forest grew, and grew, and grew…” Together, the triads created a shape low to the ground. Mrs. Anderson provided 10 counts for the groups to move from low, closed, angular shapes to high, open, curved shapes. Students took turns moving, with one student moving on each count. Each time a student with ASD took their turn, their peer coaches reinforced them by saying, “Good job taking your turn!” During multiple repetitions, Mrs. Anderson prompted students to try variations by adding twists, turns, and changing directions. Finally, she challenged the students with vocal expression. She prompted them to echo a single line or phrase that she interpreted differently with each repetition. For example, she said, “Be still,” first quietly, then loudly, then mysteriously, then authoritatively. The class echoed her as a whole in a choral response, then each team had a chance to echo her by themselves. She gave each team a line of dialogue from the story, and the triads worked together to decide how to speak the line. The rest of the class worked in their triads to identify the emotion behind the delivery of the performers. The first session left Mrs. Anderson feeling very hopeful as all of her students were actively engaged and displaying positive social interactions. Her educational assistant utilized the PMII ­progress monitoring form included in the module to collect formative assessment data. Mrs. ­A nderson continued her 30–45-minute daily drama sessions, utilizing the implementation checklist provided in the module. Over the next two months, observational data indicated an increase in positive social interactions within her classroom.

Using Deep Questioning to Improve Understanding Mr. Baker and Mrs. Hashimoto co-taught in a fifth grade inclusion classroom with 25 students, four of whom had learning disabilities. The teachers noticed that many students were having difficulty interpreting big ideas in social studies. On unit tests and writing assignment, students’ responses indicated factual understanding, but they were having difficultly inferring meaning and providing evidence to support their ideas. This was true for several students, but all four students with learning disabilities were really struggling in these areas. Mr. Baker and Mrs. Hashimoto checked out the WWC website as Mr. Baker had previously used the site to improve his teaching

85

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook

of fractions. The teachers found the practice guide Organizing Instruction and Study to Improve Student Learning (Pashler et al., 2007) very interesting. They decided to implement Recommendation #7—ask deep explanatory questions because they felt it could address students’ needs, and it had a strong level of research support. Pashler et al. (2007) recommended three pointers for using deep questioning: (a) encourage students to think aloud, (b) ask questions that elicit explanations, and (c) ask questions that challenge students. Mr. Baker and Mrs. Hashimoto believed strongly in arts integration across the curriculum so they decided to use visual text to introduce these approaches to deep questioning. They selected a variety of street photographs by Vivian Maier, depicting life in Chicago in the 1960s. They started by modeling how to interpret information with supporting evidence, using prompts inspired by Visual Thinking Strategies (Cruz & Ellerbrock, 2015). Mr. Baker asked Mrs. Hashimoto, “What’s going on in this picture?” She responded by thinking aloud about the visual information, looking carefully at the details, and talking about what she observed. Mr. Baker paraphrased her interpretations neutrally and helped the class see what she was seeing by directing their focus to specific parts of the photograph. Next, he asked, “What do you see that makes you say that?” and Mrs. Hashimoto modeled how to back up her ideas with evidence. Finally, Mr. Baker asked, “What more can we find?” Mrs. Hashimoto modeled how to dig deeper, even when it seemed as though her ideas were exhausted. After modeling, Mr. Baker and Mrs. Hashimoto moved to guided practice by presenting students with a new image and facilitating students’ interpretations as part of a whole-class discussion. They followed the same open-ended questions: What’s going on in this picture? What do you see that makes you say that? What more can we find? This time, they facilitated the conversation by linking and framing multiple student perspectives. In addition to asking students for observations and supporting evidence, they challenged students to listen to their peers and consider other viewpoints. Together, they discussed multiple possibilities and interpretations. In this manner, they engaged students in the recommended practices for deep questioning (i.e. thinking aloud, eliciting explanation, and challenging prior beliefs and assumptions). As the teachers continued to use these approaches in class, they saw that scores on assignments and tests were improving for most students but not for their students with learning disabilities. They noticed that the students with learning disabilities often had insufficient subject knowledge to respond meaningfully or deeply to many of the questions being posed. The co-teachers adapted the approach by pre-assessing students’ vocabulary and understanding of key concepts before students participated in deep questioning. Mrs. Hashimoto engaged in small-group supplemental instruction for students who needed it, while Mr. Baker engaged in enrichment activities related to the previous lesson with the other students. After adapting the deep questioning approaches in this way, the performance of the students with learning disabilities began to improve as well.

Conclusion Evidence-based practice refers to a multi-step process of instructional decision-making that involves prioritizing practices identified as effective by sound research (e.g. EBPs). Engaging in the process of evidence-based practice has the potential to improve learning outcomes for all students and is especially important for students with and at risk for developing disabilities. In this chapter, we described the importance of evidence-based practice, explained what evidence-based practice and EBPs are, highlighted resources for identifying EBPs for students with disabilities, and described two vignettes of educators engaging in evidence-based practice with students with disabilities as they integrated the arts into their daily instruction.

86

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching

References Alberts, B., Cicerone, R. J., Fienberg, S. E., Kamb, A., McNutt, M., Nerem, R. M., … & Zuber, M. T. (2015). Self-correction in science at work. Science, 348(6242), 1420–1422. doi:10.1126/science.aab3847 AFIRM Team. (2015). Peer-mediated instruction and intervention. Chapel Hill, NC: National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorders. Retrieved from http://afirm.fpg.unc.edu/ peer-mediated-instruction-and-intervention Baker, S. K., Chard, D. J., Ketterlin-Geller, L. R., Apichatabutra, C., & Doabler, C. (2009). Teaching writing to at-risk students: The quality of evidence for self-regulated strategy development. Exceptional Children, 75, 303–318. doi:10.1177/001440290907500303 Bellini, S., & Akullian, J. (2007). A meta-analysis of video modeling and video self-modeling interventions for children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorders. Exceptional Children, 73, 264–287. doi:10.1177/001440290707300301 Berkeley, S., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2010). Reading comprehension instruction for students with learning disabilities, 1995–2006: A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special Education, 31, 423–436. doi:10.1177/0741932509355988 Boardman, A. G., Arguelles, M. E., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M. T., & Klingner, J. (2005). Special education teachers’ views of research-based practices. Journal of Special Education, 39, 168–180. doi:10.1177/002246 69050390030401 Browder, D., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Spooner, F., Mims, P. J., & Baker, J. N. (2009). Using time delay to teach literacy to students with severe developmental disabilities. Exceptional Children, 75, 343–364. doi:10.1177/001440290907500305 Browder, D. M., Spooner, F., Ahlgrim-Delzell, L., Harris, A. A., & Wakeman, S. (2008). A meta-­a nalysis on teaching mathematics to students with significant cognitive disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, ­407–432. doi:10.1177/001440290807400401 Burns, M. K., & Ysseldyke, J. E. (2009). Reported prevalence of evidence-based instructional practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 43, 3–11. doi:10.1177/0022466908315563 Camargo, S. P. H., Rispoli, M., Ganz, J., Hong, E. R., Davis, H., & Mason, R. (2014). A review of the quality of behaviorally-based intervention research to improve social interaction skills of children with ASD in inclusive settings. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44, 2096–2116. doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2060-7 Carter, M., Stephenson, J., & Strnadová, I. (2011). Reported prevalence by Australian special educators of evidence-based instructional practices. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 35, 47–60. doi:10.1375/ ajse.35.1.47 Cook, B. G. (2014). A call for examining replication and bias in special education research. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 233–246. doi:10.1177/0741932514528995 Cook, B. G., Carter, E. W., Cote, D. L., Kamman, M., McCarthy, T., Miller, M. L., … & Travers, J. (2014). Evidence-based special education in the context of scarce evidence-based practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47, 81–84. doi:10.1177/0040059914551921 Cook, B. G., & Cook, L. (2016). Research designs and special education research: Different designs address different questions. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. Cook, B. G., & Cook, S. C. (2013). Unraveling evidence-based practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 47, 71–82. doi:10.1177/0022466911420877 Cook, S. C., Cook, B. G., & Cook, L. (2017). Classifying the evidence base of Classwide Peer Tutoring for students with high incidence disabilities. Exceptionality. Cook, L., Cook, B. G., Landrum, T. J., & Tankersley, M. (2008). Examining the role of group experimental research in establishing evidenced-based practices. Intervention in School & Clinic, 44(2), 76–82. doi:10.1177/1053451208324504 Cook, B. G., Smith, G. J., & Tankersley, M. (2012). Evidence-based practices in education. In K. R. Harris, S. Graham, & T. Urdan (Eds.), APA educational psychology handbook, volume 1 (pp. 495–528). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Cook, B. G., Tankersley, M., Cook, L., & Landrum, T. J. (2008). Evidence-based practices in special education: Some practical considerations. Intervention in School & Clinic, 44(2), 69–75. doi:10.1177/1053451208321452 Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Council for Exceptional Children standards for evidence-based p­ ractices in special education. Retrieved from www.cec.sped. org/~/media/Files/Standards/Evidence%20based%20 Practices%20and%20Practice/EBP%20FINAL.pdf Crockett, J. B. (2004). Taking stock of science in the schoolhouse: Four ideas to foster effective instruction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 37, 189–199. doi:10.1177/00222194040370030201

87

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook Cruz, B. C., & Ellerbrock, C. R. (2015). Developing visual literacy: Historical and manipulated photography in the social studies classroom. Social Studies, 106, 274–280. doi:10.1080/00377996.2015.1083932 de Bruin, C. L., Deppeler, J. M., Moore, D. W., & Diamond, N. T. (2013). Public school-based interventions for adolescents and young adults with an autism spectrum disorder: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 83, 521–550. doi:10.3102/0034654313498621 Dexter, D. D., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Graphic organizers and students with learning disabilities: A metaanalysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34, 51–72. doi:10.1177/073194871103400104 DuPaul, G. J., Eckert, T. L., & Vilardo, B. (2012). The effects of school-based interventions for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: A meta-analysis 1996–2010. School Psychology Review, 41, 387–412. Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015. (2015). Pub. L. 114–95 Stat. 1177. Foxx, R. M., & Mulick, J. A. (Eds.) (2016). Controversial therapies for autism and intellectual disabilities: Fad, fashion, and science in professional practice. New York, NY: Routledge. Gable, R. A., Tonelson, S. W., Sheth, M., Wilson, C., & Park, K. L. (2012). Importance, usage, and preparedness to implement evidence-based practices for students with emotional disabilities: A comparison of knowledge and skills of special education and general education teachers. Education & Treatment of Children, 35, 499–519. Gersten, R., Beckmann, S., Clarke, B., Foegen, A., Marsh, L., Star, J. R., & Witzel, B. (2009). Assisting students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for elementary and middle schools. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/ rti_math_pg_042109.pdf Gersten, R., Chard, D. J., Jayanthi, M., Baker, S. K., Morphy, P., & Flojo, J. (2009). Mathematics instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis of instructional components. Review of Educational Research, 79, 1202–1242. doi:10.3102/0034654309334431 Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C. M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., & Tilly, W. D. (2009). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Compton, D., Coyne, M., Greenwood, C., & Innocenti, M. S. (2005). Quality indicators for group experimental and quasi-experimental research in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 149–164. doi:10.1177/001440290507100202 Godlee, F., Smith, J., & Marcovitch, H. (2011). Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and autism was fraudulent. British Medical Journal, 342, 64–66. Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Olinghouse, N. (2011). Addressing executive function problems in writing: An example from the self-regulated strategy development model. In L. Meltzer (Ed.), Executive function in education: From theory to practice (pp. 216–236). New York, NY: Guilford. Hallahan, D. P., Kauffman, J. M., & Pullen, P. C. (2015). Exceptional learners: An introduction to special education (13th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., McGee, G., Odom, S., & Wolery, M. (2005). The use of single-­subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179. doi:10.1177/001440290507100203 Hosp, M. K., Hosp, J. L., & Howell, K. W. (2016). The ABCs of CBM: A practical guide to curriculum-based measurement (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford. Hudson, M. E., Browder, D. M., & Wood, L. A. (2013). Review of experimental research on academic learning by students with moderate and severe intellectual disability in general education. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(1), 17–29. doi:10.2511/027494813807046926 Hudson, R. F., Davis, C. A., Blum, G., Greenway, R., Hackett, J., Kidwell, J., … & Peck, C. A. (2016). A socio-cultural analysis of practitioner perspectives on implementation of evidence-based practice in special education. Journal of Special Education, 50, 27–36. doi:10.1177/0022466915613592 Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). 20 USC § 1400. Jitendra, A. K., Burgess, C., & Gajria, M. (2011). Cognitive strategy instruction for improving expository text comprehension of students with learning disabilities: The quality of evidence. Exceptional Children, 77, 135–159. doi:10.1177/001440291107700201 Kavale, K. A., & Mostert, M. P. (2004). The positive side of special education: Minimizing its fads, fancies, and follies. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education. Knight, V., Sartini, E., & Spriggs, A. D. (2015). Evaluating visual activity schedules as evidence-based practice for individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 45(1), 157–178. doi:10.1007/s1083-014-2201-z

88

Using Evidence-Based Practice in Teaching Kratochwill, T. R., Hitchcock, J. H., Horner, R. H., Levin, J. R., Odom, S. L., Rindskopf, D. M., & ­Shadish, W. R. (2013). Single-case intervention research design standards. Remedial and Special Education, 34, 26–38. doi:10.1177/0741932512452794 Landrum, T. J., & McDuffie, K. A. (2010). Learning styles in the age of differentiated instruction. Exceptionality, 18(1), 6–17. doi:10.1080/09362830903462441 Leko, M. M. (2015). To adapt or not to adapt. Teaching Exceptional Children, 48, 80–85. doi:101177/ 0040059915605641 Lewis, T. J., Hudson, S., Richter, M., & Johnson, N. (2004). Scientifically supported practices in emotional and behavioral disorders: A proposed approach and brief review of current practices. Behavioral Disorders, 29, 247–259. Losinski, M., Cuenca-Carlino, Y., Zablocki, M., & Teagarden, J. (2014). Examining the efficacy of self-­ regulated strategy development for students with emotional or behavioral disorders: A meta-analysis. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 52–67. Maggin, D. M., Chafouleas, S. M., Goddard, K. M., & Johnson, A. H. (2011). A systematic evaluation of token economies as a classroom management tool for students with challenging behavior. Journal of School Psychology, 49, 529–554. doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2011.05.001 Meltzer, L. (Ed.). (2011). Executive function in education: From theory to practice. New York, NY: Guilford. National Autism Center. (2015). Findings and conclusions: National standards project, phase 2. Randolph, MA: Author. National Center for Learning Disabilities. (2013). Executive function 101. Author. Retrieved from www.­ understood.org/~/media/040bf b1894284d019bf 78ac01a5f1513.pdf National Professional Development Center on Autism Spectrum Disorder. (n.d.). Evidence-based practices. Retrieved from http://autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/evidence-based-practices National Technical Assistance Center on Transition. (n.d.). Effective practices and predictors. Retrieved from http://transitionta.org/effectivepractices Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner, R. H., Thompson, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Research in special education: Scientific methods and evidence-based practices. Exceptional Children, 71, 137–148. doi:10.1177/001440290507100201 Pashler, H., Bain, P., Bottge, B., Graesser, A., Koedinger, K., McDaniel, M., & Metcalfe, J. (2007). Organizing instruction and study to improve student learning. Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sciences. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/20072004.pdf Sackett, D. L., Straus, S. E., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W., & Haynes, R. B. (2000). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM (2nd ed.). Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone. Spencer, T. D., Detrich, R., & Slocum, T. A. (2012). Evidence-based practice: A framework for making effective decisions. Education and Treatment of Children, 35, 127–151. doi:10.1353/etc.2012.0013 Spooner, F., Knight, V., Browder, D., Jimenez, B. A. & DiBiase, W. (2011). Evaluating evidence-based ­practices in teaching science content to students with severe developmental disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 36(1/2), 62–75. doi:10.2511/rpsd.36.1-2.62 Spooner, F., Knight, V. F., Browder, D. M., & Smith, B. R. (2011). Evidence-based practice for teaching academics to students with severe developmental disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 374–387. doi:10.1177/0741932511421634 Sreckovic, M. A., Common, E. A., Knowles, M. M., & Lane, K. L. (2014). A review of self-regulated strategy development for writing for students with EBD. Behavioral Disorders, 39, 56–77. Therrien, W. J., Taylor, J. C., Hosp, J. L., Kaldenberg, E. R., & Gorsh, J. (2011). Science instruction for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 188–203. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00340.x Torres, C., Farley, C. A., & Cook, B. G. (2012). A special educator’s guide to successfully implementing evidence-based practices. Teaching Exceptional Children, 45(1), 64–73. doi:10.1177/004005991204500109 Travers, J. C., Ayers, K., Simpson, R. L., & Crutchfield, S. (2016). Fad, pseudoscientific, and controversial interventions. In R. Lang, T. B. Hancock, & N. N. Singh (Eds.), Early intervention for young children with autism spectrum disorder (pp. 257–293). Switzerland: Springer. Travers, J. C., Cook, B. G., Therrien, W. J., & Coyne, M. D. (2016). Replication research and special ­education. Remedial and Special Education, 37, 195–204. doi:10.1177/0741932516648462 Umbreit, J., Ferro, J., Liaupsin, C., & Lane, K. (2007). Functional behavioral assessment and function-based intervention: An effective, practical approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Vaughn, S., & Dammann, J. E. (2001). Science and sanity in special education. Behavioral Disorders, 27, 21–29.

89

Cook, Simpson-Steele, and Cook Wang, P., & Spillane, A. (2009). Evidence-based social skills interventions for children with autism: A metaanalysis. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 44, 318–342. What Works Clearinghouse. (n.d.). What works clearinghouse. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ What Works Clearinghouse. (2014). Procedures and standards handbook, version 3.0. Retrieved from http://ies. ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwwc_procedures_v3_0_standards_handbook.pdf Wong, C., Odom, S. L., Hume, K. Cox, A. W., Fettig, A., Kucharczyk, S., … Schultz, T. R. (2014). ­Evidence-based practices for children, youth, and young adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina, Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute, Autism ­Evidence-Based Practice Review Group. Retrieved from http://autismpdc.fpg.unc.edu/sites/autismpdc. fpg.unc.edu/files/2014-EBP-Report.pdf Wood, B. K., Oakes, W. P., Fettig, A., & Lane, K. L. (2015). A review of the evidence base of functional assessment-based interventions for young students using one systematic approach. Behavioral Disorders, 40, 230–250. doi:10.17988/0198-7429-40.4.230

90

7 Preparing to Teach Students with Disabilities in and through the Arts Juliann B. Dorff

While everyone is different, everyone belongs. (The Haggerty School Motto, 2016)

The Haggerty School was established within the Cambridge, Massachusetts, Public School District in 1995, serving grades K-5 based on the concept of full inclusion, designed to meet the needs of all students. Its first principal, James Petner, challenged to meet the emotional, academic, and social needs of the school’s diverse population, recognized the importance of a prepared faculty. Petner is captured on video, saying, “We cannot ask teachers to do something for which they are not prepared” (Defries & Habib, 2009). Preparation of all educators to welcome and teach all children continues to be essential as schools across the country adopt models of inclusive education. This sentiment represents the continuing need to ensure that arts educators are prepared to meet the needs of all students. Teacher preparation programs are responsible for educating and training the next generation of arts educators by providing them with in-depth knowledge of their arts disciplines as well as a thorough understanding of best practices in education. As the diversity in pre-K-12 classrooms expands, so must the inclusion of strategies and methods to teach all learners. No longer can arts teacher education programs rely solely on capstone student teaching experiences to adequately prepare educators to excel in the classroom. This chapter offers guidance on implementing effective arts teacher preparation programs through an infusion approach by defining and examining the approach’s development and components.

Arts Teacher Preparation, Then and Now A Historic Perspective of Arts Teacher Preparation In the mid-1990s, several researchers investigated teacher education programs to determine what a quality, pre-service education in the arts should include to meet the needs of all learners and to review the preparedness of first-year visual and performing arts teachers (see, for example, Guay, 1994; DePauw & Karp, 1994; Gfeller, Darrow, & Heddon, 1990). In these landmark studies, similarities were found across the various arts education disciplines of music, visual arts, theater, and dance.

91

Juliann B. Dorff

In the related disciplines of physical education, recreation, and dance, DePauw and Karp (1994) highlighted the need for more emphasis on preparing pre-service educators to teach students with disabilities. They acknowledged the existence of minimal preparation from the course requirement on inclusion, taught in general education, special education, or psychology departments of colleges and universities, but believed this fell far short of what was needed to prepare teachers to fully integrate all students into the classroom. DePauw and Karp recommended an “infusion approach,” calling for the infusion of knowledge with respect to teaching students with disabilities throughout the curriculum (p. 52). They believed that having a separate course or courses in a pre-service degree program reinforced the idea of a segregated student population rather than one that encouraged inclusion. They also voiced their concern that the separate course approach emphasized differences rather than similarities among students. The study revealed that subject-specific faculty felt ill-equipped to teach this content, reinforcing the need to adopt the infusion approach. Researching the success of music educators working with mainstreamed students in Iowa and Kansas, Gfeller et al. (1990) discovered that only 25 percent of the teachers surveyed had one college class related to teaching students with disabilities. In some cases, it was a child psychology course and typically did not specifically focus on the needs of students with disabilities. Both Gfeller et al. (1990) and, later, Frisque, Niebur, and Humphreys (1994), who surveyed music educators in Arizona, concluded that far too often, success in a music class for students with disabilities was measured by the students’ participation or by the ability of the educator to control behavior rather than progress in musical skills or content. Guay (1994) conducted research on first-year visual arts educators to determine their preparedness for teaching all students. Similar to DePauw and Karp (1994), Guay found that one special education course was the standard for pre-service education programs in covering the special education curriculum, with little to no arts-specific instruction. Of the respondents in Guay’s survey of K-12 visual arts educators, 58 percent believed that they were not prepared, with an additional 15 percent stating that they were minimally prepared. The first-year visual arts educators who felt the most prepared were those who had taken at least two or more courses addressing students with disabilities. Most of those surveyed had no experience teaching students with disabilities. Guay, corresponding with DePauw and Karp’s recommendations, advocated for an infusion approach, with content regarding students with disabilities covered in all arts-specific courses, supported through consultation and collaboration with special education faculty. Guay also emphasized the necessity of including hands-on engagement in the curriculum. Blandy (1994) identified minimal level competencies for pre-service visual arts teachers to be prepared to teach students with disabilities. The competencies are: • • • • • • •

Knowledge about students with disabilities, Understanding current federal and state laws, Understanding of propositions and principles of theory and applications, Knowledge of literature that addresses disabilities, Fieldwork placements, Familiarity with communication systems, Interactions in their school and social lives with those who have disabilities.

The identification of specific competencies established an initial framework for the development of pre-service instruction and guidelines for instructional support for teachers working with students with disabilities.

92

Preparing to Teach Students

Contemporary Practice in Arts Teacher Preparation Several researchers have investigated how arts teacher preparation has grown or changed in the past 20 years. An examination of music degree course catalogues conducted by Colwell and Thompson (2000) uncovered a lack of arts-specific special education instruction. Salvador (2010) substantiated this, indicating that pre-service arts educators were receiving one general education course designed for teaching students with disabilities, which had little to no connection to content-specific instruction. She found that music education faculty wanted to include and infuse more disability content in their coursework, but many music education faculty felt inadequate teaching content related to teaching music to students with disabilities. She also noted, as Gfeller et al. (1990) had indicated 20 years earlier, that there was an emphasis on inclusion at the elementary level but less so at the secondary (Salvador, 2010). A more recent study of visual arts teacher preparation revealed that teachers are still in need of more preparation, exposure, and experience (Cramer, Coleman, Park, Bell & Coles, 2015). Designed to measure progress since Guay’s work of 1994, the study investigated the attitudes and preparation of practicing visual arts educators. Cramer and colleagues determined that teachers feel very knowledgeable and prepared to teach students without disabilities but minimally prepared to teach students with disabilities. Their results mirrored those of Guay (1994), finding that teachers who had taken two or more courses addressing teaching students with disabilities felt more prepared and more knowledgeable than those who had taken one or none and felt more apt to use assistive technology. This additional knowledge resulted in more differentiated instruction and the ability to use multiple approaches to reach all students in the classroom. However, only 19 of 77 teachers reported being highly knowledgeable. Similarly, VanWheelden and Whipple (2014) surveyed music educators to examine changes in the 20 years since the work by Gfeller et al. (1990). Their findings revealed that there was little coursework in music education degree programs specifically designed for preparing teachers to work with music students with disabilities. Practicing educators also reported low attendance at professional development workshops addressing teaching students with disabilities and indicated that there were few offerings that directly addressed teaching music to students with disabilities. Those who did attend such workshops agreed that they felt more prepared. The music educators reported having little or no involvement in Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) for their students as well as little or no collaboration with special educators. They did believe that special educators, paraeducators (classroom aides and support staff ), and administrators were sensitive to their challenges. A majority of the respondents to the VanWheelden and Whipple (2014) study had taken a general education course in child psychology/child development, but less than one-fourth had completed coursework specific to working with students with disabilities in music. This finding was similar to the results of Gfeller et al. (1990). Those individuals who had arts-specific coursework for teaching students with disabilities felt more prepared to work with such students—again, similar to the results of Gfeller et al. Further, as in the Gfeller et al. study, the course most often mentioned was a child psychology course; however, VanWheelden and Whipple found that course content was disability focused but not arts-specific. Of those who had the benefit of an arts-­ specific course on disabilities, fewer than half had actual contact with students with disabilities in teaching and assessment situations. Although respondents in the VanWheelden and Whipple (2014) study reported feeling underprepared, their recorded feedback demonstrated that they had an increased understanding of what constituted successful inclusion and were comfortable adapting and/or modifying the general curriculum to meet the needs of students with disabilities. These respondents also placed greater

93

Juliann B. Dorff

focus on all students’ achieving the music goals of their lessons as compared to those in the Gfeller et al. (1990) study, who reported that their primary focus was on the non-music goals of participation and behavior.

Arts Teachers Preparation for the 21st Century At this juncture, slow progress has been made toward creating education programs in arts education that prepare pre-service teachers to meet minimal level competencies, identified two decades previously by Blandy (1994). Arts educators still need more preparation that includes coursework and practical experiences (Cramer et al., 2015), greater collaboration between arts education and special education faculty (Cramer et al., 2015; VanWheelden & Whipple, 2014), and greater emphasis on the importance of meaning-making in the arts rather than on managing behavior as a sign of successful inclusion (Cramer et al., 2015). Using the infusion model to integrate information about teaching diverse student populations in all arts-specific education coursework reinforces the concept that each student is a unique individual worthy of a teacher’s attention. Accommodating for difference is a natural part of teaching (Guay, 1994; Depauw & Karl, 1994). This requires going beyond the one chapter devoted to teaching children with exceptionalities in many arts-specific education texts. Providing opportunities during pre-service field experience to collaborate (attending IEP meetings, meeting with special educators/paraeducators [Cramer et al., 2015; VanWheelden & Whipple, 2014], and having exposure to students with disabilities) increases confidence, understanding, and reflective thinking (Hammel & Hourigan, 2011). Authentic experiences of teaching students with disabilities empower pre-service educators with confidence that they can successfully teach all students (Bain & Hasio, 2011). As research has shown, there are several barriers to introducing infused and authentic ­opportunities to pre-service educators. Because teachers are licensed professionals, certification/ licensure demands must be considered. Thus, with program accreditation and university requirements (liberal arts, general education, core classes, etc.), education degree programs tend to exceed the traditional 120 hours needed for undergraduate degrees (Colwell & Thompson, 2000; ­Hammel & Hourigan, 2011). In conflict with these needs are legislative priorities to lessen the costs of college degrees by keeping required coursework to a minimum (Colwell & ­Thompson, 2000). Compounding the problem, there is a shortage of faculty with the confidence to teach content ­(Colwell & Thompson, 2000; Salvador, 2010), which can result in their glossing over of the topic or i­gnoring it altogether (Hammel & Hourigan, 2011). A challenge in higher education is to develop quality curricula that prepare arts educators to teach all learners, achieving at least the minimum standards identified by Blandy in 1994. What coursework, experiences, and strategies should be included for the next generation of arts educators for them to achieve competency and confidence in their abilities to plan for, teach, and assess all the students in their classes? The following is an examination of content and practice to include in the pre-service training of arts educators, rooted in the concept of the human variation model of disability and encouraging an infusion approach to arts education instruction.

Disability as Human Variation/Disability as Diversity Pre-service educators begin their studies to become arts educators with preconceived ideas about children, disability, and learning. Each student must examine her/his ideas about disability and have opportunities to consider difference and diversity in the classroom from multiple perspectives. For example, when asked if he would prefer to not have cerebral palsy, Norman Kunc, a disability self-advocate stated,

94

Preparing to Teach Students

I honestly don’t know. I do know that, knowing what I know now, if I were given a choice, I would choose to live with cerebral palsy. This statement invariably evokes bewilderment and skepticism among non-disabled people. They are firmly convinced that I would be “better off”—and hence prefer—to live a non-disabled life. What they fail to understand is that cerebral palsy is an integral part of who I am, my identity is the product of my history. My history is that of a person with cerebral palsy. I wouldn’t be who I am; I’d be someone else. Frankly, I like who I am, I like my history, I like my life. I’m not sure I’d sacrifice who I am for the sake of normal movement and speech. (Kunc & Van der Klift, 1995, p. 21) Kunc provided insight into living with a disability that can be difficult to understand. Why wouldn’t he want to be “fixed”? To be “normal”? Our reaction is deeply rooted in the way our ­society has viewed disability. Historically, disability has been socially constructed through a variety of lenses or models, most notably through a medical model. This model conceptualized disability as an illness or injury that required fixing or at least an improvement of its effects on the individual’s ability to function (Scotch & Shriner, 1997). A medical paradigm, used in a social context, places emphasis on “normality,” upholding societal values of uniformity rather than diversity, with some children labeled as normal and others as deficient and in need of repair (Shyman, 2016). Thus, disability is defined as a finite list of limitations, behaviors, or deficits, and simply identifying a disability can result in a prescribed list of strategies needed to teach a student when, in fact, each individual is much more complex (Ashby, 2012). Rather than relying solely on a medical model with its limiting view of people with a disability, the human variation model recognizes the difference inherent in the human condition. It defines “disability as an extension of the natural physical, social and cultural variability of the human species” (Scotch & Shriner, 1997, p. 154). Issues related to a person with a disability are a reflection of society’s inability to accommodate for difference rather than a deficit in the individual. For example, a wheelchair limits the individual not because of the individual but because of the way in which the world has designed the built environment (Derby, 2011). To the extent that society fully accommodates a condition, it ceases to be a disability through the lens of the human variation model (Scotch & Shriner, 1997). Learning is not conceptualized as something therapeutic or as a way to change or “fix” an individual; rather, learning is authentic, characterized by engaging learning experiences designed to be accessible for each learner. The human variation model provides educators with the opportunity to consider students not as fitting into categories of particular disabilities but as individuals with learning challenges that need to be addressed along with the challenges of other learners in a class. This understanding encourages the educator to develop lessons that are active, physical, and sensory, and provides the opportunity for multiple means of engaging and expression. Emphasizing human variations reminds the educator that a strategy designed to support one student may be supporting many others as well. The model also encourages educators to target instruction more specifically, as all students should be afforded the opportunity to be active and engaged in their learning. Disability pre-service arts educators should be given the opportunity to develop lessons that consider students’ diverse learning needs prior to instruction, reinforcing the concepts used in universal design for learning (Ashby, 2012).

The Infusion Approach to Arts Education As recommended by DePauw and Karp (1994), Blandy (1994), and Guay (1994), and rooted in the human variation model, the infusion approach to teacher preparation requires that all faculty provide seamless instruction that equips future teachers to meet the needs of all students in arts classrooms in all content-specific coursework. This might necessitate collaborations outside of faculty

95

Juliann B. Dorff

members’ content knowledge areas. In addition, pre-service educators need hands-on exposure to students with disabilities beyond those simply during capstone student teaching experiences. The following is a description of minimum expectations for a quality pre-service arts educator’s preparation for classroom teaching: Collaboration

As highlighted in the 1990s (Blandy, 1994; DePauw & Karp, 1994; Guay, 1994), collaboration is needed between special education and arts education faculty to successfully prepare arts educators. Effective teacher preparation includes experiencing and practicing collaboration during the training phase of an educator’s career (Gerber & Federenko, 2006). The pre-service experience should provide the opportunity for teachers in training to collaborate with several stakeholders in the school community (Guay, 1995). At a minimum, these opportunities can include inviting guest lecturers, such as intervention specialists, paraeducators, and individuals with disabilities, into arts-specific classes to share their expertise and experiences. In addition, visiting schools to observe, assist, and, eventually, teach arts lessons prior to student teaching can provide practical one-on-one exposure to the working relationships needed for classroom success. Intervention

Intervention specialists, who are special educators with expertise in instructional and behavior management, can be invaluable partners with arts educators (Martin & Hauth, 2015). Pre-service educators can gain information from intervention specialists regarding behavior management plans and other aspects of IEPs to determine how they can best support their students in the arts curriculum. Intervention specialists can collaborate on lesson plans, providing specific suggestions for appropriate supports and accommodations for each student, information regarding available assistive technology, and classroom arrangement and structure (Dorff, 2012). They can also provide information and training regarding evidence-based practices that can be utilized in lesson development (Martin & Hauth, 2015). Additionally, special education teachers can provide specific information regarding the routines and interests of the students with whom they work and how an individual student responds to stress and interacts with others in the classroom (Dorff, 2012). Paraeducators

There is extensive research on the role of paraeducators, also known as classroom aides, who provide supports to students with disabilities in the classroom (Chopra, Carroll, & Manjack, 2018). Although Guay (2003) indicated that paraeducators generally have had little to no formal training, they do play an integral part in the arts classroom, and their importance is recognized in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004). Paraeducators can teach and/or clarify prerequisite skills, instruct and manage behaviors, and control the environment for a child with a disability. However, Guay (2003) and Burdick and Causton-Theoharis (2012) found that, often, there was little communication between paraeducators and teachers. Arts teachers too often left instruction up to paraeducators and, as a result, had little contact with their students with disabilities. When seated with a paraeducator, an individual student is often separated from their peers, reducing the opportunity for peer interaction. An uninformed paraeducator will often assist by instinct, offering more support than is needed and limiting the student’s opportunity to make personal choices. Teachers must take responsibility for informing paraeducators about the type and amount of guidance they are expected to provide students (Moore, 2013). Pre-service educators need to practice this conversation, as young teachers might feel uncomfortable addressing paraeducators

96

Preparing to Teach Students

who are likely to be older. Course content for pre-service arts educators should include identifying their roles in relation to paraeducators. Relationships built on mutual respect among paraeducators, teachers, and students require teachers to recognize the skills that paraeducators bring to the classroom. A strategy of “fading support” allows students to encounter materials and peers without a paraeducator hovering over them, permitting the students to experiment with the processes in new ways. In this strategy, the paraeducator provides only the supports that are necessary, backing off and assisting other students and encouraging peer relationships as they develop to increase authentic interaction with other students (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008). Families

Parents and other caretakers play a major role in their children’s education. Effective collaboration with families facilitates teachers’ increased understanding of the needs of their students, leading to the development of teaching strategies and greater understanding, which is especially important for students with disabilities and their families (Hourigan & Hammel, 2018). As teachers will need to maintain consistent interactions and collaboration with parents, pre-service educators should have opportunities to practice these skills. Parents want to be heard, acknowledged as experts regarding their children, and treated with respect, believing that increased communication between themselves and teachers is critical to their children’s success (Collier, Keefe, & Hirrel, 2015). However, opportunities for pre-service educators to collaborate with parents can be difficult to arrange. Pre-service content can include such activities as encouraging the involvement of arts teacher candidates in the IEP process, particularly during the student teaching experience; requiring candidates to create newsletters for parents that include the planned curriculum; and placing phone calls to introduce themselves to families. As the arts often involve performance elements, such as art shows, concerts, plays, and demonstrations, pre-service educators can use these events to seek out parents in attendance and begin a conversation. Any opportunity for a pre-service educator to make contact with parents should be encouraged to emphasize the importance of this vital partnership. Collier et al. (2015) emphasized the need for pre-service educators to understand the instructional role of parents in providing teachers with much needed insight into their students. The great limiter, however, is the element of time; for such collaborations to be fruitful, there must be dedicated time for pre-service educators to listen to parents’ stories and experiences related to their children. At the very least, pre-service educators in the arts need to be made aware that collaboration with parents is a requirement for a teaching professional. Working closely with intervention specialists, support staff, and parents can provide pre-service educators with the confidence to discuss various teaching issues with educational professionals and other stakeholders. As college students, pre-service educators have little opportunity to interact with the adults in their lives as peers. These relationships present them with the opportunity to have their ideas validated by professionals in the field, providing them with essential skills needed in the teaching profession (Dorff, 2012). Students

One stakeholder not to be overlooked is the student. To gain insight into expectations and abilities, pre-service educators should speak directly with students with disabilities whenever possible. The phrase “nothing about us without us” has become ubiquitous in the disability rights movement and speaks to the importance of providing the opportunities for people with disabilities to have voices in their education and their lives. Students with disabilities are on higher education campuses, working toward undergraduate and graduate degrees, and, in addition, many universities have begun nondegree programs for students with intellectual disabilities to continue

97

Juliann B. Dorff

their education in a college environment while transitioning from their K-12 coursework (US Department of Education, 2011). Through candid conversations, they can provide pre-service educators with the opportunity to learn about their experiences in school and how they might have preferred to be taught.

Preparing Strategies/Adaptations/Modifications for Effective Teaching To prepare arts educators for their future diverse classrooms, use of an infusion model incorporates strategies and methods of teaching students with disabilities throughout coursework in their arts discipline. Infused in instruction, the following essential practices should be covered and consistently revisited: universal design for learning (UDL), differentiated instruction, and evidence-based practices. Universal Design for Learning

UDL is a well-researched education framework, rooted in the architectural concept of universal design, which ensures equal physical access to buildings for people with disabilities. As conceptualized in the field of architecture, it is essential to plan building access from the beginning of the design process and incorporate it into each planning phase. The goal of this pre-planning is to eliminate the need for accommodations or modifications once the structure is built. This concept is the basis for universal design for learning (Martin & Hauth, 2015). What is critical is not to make education more accessible to students with disabilities, as has often been argued, but to ensure that UDL options and alternatives are exercised broadly across the whole range of students. Given this interpretation, no particular type of student has prior rights over any other students, for to diminish one is to diminish the possibility of the promise of them all. (Glass, Meyer & Rose, 2013, p. 117) In the above description, UDL reaches beyond targeting students with disabilities. Neuroscience has consistently demonstrated that learners vary greatly in the ways that they learn and that variability is normal rather than exceptional (Glass, Meyer, & Rose, 2013). Meaningful instruction requires arts educators to investigate options and curriculum strategies that will meet the needs of all students in their classes, and UDL requires that educators consider variability in student learning from the onset of curriculum planning. Often, educators consider the difference or variables in their classes as an afterthought rather than encompassing the needs of all students when identifying lesson objectives before planning (Lieberman, Lytle, & Clarcq, 2008). This is often the way pre-service teachers are taught to organize their lessons: First, identify target objectives and plan activities, then consider the accommodations or modifications that will be needed. Rather than developing accommodations and modifications after completion of a lesson plan, UDL calls for organization of instruction and classroom experiences that address the needs of the various learners in the room in advance. The result is a curriculum plan that provides the opportunity for all students to participate, learn, and demonstrate their learning in the arts. UDL is designed around three principles that can be used as guides for curriculum development: 1 To support recognition learning, providing multiple means of representation by offering flexible ways to present what we teach and learn;

98

Preparing to Teach Students

2 To support strategic learning, providing multiple means of action and expression by offering flexible options for how we learn and express what we know; 3 To support affective learning, providing multiple means of engagement: the why of learning. Each of these steps asks the educator to consider a variety of different strategies to support the what, how, and why of each lesson (CAST, 2014). For pre-service educators to grasp these principles and experience UDL in action, they should be expected to embrace these concepts when creating lessons throughout their arts-specific and general education classes. Both arts-specific and general teacher education faculty should utilize the UDL construct when creating their lessons and highlight its use when presenting information to their classes. As the maxim suggests, teachers often teach as they were taught. Consequently, it becomes imperative that pre-service educators experience consistent modeling of good teaching based on UDL principles in their classes. Differentiated Instruction

Like UDL, differentiated instruction attempts to remove barriers to learning by providing multiple paths to achieve mastery of lesson content. Differentiated instruction is the strategy of adapting to individual students’ needs and abilities to make classrooms more inclusive (Westwood, 2011). It encourages the adaptation of course materials to align with observed differences among learners in the classroom. Implemented effectively, differentiated instruction meets the needs of all learners in the included classroom, such as students with disabilities, learning difficulties, language differences, and those who are gifted and talented. It is often described as being responsive to student needs rather than as an aspect of planning to achieve the outcomes of the learning objectives (Westwood, 2011). The following set of beliefs forms the foundation of differentiated instruction: • • • • • •

Students’ voices and perspectives are valuable; Teachers should empower students to think critically and make decisions about their learning; Students have different learning needs, and these differences should be valued; Students start their learning at different points; Even though students may be working toward a similar goal, instruction may not look the same for all students or the same at all times; Ongoing assessment is the key to designing a strong curriculum (Fountain, 2014, p. 12).

When teachers use differentiated instruction, all class members have the opportunity to learn and demonstrate their knowledge of the same content in different ways that address their learning and response styles (Fountain, 2014). Differentiated instruction is defined more by the provision of alternate ways to access information and additional support to achieve learning goals than by drastic curricular changes (Westwood, 2011). Differentiated instruction breaks lesson planning into three components: content, process, and product. Content is the what of a lesson: what a student should know and be able to do. Process is the how of a lesson: how information will be presented. Product is the demonstration of the lesson: what a student will do to demonstrate learned content. To differentiate instruction, educators first assess their students’ prior knowledge, learning preferences, skills, and interests. Guided by this information, a lesson can be adapted to meet students’ learning needs. Differentiating the what of the lesson might include:

99

Juliann B. Dorff

• • •

Setting individual objectives for learning, Modifying curriculum content to align with the cognitive ability of students, Opportunities to connect directly to individual students’ interests.

Differentiating the how of a lesson might include: • • • • •

Varying the amount of time given to complete a task, Adapting course materials, Providing assistive technology, Providing opportunities for students to work in groups or alone, Adjusting the amount of individual guidance to students.

Differentiating the demonstration of a lesson might include: • •

Students can produce work using different forms or media, Varying the amount of or size of the finished work (Westwood, 2011).

When differentiating instruction, it is recommended that educators make adaptations and modifications only when necessary, providing alternative pathways and additional support rather than modifying the content of a lesson (Westwood, 2011). Course textbooks are increasingly including content about differentiated instruction. Expanding pre-service educators’ opportunities to teach before their capstone student teaching experience provides additional opportunities to reflect on their differentiated practice and adjust teaching based on the needs of their students. Evidence-Based Practices

Practices, interventions, and/or instructional strategies that have been demonstrated to be effective through research are identified as evidence-based practices (EBP) (Martin & Hauth, 2015). To be labeled an evidence-based practice, the practice or strategy must meet strict guidelines set forth by the US Department of Education’s What Works Clearinghouse (n.d.). The Council for Exceptional Children also provides standards for EBP (CEC, 2014). A student’s IEP team can adopt these strategies when needed for a particular student, and when all educators working with the student use them consistently, there is a better opportunity for successful outcomes (Malley, 2014). As EBPs are rooted in research, their implementation must follow an established protocol that highlights the need for arts educators to be involved in the process of implementing a student’s IEP. Implementing an EBP requires an assessment of a student’s current performance, determination of the appropriate strategy, tracking of the student’s progress and growth, recognition of the success of a strategy, or changing of the strategy if progress is not being made (Malley, 2014; Martin & Hauth, 2015). Learning to engage in evidence-based practice, which “refers to a multi-step process of instructional decision-making that involves prioritizing practices identified as effective by sound research (e.g., EBPs)” (Cook, Simpson-Steele, & Cook, 2018, p. 87), should be an essential component of pre-service coursework for arts educators. Arts-specific instructors should reinforce this knowledge and require their pre-service educators to work closely with intervention specialists at their student teaching placements to identify and learn how to implement current practices with particular students. Observation of the pre-service educator in the classroom by university personnel and the intervention specialist can provide immediate feedback to determine if the practice has been implemented correctly and if students are making progress.

100

Preparing to Teach Students

Exposure/Confidence The position statement of the National Art Education Association (NAEA, 2015) addressing Equity for All Students, states, in part, that “A successful art education program respects a range of diversity in the uniqueness of all students, their similarities, differences, and learning characteristics.” Additionally, the organization’s position on Preservice Education and its Relationship to Higher Education, adopted in 2011, was revised in 2014 with the following paragraph added: NAEA recognizes the importance of clinical experiences in mastering the art of teaching. Teaching is a practice skill, requiring hands-on application of theory. As student teachers, preservice educators should have experiences in the classroom with diverse students and explore different approaches to teaching students with special needs. (NAEA, 2014) The capstone experience for pre-service arts education programs is student teaching. This provides pre-service educators, under the guidance of a cooperating teacher, with the opportunity to put into practice theories studied during their coursework. This experience can provide aspiring educators with the opportunity to utilize the UDL principles in their lesson planning and actually differentiate instruction in inclusive classrooms. Some arts teacher preparation programs offer courses that include experiences for teaching students with disabilities before capstone teaching. These courses are either required or offered as recommended electives through arts education programs. The teaching experience occurs either in a self-contained unit for students with disabilities, meaning that the students in these classrooms are taught separately from the general school population for the majority of their days, or in inclusive arts education settings. Pre-service students have opportunities to observe in their assigned classrooms; meet the students, intervention specialists, and paraeducators; and practice collaborative skills. Consideration is given to available supportive technologies and/or adaptive tools that can be utilized to fully engage students in the arts classroom. Thus, pre-service educators can learn to plan curricula based on these experiences. Studies have measured pre-service educators’ perceptions about teaching students with disabilities after participating in such courses, indicating more positive perceptions about working with students with disabilities after having these experiences (Bain & Hasio, 2011; Kaiser & Johnson, 2000; VanWheelden & Whipple, 2005). The pre-service educators’ exposure to students with disabilities resulted in increased confidence as they were able to develop a comfort level with a new and often unfamiliar environment (Bain & Hasio, 2011). Providing pre-service educators with the opportunity to develop a curriculum and teach it created an authentic experience for them as well as authentic learning for students with disabilities. Additional skills learned by pre-service educators included improved listening skills, better understanding of diverse learning groups, flexibility, patience, and reflective practice. (Bain & Hasio, 2011).

Conclusion Since the landmark work of the 1990s (Blandy, 1994; DePauw & Karp, 1994; Guay, 1994), demonstrating how to better prepare arts educators to meet the needs of all students in diverse classrooms, progress has been slow. Some university faculty are becoming more comfortable teaching topics addressing students with disabilities and including more information in their arts-specific courses; in some cases, they are providing additional experiences to pre-service educators to support theory-based learning (see, for example, Andrus, 2012; Dorff, 2012; Fuelberth & Laird, 2014; Horoschak, Gavin, & Hicks, 2014). However, anecdotal evidence indicates that not all universities

101

Juliann B. Dorff

offering arts education degrees require coursework in teaching students with disabilities, and research is needed to better understand this trend (Silverstein, 2012). With current constraints on the number of hours for an education degree, it is unlikely that university curricula will include additional required coursework. Pre-service arts education suggests the adoption of an infusion approach, which will enhance teaching methods and strategies to meet the needs of all students in arts classes, in all arts-specific and general teacher education courses. Opportunities to work with diverse student populations and design arts-specific strategies will contribute to the preparation of highly qualified arts educators, enthusiastic about sharing their love of the arts with each new generation.

References Andrus, L. (2012). Teaching urban students with special learning needs: What we learned through the Art Partners Program. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). The Intersection of Arts Education and Special Education: Exemplary Programs and Approaches (pp. 19–46). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Ashby, C. (2012). Disability studies and inclusive teacher preparation: A socially just path for teacher education. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 37(1), 89–99. Bain, C. & Hasio, C. (2011). Authentic learning experience prepares preservice students to teach art to children with special needs. Art Education, 64(2), 33–39. Blandy, D. (1994). Assuming responsibility: Disability rights and the preparation of art educators. Studies in Art Education, 35(3), 179–187. Burdick, C., & Causton-Theoharis, J. (2012). Creating effective paraprofessional support in the inclusive art classroom. Art Education, 65(6), 33–37. CAST. (2014). What is universal design for learning? [Website]. National Center on Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved from www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl Causton-Theoharis, J. & Burdick, C. (2008). Paraprofessionals: Gatekeepers of authentic art production. Studies in Art Education, 49(3), 167–182. Chopra, R. V., Carroll, D., & Manjack, S. K. (2018). Paraeducator issues and strategies for supporting ­students with disabilities in arts education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 105–128). New York, NY: Routledge. Collier, M., Keefe, E. B., & Hirrel, L. A. (2015). Preparing special education teachers to collaborate with families. School Community Journal, 25(1), 117–135. Colwell, C. & Thompson, L. (2000). “Inclusion” of information on mainstreaming in undergraduate music education curricula. Journal of Music Theory, 37(3), 205–211. Cook, B. G., Simpson-Steele, J., & Cook, L. H. (2018). Using evidence-based practice in teaching students with and at risk for developing disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 72–90). New York, NY: Routledge. Council for Exceptional Children. (2014). Standards for evidence-based practices in special education. Retrieved from www.cec.sped.org/~/media/Files/Standards/Evidence%20based%20Practices%20and%20Practice/ EBP%20­FINAL.pdf Cramer, E. S., Coleman, M. B., Park, Y., Bell, S. M., & Coles, J. T. (2015). Art educators’ knowledge for teaching students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Studies in Art Education, 57(1), 6–20. Defries, R. & Habib D. (2009). Including Samuel. USA: Pinehurst Pictures and Sound. DePauw, K. P. & Karp, G. G. (1994). Preparing teachers for inclusion: The role of higher education. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation and Dance, 65(1), 51–56. Derby, J. (2011). Disability studies and art education. Studies, 52(2), 94–111. Dorff, J. (2012). The importance of collaboration in art classrooms for success of students with special needs. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 10–18). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Fountain, H. (2014). Differentiated Instruction. Worcester, MA: Davis Publications. Frisque, J., Neibur, L. & Humphreys, J. T. (1994) Music mainstreaming practices in Arizona. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(2), 94–104. Fuelberth, R. V. & Laird, L. E. (2014). Tools and stories: Preparing music educators for Successful inclusive classrooms through universal design for learning. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and Special Education Exemplary Programs and Approaches (pp. 127–145). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

102

Preparing to Teach Students Gerber, S. & Federenko, J. (2006). Building cooperative partnerships. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay, (Eds.) Reaching and Teaching students with special needs through art. (pp. 161–176). Reston, VA: The National Art Education Association. Gfeller, K., Darrow, A. A., & Heddon, S. K. (1990). Perceived effectiveness of mainstreaming in Iowa and Kansas schools. Journal of Research in Music Education, 38, 90–101. Glass, D., Meyer, A., & Rose, D. (2013). Universal design for leaning in the arts. Harvard Educational Review, 83(1), 98–119. Guay, D. (1994). Students with disabilities in the art classroom: How prepared are we? Studies in Art Education, 36(1), 44–56. Guay, D. (1995). The sunny side of the street. A supportive community for the inclusive classroom. Art Education, 48(3), 51–56. Guay, D. (2003). Paraeducators in art classrooms: Issues of culture, leadership, and special needs. Studies in Art Education, 45(1), 20–39. Haggarty School. (2016). Haggarty School motto. Retrieved from http://haggerty.cpsd.us/about_our_school Hammel, A. & Hourigan, R. (2011). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label free approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Horoschak, L., Gavin, K., & Hicks, V. (2014). Reflections on Moore College of Art and Design’s Master’s Degree Program with an emphasis in special populations. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 127–145). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Hourigan, R., & Hammel, A. (2018). Family perspectives on access to arts education for students with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 267–277). New York, NY: Routledge. Kaiser, K. A. & Johnson, K. E. (2000). The effect of an interactive experience on music majors’ perceptions of music for Deaf students. Journal of Music Therapy, 37(3), 222–234. Kunc, N. & Van der Klift, E. (1995). In spite of my disability [Online version]. Retrieved from www.­ broadreachtraining.com/articles/arinspit.htm Lieberman, L., Lytle, R., & Clarcq, J. (2008). Getting it right from the start. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 79(2), 32–39. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding principles for teachers. Washington: DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Martin, C. C. & Hauth, C. (2015). The survival guide for new special education teachers. Alexandria, VA: The Council for Exceptional Children. Moore, P. (2013). The key to success for students with special needs. Teaching Music, 20(5), 57. National Art Education Association Position Papers. (2014). Preservice education and its relationship to higher education. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Retrieved from https://arteducators-prod. s3.amazonaws.com/documents/219/7d7c4c63-4a96-4873-90cb-857456bfe90c.pdf?1451957252 National Art Education Association Position Statement. (2015) Equity for all students. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Retrieved from www.arteducators.org/advocacy/articles/128-position-statementon-equity- for-all-students Salvador, K. (2010). Who isn’t a special learner? A survey of how music teacher education programs prepare future educators to work with exceptional populations. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 20(1), 27–38. Scotch, R. K. & Shriner, K. (1997). Disability as human variation: Implications for policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 549, 148–159. Shyman, E. (2016). The reinforcement of ableism: Normality, the medical model of disability, and humanism in applied behavior analysis and ASD. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 54(5), 366–376. Silverstein, L. (2012). Proceedings report. Examining the intersection of arts education and special education: A national forum. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. US Department of Education. (2011). Students with disabilities preparing for postsecondary education: Know your rights and responsibilities. Washington, DC: Office of Civil Rights. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/about/ offices/list/ocr/transition.html VanWheelden, K. & Whipple, J. (2005). The effects of field experience on music education majors’ perceptions of music instruction for secondary students with special needs. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 14(2), 62–68. VanWheelden, K. & Whipple, J. (2014). Music educators’ perceptions of preparation and supports available for inclusion. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 23(2), 33–51. Westwood, P. (2011). Commonsense methods for children with special educational needs. New York, NY: Routledge.

103

Appendix I Suggested Texts and Videos for Pre-Service Education Adamek, M. S., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: The American Music Therapy Association. Canzoniero, M. (2011). Shelter Island. New York: Studio 13. Defries, R. & Habib D. (2009). Including Samuel. USA: Pinehurst Pictures and Sound. Dorff, J. & Hoeptner Poling, L. (2013). I am: Teacher resource guide: A series of visual art lesson plans designed to engage students with disabilities. VSA International Art Program. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Dorff, J. & Hoeptner Poling, L. (2014). The Future: Teacher resource guide: A series of visual art lesson plans designed to engage students with disabilities. VSA International Art Program. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Dorff, J. & Hoeptner Poling, L. (2015). The World: Teacher resource guide: A series of visual art lesson plans designed to engage students with disabilities. VSA International Art Program. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Dorff, J. & Hoeptner Poling, L. (2016). Ubuntu: Teacher resource guide: A series of visual art lesson plans designed to engage students with disabilities. VSA International Art Program. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Gerber, B. L. & Guay, D. (2006). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Gerber, B. L. & Kellman, J. (2010). Understanding students with autism through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Habib, D. (2014). Who cares about Kelsey? University of New Hampshire: Institute on Disability/UCED. Hammel, A. M. & Hourigan, R. M. (2011). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label free approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hammel, A. M. & Hourigan, R. M. (2013). Teaching music to students with autism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hammel, A. M., Hickox, R. Y. & Hourigan, R.M. (2016). Winding it back: Teaching to individual differences in the music classroom. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U. S. C. §§ 1401 et. seq. (2004). Kaufman, K. A. (2005). Inclusive creative movement and dance. Champagne, IL: Human Kinetics. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Malley, S. M. (Ed.). (2012). The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches. VSA The International Organization on Arts and Disability. Washington: DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the core arts standards: Guiding principles for teachers. Washington: DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M. (Ed.). (2014). 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches. VSA The International Organization on Arts and Disability. Washington: DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. What Works Clearinghouse. (n.d.). What works clearinghouse. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ Wurzburg, G. (2001). Graduating Peter. Direct Cinema Limited. Wurzburg, G. & Goodwing, T. (1992). Educating Peter. Direct Cinema Limited.

104

8 Utilizing Paraeducators Issues and Strategies for Supporting Students with Disabilities in Arts Education Ritu V. Chopra, Diane Carroll, and Sharon K. Manjack

Paraeducators are routinely used in the delivery of instruction to students with disabilities. However, paraeducators often have no formal preparation and typically receive limited supervision from special education teachers for their role in supporting students with disabilities. Drawing upon existing literature, this chapter provides historical background, current challenges, and effective practices related to the use of paraeducators who support students with disabilities in general education, specifically in arts education. In this chapter, we highlight the importance of collaboration between special education teachers and arts education teachers to ensure access to visual art, music, dance, theater, and other arts-related curricula, with the purpose of achieving optimal outcomes for students with disabilities in the arts. Emphasis is placed on the importance of (a) arts education teachers and special education teachers as co-designers of instruction for students with disabilities; (b) ongoing communication between arts education teachers, special education teachers, and paraeducators to guide paraeducators as they work with students with disabilities; and (c) provision of instructional and assessment materials for paraeducators to use in order to direct and monitor student progress under the guidance of arts education and special education teachers.

Trends and Challenges According to the National Education Association (NEA, 2016), paraeducators are the largest group of education support professionals (ESPs). It is estimated that approximately 758,000 paraeducators assist teachers in schools in grades K-12. Special education programs are believed to be the single largest employer of paraeducators (French, 2003; NEA, 2016). A dramatic surge in the use of paraeducators to provide individualized support to students with disabilities began with the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1975, when it was mandated that students with disabilities be educated in the least restrictive environment (LRE) appropriate to their individual learning needs. This led to the employment of paraeducators, alternatively called paraprofessionals, teacher assistants, education assistants, or teacher aides, whose primary role was to assist with the basic needs of students with disabilities (Conley, Gould, & Levine, 2009; French, 2003; Giangreco, Yuan, McKenzie, Cameron, & Fialka, 2005; Pickett, 2008). In the 1990s, with growing trends toward the inclusive education of children with disabilities in local schools and classrooms, there was a further increase in paraeducators’ employment. There was also an expansion of their role to include their offering instructional support in academic subjects, teaching

105

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

functional life skills and vocational skills, collecting data, facilitating interactions with peers without disabilities, and supporting students with challenging behaviors (Ashbaker & Morgan, 2010; Chopra, 2009; Douglas, Chapin, Nolan, 2016; Doyle, 2008; Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; French & Pickett, 1997; Giangreco & Broer, 2005; Uitto & Chopra, 2015). As a result of this role expansion, paraeducators have been heralded as “bridges,” “critical team members,” and “connectors” in the inclusion process for students with disabilities (Chopra et al., 2004; Daniels & McBride, 2001; French & Chopra, 1999; Marks, Schrader, & Levine 1999; Wadsworth & Knight, 1996). Arts education classes were typically one of the first places where students with more ­significant disabilities were placed in response to the push toward inclusive education (­Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008: Malley, 2018; Weibe-Zederayko & Ward, 1999). Arts education classes, whether visual art, music, theater, or dance, are often places where students with the most significant disabilities may shine because of less dependence on reading, writing, math, and language skills. Students who have difficulty expressing themselves verbally or in writing may find the arts to be an easier or more comfortable way of expressing themselves and experiencing increased opportunities for socializing with their peers who do not have disabilities (Guay 2003; Guay & Gerlach, 2006). The success of students with disabilities in arts education tended to pave the way for their inclusion in other general education classrooms. Paraeducators have been found to be invaluable to the participation of students with disabilities in arts education. Guay (2003) found that ­paraeducators played a central role in arts education by clarifying assignments; breaking down tasks into smaller, more manageable steps; and helping students organize their ideas and materials. Paraeducators also assisted arts education teachers by administering assessments in alternate modes, supervising transitions, and implementing and monitoring behavior management plans. Although there is general agreement that paraeducators are an integral part of the instructional process and that they provide critical supports to students with disabilities in inclusive education, several issues have been documented with their use (Chopra & French, 2004; Chopra & Uitto, 2015; ­ iangreco, ­Edelman, Douglas et al. 2016; Downing, Ryndak, & Clark, 2000; Giangreco, 2010; G Luiselli, & Macfarland, 1997; Pickett, 2003). In the following section, we discuss the interrelated issues and challenges regarding the use of paraeducators, with specific emphasis on how these concerns affect student access to the arts education curriculum. Specific to arts education are issues associated with paraeducators who interfere with authentic student choice, creativity, and task production (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Guay, 2003).

Role Confusion Increased use and the expanded role of paraeducators has resulted in confusion about the role of the teacher and the paraeducator (Carter, O’Rourke, Sisco, & Pelsue, 2009; Chopra & Uitto, 2015; Douglas et al., 2016; French & Pickett, 1997; Giangreco, Suter, & Doyle, 2010). Researchers and experts in the field have repeatedly underscored that the role of paraeducators is to supplement, not supplant, the work of licensed teachers or related service providers (Giangreco, Broer & Suter, 2011; National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities, 1999). This stance is supported by the most widely accepted definition of a paraeducator: A paraeducator is an employee: (1) whose position is either instructional in nature or who delivers other direct or indirect services to students and/or parents; and (2) who works under supervision of a teacher or other professional staff member who is responsible for the overall conduct of the class, the design and implementation of individualized educational programs, and the assessment of the effect of the programs on student progress. (Pickett, 1986, p. 2)

106

Utilizing Paraeducators

Research reveals, however, that special education paraeducators tend to perform tasks that are quite complex and make important curricular, instructional, and management decisions for students with disabilities, despite the absence of formal qualifications, preparation, or supervisor approval (Chopra & Uitto, 2015; Giangreco et al., 2011; Katsiyannis, Hodge, & Lanford, 2000). Legally and ethically, these tasks are the responsibilities of both general education and special education teachers as well as other licensed professionals, who often lack clarity about their own role when working with a paraeducator (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012; French, 1998; Giangreco & Doyle, 2004; Giangreco, Edelman, Broer, & Doyle, 2001; Katsiyannis et al., 2000). Paraeducators sometimes willingly assume, or are assigned, responsibilities beyond the scopes of their legitimate roles, which may lead to their serving as the primary providers of instruction for students with disabilities. This practice often results in teachers’ relinquishing their legitimate roles in the education of these students (Giangreco, Carter, Doyle, & Suter, 2010). This practice is apparent in arts education classes, where paraeducators have been found to make independent decisions about art objectives, methods, and materials for students with disabilities (Guay & Gerlach, 2006). Arts education teachers typically have large-sized classes and purposefully create less structured classroom settings to enhance individual student creativity. Yet these teachers f ind themselves acquiescing to the decisions of the paraeducators because, like many other general education teachers, they often lack understanding of and clarity about the roles of paraeducators and therefore assume they are responsible for “teaching” students with disabilities. Additionally, many arts education teachers lack knowledge regarding appropriate modif ications and accommodations for students with disabilities or are sometimes simply uncomfortable around these students (Cramer, Coleman, Park, Bell, & Coles, 2015). Other factors that lead paraeducators to assume inappropriately central roles in arts instruction for students with disabilities are (a) lack of preparation for teachers to work with paraeducators, (b) lack of collaboration between arts teachers and special education teachers, and (c) lack of clarity about who is responsible for guiding and supervising the work of the paraeducator (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Guay, 2003). We discuss these factors at length in the following sections.

Lack of Preparation for the Paraeducator Role Recent research demonstrates that not only do paraeducators engage in instructional tasks that are not appropriate to their role while working with students with disabilities, they often do so with little or no training. Critical questions have been raised regarding the possible disservice to students with disabilities when their instruction is solely left to paraeducators, who are the least prepared or least qualified personnel to work with them (Allington & Cunningham, 1996; Blacher, 2007; Chopra & French, 2004, Etscheidt, 2005; French, 1998; Giangreco et al., 2010; Minondo, Meyer, & Xin, 2001; Riggs & Mueller, 2001; Rubin & Long, 1994; Rutherford, 2012; Uitto & Chopra, 2015). In a study examining the supports provided to students with disabilities in general education classes, Giangreco, Broer, and Edelman (2002) found that paraeducators, teachers, and administrators reported instruction as being the paraeducator’s primary purpose in schools, yet these individuals lacked the academic qualifications and adequate preparation to serve in their assigned instructional roles. The authors questioned this overreliance on unqualified personnel, providing the primary instruction to students with disabilities, while their peers without disabilities received their primary instruction from a licensed teacher. Brown, Farrington, Ziegler, Knight, and Ross (1999) concluded that often, the least qualified personnel are in the position of providing the majority of instruction and related services to students who present educators with the most complex learning challenges.

107

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Despite repeated calls for training paraeducators over the past 30 years, lack of preparation continues to be a paramount concern. Paraeducators typically do not have pre-service training, rarely have access to in-service professional development opportunities, and are not provided with onthe-job training from teachers to address gaps in content area knowledge and skills (Anderson & Finney, 2008; Blalock, 1984; Chopra, Sandoval-Lucero, & French, 2011; French & Cabell, 1993; Jones & Bender, 1993; Mueller, 1997; O’Neill, 2010; Parsons & Reid, 1999; Pickett, Gerlach, Morgan, Likins, & Wallace, 2007; Riggs, 2001). Similar trends have been reported in the literature regarding paraeducators in arts education. In a study conducted by Guay (2003), paraeducators assisting in arts classes reported that they had not only received inadequate training but, more often, received minimal or nonexistent training. In working with students with disabilities, paraeducators often lack basic understanding of arts education goals, processes, and materials as well as an understanding of various disabilities, instructional strategies, and behavior supports (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Guay, 2003; Guay & Gerlach, 2006). For students with low incidence disabilities, arts education classes are often settings where they may most easily and successfully be included with their non-disabled peers. However, lack of paraeducator knowledge about arts education basics denies students with disabilities access to the arts curriculum and results in lost opportunities for inclusion and authentic artistic expression.

Insufficient Supervision of Paraeducators Experts in the field, as well as professional organizations, such as the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC), have identified supervision, in terms of guiding and directing the work of paraeducators, as the ethical responsibility of teachers and an integral part of their personnel standards (Ashbaker & Morgan, 2010; CEC, 2016; Chopra & Uitto, 2015; French, 2002; Pickett, 1986; Wallace, Shin, Bartholomay, & Stahl, 2001). In 1986, Pickett pointed out that the effective use of a paraeducator relied on the teacher’s leadership, or executive style, and ability to integrate the paraeducator into the classroom setting. Three decades later, however, teachers’ delegation of tasks and their roles as supervisors continue to be dynamics in special education that need clarification (Fisher & Pleasants, 2012). It is well documented that teachers feel unprepared and reluctant to supervise paraeducators (Chopra et al., 2011; Drecktrah, 2000; French, 1998, 2001, 2003; French & Pickett, 1997; Giangreco et al., 2010; Pickett, 1986; Wallace et al., 2001). Lack of preparation is the root cause of teachers’ lack of competence in supervision, with the topic adequately addressed neither in pre-service teacher education programs nor in professional development occurring after employment (Wallace et al., 2001). ­Inadequate supervision from either the special educators or the general educators in inclusive classroom settings contributes to the practice of many paraeducators making pedagogical decisions independent of the teachers (Downing et al., 2000; French, 2001; Giangreco et al., 2001, 2002; Marks et al., 1999; Riggs & Mueller, 2001). Detrimental, though often unintended, effects occur when teachers do not perform their leadership role and paraeducators, who are often inadequately trained, make their own decisions in providing services to students with disabilities (Giangreco & Doyle, 2004). Literature specific to the role of teachers in arts education classes reiterates similar concerns. Not only do arts education teachers need to know how to work directly with students who have disabilities, they also need to know how to guide, support, and supervise paraeducators. Although working with paraeducators is an increasingly important job responsibility, these skills are not specifically addressed in arts educator preparation programs (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Guay, 2003; Guay & Gerlach, 2006). To facilitate the delivery of inclusive instruction, arts education preparation programs must prepare teachers to take on the leadership roles necessary for successful collaboration with support personnel (Galbraith, 1997).

108

Utilizing Paraeducators

Lack of Collaboration Unequivocal agreement exists among experts and researchers in the field of special education that collaboration and consultation are not options but necessities to ensure inclusive education (Biggs, Gilson, & Carter, 2016; Eccleston, 2010; French & Chopra, 2006; Friend  & Cook, 2017; Jones, 2012). Yet, despite the preponderance of literature on co-teaching, collaboration, and consultation as supports for the successful inclusion of students with disabilities, these continue to be challenging areas of work for special education teachers and general education teachers, with myriad well-documented barriers. The addition of paraeducators to these already complex and difficult situations can further complicate matters for all involved (Chopra, 2009; Giangreco, 2003; Mastropieri, 2001; McGrath, Johns, & Mathur, 2010). Lack of planning time and systematic communication have been identified as the two major barriers to effective teamwork among teachers and paraeducators (Chopra & Uitto, 2015; French, 2002; Jones, 2012; Voltz, Elliott, & Cobb, 1994; Wallace et al., 2001; Weishaar, 2001). The root of this problem typically lies within the special education delivery system: The extensive demands on special education teachers with large caseloads leaves limited time for them to meet and/or consult with paraeducators and general education teachers (Giangreco & Broer, 2005). These concerns are reiterated in arts education, as pointed out by Guay and Gerlach (2006): “Art teachers have traditionally been isolated, and thus autonomous, within either their art classroom or the classrooms they visit with their art carts” (p. 190). Guay and Gerlach suggest that the inclusion movement has alleviated some of this isolation; however, including students with disabilities in arts education classes does not mean that arts educators receive the special education support they need. In the absence of collaboration with the special education teacher, arts education teachers are expected to not only address the needs of students with the most significant disabilities, as well as those with less significant disabilities, but guide and supervise paraeducators in the process, with little to no training on how to do so.

Overreliance on Paraeducators and Excessive Paraeducator Support An extensive volume of research and literature has documented a wide range of unintended but considerably negative consequences of over-reliance on paraeducators in special education (Broer, Doyle, & Giangreco, 2005; Carter, Sisco, Brown, Brickham, & Al-Khabbaz, 2008; Chopra, 2009; Chopra & French, 2004; Giangreco, 2010; Giangreco et al., 1997; Marks et al., 1999; Skar & Tamm, 2001; Tews & Lupart, 2008; Werts, Zigmond, & Leeper, 2001; Young, Simpson, Myles, & Kamps, 1997). The potential unfavorable effects are enumerated below: • • • •

•

Overdependence on paraeducators by students with disabilities and/or their parents, resulting in the learned helplessness and disempowerment of students; Failure by paraeducators to exercise boundaries in their relationships with students and the development of feelings of “ownership” of students; Close relationships between paraeducators and parents of students with disabilities, which exclude or limit teacher involvement; Relinquished teacher responsibility, with untrained paraeducators serving as the “primary teacher” for students, resulting in limited access to competent instruction, lowered expectations, and compromised learning opportunities; Missed inclusion opportunities and the establishment of social barriers that prevent peer interactions, resulting in non-assimilation/acceptance by peers and bullying and teasing for students with disabilities.

109

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Only two studies (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Guay, 2003) focusing on paraeducators in arts education settings have been reported. Both studies have validated the above findings and uncovered additional negative effects specific to the use of paraeducators in supporting students with disabilities in visual arts education. Guay (2003) confirmed that the presence of paraeducators resulted in segregation and isolation from peers and resulted in reduced or no interaction between the student(s) with disabilities and the arts education teachers or their peers. In this study, the arts teacher often relinquished leadership and let well-meaning but untrained or under-trained paraeducators make decisions about objectives, methods, and ­m aterials for the students with ­d isabilities. When paraeducators determined learning outcomes, lowered expectations and disempowerment of the students with disabilities were apparent. Paraeducators also interfered with students’ creativity by supporting conformist types of art production and giving step-­by-step directions to the students; occasionally, paraeducators did most of the work themselves, with limited or no contributions from the student. According to Guay, “They took over when time, discipline, or ability constraints were felt” (p. 33). In the second study, Causton-Theoharis and Burdick (2008) reported that although paraeducators provided access (“opened the gate”) to the arts education curriculum for students with disabilities, they often denied access (“closed the gate”) by “interrupting authenticity” and “altering art production entirely” (p. 171). In this study as well, paraeducators were found to lower expectations of students with disabilities, unnecessarily share in the completion of art assignments, alter student work to make it “look better,” limit and/or dictate the use of materials, and restrict or limit student ideas and choices. The authors observed that paraeducators tended to over-support the students and attempted to suppress or minimize differences in art performance and production. Some of the issues and concerns that specifically apply to arts education stem from the fact that specific annual goals and direct instructional minutes may not be included for the arts on students’ individualized education programs (IEPs). If included, by law, teachers of the arts would receive specific special education support and resources, as outlined in a student’s IEP. When arts education goals and services are not included on IEPs, special education teachers may not realize that teachers of the arts require assistance. However, if the needs of a student are significant enough, a paraeducator is typically assigned to work with the student in all classes, including the arts. As we have observed in our experience, only when special education teachers truly understand the content of the particular arts education class and the potential benefits of active engagement by students with disabilities do they go out of their way to ensure that appropriate modifications and accommodations are provided. When special education teachers do not reach out, arts teachers assume that the only support they have is the paraeducator who accompanies the student with disabilities to their arts class. In certain cases, because of their lack of preparation in supporting students with disabilities, arts educators may relinquish full responsibility for instruction to paraeducators instead of using effective strategies to shape their instructional support.

Strategies for Effective Use of Paraeducators in Arts Education In this section, we share evidence-based strategies to address the challenges associated with the use of paraeducators in arts education. Although we have found these strategies to be useful, and most prevalent in the literature, they are by no means finite. To illustrate their use, we have woven

110

Utilizing Paraeducators

real-life case studies, drawn from the third author’s experience in arts education, throughout the text.

Engaging in Collaboration Collaboration is the key to creating successful working relationships and practices that facilitate communication and co-planning among teachers of the arts, special education teachers, and paraeducators. Friend and Cook (2017) referred to collaboration as a “style of direct ­i nteraction between at least two coequal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal” (p. 5). Additionally, they discussed shared responsibility and equal participation in deciding the appropriateness of materials and strategies. Additional aspects of collaboration include not only sharing materials but also resources, such as time, expertise, strategies, and sharing in accountability for results, whether positive or negative. When applied to arts education, collaboration requires that special education teachers and arts teachers, as coequal parties, voluntarily discuss curriculum, student needs, and strengths, and collaboratively establish the expectations, accommodations, and modifications outlined for each student. Each party comes with particular expertise: Special educators are aware of students’ learning needs, but arts education teachers are experts in art curriculums and classroom expectations. Together, when sharing individual expertise, strategies, and expectations, they can create a positive plan for each special education student. Additionally, the arts education teacher has an additional adult, the paraeducator, in the classroom. Together, the arts educator and special educator must decide on supervision responsibilities and requirements so that a unified message can be conveyed to the paraeducator to ensure appropriate student support ( Jones, 2012; Lamar-Dukes & Dukes, 2005; Voltz et al., 1994; Wallace et al., 2001; Weishaar, 2001). Murawski and Dieker (2004) suggested that, before working together, arts education and special education teachers explore their preexisting beliefs, attitudes, and expectations about collaboration, co-teaching, and the consultative process. Sample discussion statements that can be utilized for this pre-collaboration conversation are presented in Appendix A. Offering them opportunities to share their experiences, concerns, and successes allows for expression of individual beliefs, attitudes, and expectations. Teachers are then able to begin the process of building trust and rapport as they use those answers to design a co-teaching, collaborative, and/or consultative process that works best to address their students’ needs. The paraeducator who supports the student with disabilities is also an integral part of the collaborative team and should be apprised of the teachers’ collaborative decisions. This can happen during or after the initial meeting between the art teacher and special education teacher. In addition to discussing the individual student’s needs, the arts education teacher and special education teacher should discuss additional expectations of the paraeducator. For example, the paraeducator may be seen as a resource solely for supporting a student with disabilities or may support the whole class, interacting with all students.

Clarifying Roles and Responsibilities Role clarity is one of the prerequisites for collaborative practice (Carroll, 2001; Da Fonte & Capizzi, 2015). The following example addresses issues of role ambiguity among the special educator, arts educator, and paraeducator.

111

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Case Study: Whose Role Is It? Music Teacher Dilemma: “Quite honestly, I don’t know what my responsibilities are with regard to Tina’s paraeducator. I’m a music teacher. Am I responsible for telling her what to do? I figured someone else was responsible, so I just let her do whatever she wants. Who’s in charge? Who do I go to?” Issue: Paraeducator acts as the primary teacher when music teacher relinquishes responsibility. Possible Solution/Strategy: At the beginning of the year, the special education teacher, music teacher, and paraeducator should meet to review Tina’s IEP and develop music goals. In this situation, the role of the paraeducator should be clearly defined, as should the music teacher’s supervisory role.

In working under the direction and supervision of a licensed professional, a paraeducator’s responsibilities might include the following tasks (Carroll, 2001; CEC, 2016; Chopra & Uitto, 2015; French, 2002): • Implement instruction and organize learning experiences in various environments, based on lesson plans provided by teachers or other licensed personnel, • Prepare, produce, and maintain instructional materials as prescribed by the teacher, • Assist in the instructional processes and communicate their perceptions of students’ progress and needs with the teacher • Reinforce learning with individual students or small groups, • Assist individual students with personal care, mobility, etc., • Assist with observations/data recording/charting, • Assist with ongoing behavior management, • Maintain a safe learning environment. Inclusive special educators must assume the roles of program leaders who are responsible for streamlining information, problem-solving, and coordinating a complex system of students and adults, including paraeducators, related service providers, general education teachers, and peer assistants (Fisher, Frey, & Thousand, 2003; French & Chopra, 2006). Widely acknowledged responsibilities of special educators, related to paraeducator supervision, include the following tasks (CEC, 2016): • • • • •

Provide paraeducator orientation, Plan lessons and determine adaptations for the paraeducator to implement, Schedule the paraeducator’s daily assignments, including settings and students to support, Delegate tasks appropriate to paraeducator’s role, based upon their competencies, Provide on-the-job training and coaching to paraeducator regarding (a) assigned curricular and instructional tasks in general education classes and (b) overall ethical and professional behaviors beneficial to students with disabilities, • Monitor paraeducator’s performance through routine observations and timely, supportive, and collegial feedback, • Manage the workplace through systematic communication and problem-solving with the paraeducator and other licensed school personnel. Although special education teachers have a more prominent role in designing i­nstruction for students with disabilities and supervising paraeducators, it is imperative that general ­educators, including teachers of the arts, accept and view both of these functions as shared responsibilities 112

Utilizing Paraeducators

(Chopra, 2009; Douglas et al., 2016; French & Chopra, 2006). Listed below are the responsibilities of arts educators working with special education teachers and paraeducators to ensure that the needs of students with disabilities are adequately met in their classes: • • • • • • • •

Meet with the special education teacher to determine how to address the needs of students with disabilities, Develop plans to address curricular content and IEP goals, Co-teach, collaborate, and/or consult regularly with the special education teacher to ensure that the needs of students are met and monitor progress, Address the needs of all students in the arts classroom, including planning and implementing instruction, assessment, and classroom management, With the special education teacher, provide overall orientation for the paraeducator, including class expectations, behavior management philosophy, and the overall goals of the arts class, With the special education teacher’s input, define the paraeducator’s roles and responsibilities, Supervise the paraeducator in the arts classroom, Provide ongoing feedback to the paraeducator, and special education teacher, about their performance.

Developing a Plan for the Student To determine specific learning outcomes for a student with disabilities, the first step is identifying what comprises essential learning for all students in the arts education class. Based on these essential learning goals, the arts education teacher and the special education teacher can select outcomes, or devise alternative learning outcomes, that would be appropriate for the student. The special education teacher is most familiar with the individual student’s needs and what instructional strategies, accommodations, and modifications might be needed to meet those learning outcomes. To help the teacher of the arts plan for a student with a disability, the special education teacher should first develop an IEP summary that describes pertinent information about the student, learning needs related to his/her disability, his/her strengths, his/her academic and communication abilities, goals and objectives to be addressed in the arts class, curricular and assessment accommodations and modifications, and a behavior intervention plan, if applicable. If goals for arts education are already written into the IEP, teachers simply need to design lessons to address them. The arts teacher should contribute to the IEP review each year, and if there are any needed accommodations in the arts classroom, they should be included in the IEP. Typically, goals for arts education are not specified in the IEP, and teachers may choose to write informal ones to guide their arts lessons. However, after consideration of a student’s specific needs, teachers might also integrate arts instruction with goals that promote independence, communication, or socialization (Guay, 1993, 2006). Teachers should also discuss lesson formats and how a student will respond or participate. For example, it may be difficult for a student to attend to a lecture, but providing a modified picture schedule of the steps involved in the learning activity may help to engage them and provide an alternative method of instruction. If the lesson requires the student to learn new vocabulary, how and when will that be taught? What words would need to be added to a communication device so that the student could actively participate in the class? Additionally, a student may need modified or adapted materials, which should be included in the IEP. The special educator and arts educator can collaboratively decide what those might be and how they will be procured. Together, they can develop ideas for adapting all aspects of the lesson. If the outcomes address IEP objectives, they can also decide how these will be measured and by whom. Because arts education classes are frequently less structured than core academic classes, students may have more opportunities to socialize. Thus, another potential question for teachers to consider is how the student with disabilities will be included in this aspect of the class. 113

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Planning with the Paraeducator Just as arts education and special education teachers need to explore their attitudes, beliefs, and expectations about working together to meet the needs of students with disabilities, so should paraeducators. Work and teaching style inventories (French, 2002) are a good way to discover personal preferences in the work place. Using this information to build on each other’s strengths is helpful in designing a plan to work together. After meeting together to explore their preexisting beliefs, attitudes, and expectations, and to review the IEP summary, the role of the paraeducator in implementing the plan developed by the arts education teacher and special education teacher must be established. The plan must be conveyed to the paraeducator in enough detail to make it clear what the student is to accomplish in the art class and what adaptations are appropriate for the student. In addition, the plan should address how the student will participate in instructional groupings and in various lesson formats (lecture, group work, independent work, research, etc.). The plan must also provide strategies for the paraeducator to use in providing support, modifications, and instruction that allow the student to be as independent as possible. Because each student has different needs, each plan might be somewhat different. A sample plan in Appendix B includes essential elements that will guide the paraeducator’s work. This template can be adapted for use by a paraeducator in any other arts education classes (Da Fonte & Capizzi, 2015; French 2002; The Paraprofessional Resource and Research Center, 2017). Just as it is important to establish relationships and plan for students with disabilities at the beginning of the year, it is important to continue this relationship by developing regular and ongoing communication procedures about student progress toward meeting IEP goals and objectives. The arts education teacher, special education teacher, and paraeducator should review data; discuss progress toward current IEP goals; modify or change goals as needed; document and celebrate student successes; and develop goals, modifications, and/or accommodations to address areas in which the student can make additional progress. Lastly, ongoing communication between the arts educator and special educator regarding paraeducator support in the arts class should be maintained. Information can be used to provide feedback and to commend the paraeducator for work that is performed well; if there are problem areas, changes can be made sooner rather than later.

Preparing Paraeducators for Their Roles Paraeducators typically rely on in-service and on-the-job training from the teachers who work most closely with them. Through the orientation, planning, and delegation processes described in the preceding sections, teachers can ensure that paraeducators have knowledge about specific disabilities, student needs, and instructional strategies. Additionally, paraeducators need ongoing coaching support from teachers to help them apply the skills they learn as a result of the training they receive. This section describes some basic training topic areas to help paraeducators support special education students in arts education settings.

Treating Students with Dignity and Respect Being treated with dignity and respect is a right for everyone and is critical to those with disabilities’ leading lives that are as typical as possible. Legal mandates and professional organizations provide professional guidelines for the education and treatment of individuals who have disabilities, and there are commonalities among these guidelines (CEC, 2016; Individuals

114

Utilizing Paraeducators

With Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004). CEC has identified “Maintain the dignity, privacy, and confidentiality of all individuals with exceptionalities, families, and school employees” (p. 7) as a required skill under its paraeducator professional development standards. It is important to impart the use of person-first language to paraeducators to ensure dignity and respect for students with disabilities. Examples of person first language include “student with autism” rather than “the autistic student” and “he receives special education services” rather than “he’s a special ed. student.” By placing the person first, the disability is no longer the primary, defining characteristic of an individual but one of several aspects of a whole person. Informing paraeducators about person first language creates awareness regarding the power of thoughtful terminology, which not only demonstrates respect for students in special education but also provides an exemplary model for students and teachers in general education (Chopra, 2009; Snow, 2008).

Presuming a Student’s Competence The concept of presumed competence connotes that educators must presume that all children are, or can become, competent (Donnellan, 1984). Presumed competence is considered the least dangerous assumption because it acknowledges that children have different skills and learn best when they are valued and supported, and when others hold high expectations for them ( Jorgenson, 2005). Thus, when working directly with a child, an educator has a choice to (a) presume that the student is incompetent and unable to learn a different way to behave or (b) admit that they cannot know another’s thinking unless the person reveals it and that it is reasonable to presume that the student is competent and capable of learning and changing. When made aware of the concept of presumed competence, paraeducators can be trained to take on the responsibility of finding appropriate ways to assist each student’s learning, based on the belief that all students can and want to learn with adequate and appropriate support.

Learning Student-Specific Information To best meet individual needs, paraeducators need to have information about the students with whom they work. While exceptionality labels might give them basic information, they will need more specific information about individual strengths, challenges, learning styles, instructional strategies, and behavior management plans. An IEP summary (see Appendix C) can be a springboard for student-specific training, but a paraeducator may need more indepth information, specific training, and coaching to meet a student’s needs.

Fostering Independence, Creativity, and Authenticity Guay and Gerlach (2006) underscored that artwork created by students with disabilities can be beautiful and valued because the goal of arts education is for students to share personal ideas through what they create on their own. It is clear in the examples below that the paraeducators may have the best intentions, but their actions have the unintended consequences of interfering with students’ creativity and the authenticity of their work. However, coaching by teachers, and the development of appropriate plans, can help paraeducators in such situations to provide support in a manner that allows students to explore, enjoy, and be creative in their performance. Paraeducator training on prompting methods and fading support can go a long way in fostering independence and encouraging creativity and confidence among students with disabilities (Broer, Doyle, & Giangreco, 2005; Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Giangreco, 2010).

115

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Case Study: Fostering Independence and Creativity in Drama Drama Teacher Dilemma: “Drama is a great outlet for Susan. I wish her paraeducator would give her some space and let her feel that she is free to perform, that she can be her own person. Susan actually seems to be more creative, more responsive, more expressive, when her paraeducator is not around.” Issue: “Helicopter Paraeducator” limiting student creativity. Possible Solution/Strategy: Drama is an excellent way of including students with disabilities, given its potential for expression through a variety of modalities. Using Susan’s IEP as a guide, her drama teacher, special education teacher, and paraeducator should meet to discuss Susan’s strengths and develop goals for her drama instruction. Based on these goals, teachers should develop an instructional plan that addresses Susan’s needs, builds upon her strengths, and clarifies her paraeducator’s responsibilities.

Case Study: Fostering Independence and Creativity in Music Music Teacher Dilemma: “Jose is pretty good at playing the piano, but I think he feels embarrassed and just gives up when his paraeducator keeps intervening. She tells him what to do and how to do it while he is trying to play.” Issue: Disempowerment and learned helplessness. Possible Solution/Strategy: Jose’s music teacher and special education teacher need to have a conversation with the paraeducator about his IEP goals. Because he is good at playing the piano, it is more important that the paraeducator allows Jose to explore and experiment within the process, to find his passion and enjoy exploring without feeling constrained.

Clarifying Classroom and Instructional Expectations Arts education teachers and special education teachers must consult with each other to make sure that consistent classroom and instructional expectations are communicated to the paraeducator. Also, clear instructions should be given regarding roles and responsibilities (e.g. paraeducators should not be making instructional decisions on their own).

Case Study: Clarifying Classroom and Instructional Expectations in Dance Dance Teacher Dilemma: “Christina participates in class. She seems to enjoy dance very much. However, she is unable to complete the weekly journal reflections. Her paraeducator has her working on other activities in place of them.” Issue: Paraeducator assuming the teacher role and making curricular decisions. Possible Solution/Strategy: At the beginning of the year, the special education teacher, dance teacher, and paraeducator should review Christiana’s IEP. Dance strategies addressing her IEP goals should be developed, and if Christina is unable to complete weekly written journal reflections on her own, sample accommodations might include letting Christina dictate her reflections to her paraeducator or allowing her to state her reflections orally. The paraeducator should consult with the dance teacher prior to making any changes to the prescribed plan for Christina.

116

Utilizing Paraeducators

As indicated in this example, paraeducators must receive information and training about classroom rules and curriculum objectives that students are expected to follow in each environment. Additionally, students with disabilities require specific and often unique instruction. While learning specific educational theory is not necessary for paraeducators, teachers must ensure that paraeducators have an understanding of the specific instructional strategies and supports that each student may require.

Managing Student Behavior Students who exhibit inappropriate or even dangerous behaviors can be quite challenging for arts teachers who have little training in behavior intervention strategies. In cases like this, students should have a Behavior Intervention Plan (BIP) as part of their IEP. The BIP outlines supports necessary to prevent negative behaviors; includes intervention strategies; and provides a crisis plan, should a student’s behaviors pose a danger to themselves or others. The following example emphasizes that all adults interacting with a student who has challenging behavior should be appropriately trained to carry out the BIP, including the collection of data, as required.

Case Study: Behavior Management in the Art Studio Visual Art Teacher Dilemma: “I didn’t know what to do when Omar suddenly went into a rage. He actually grabbed his paraeducator’s head and tried to bang it on the table. She looked shocked and didn’t know what to do either. Omar is nonverbal, and I have no idea what is going on.” Issue: Lack of communication among the team members. Possible Solution/Strategy: Omar is a student with autism who is nonverbal, has below average cognitive functioning, and has extensive support needs. His paraeducator and art teacher should have met with the special education teacher prior to his placement in the arts classroom to learn Omar’s academic strengths, interests, and social/behavioral needs. All of this information is in Omar’s IEP, and the special education teacher should summarize it for the visual art teacher and paraeducator. More importantly, his special education teacher should review his BIP with the visual art teacher and paraeducator, so they are able to respond, should an incident like this occur and, more importantly, so they are able to make attempts to prevent harmful incidents from occurring.

Fostering Peer Acceptance, Social Interaction, and Inclusion Positive peer relationships are important for the social and emotional development, positive adjustment, and school engagement of students with disabilities. Participation in arts education allows students with disabilities to share a space, an activity, interests, and opportunities for communication and assimilation. Because interactions with peers without disabilities happen infrequently without intentional effort and support, an additional part of the training plan should include tools and strategies for fostering peer interactions and relationships. The following example demonstrates how paraeducators can purposefully fade their support and encourage peer interactions for a student with disabilities: When paraeducators support all students in a class rather than only those with disabilities, they are able to provide much needed assistance to the teacher in large classes and contribute to alleviating the stigma against students who may feel marginalized for needing constant paraeducator support (Carter & Brock, 2015; Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Kurth, Lyon & Shorgen, 2015).

117

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Case Study: Fostering Peer Acceptance, Social Interaction, and Inclusion in Art Visual Art Teacher Dilemma: “Mark seems to be liked by his classmates. Most don’t even realize he has a disability, but his paraeducator won’t leave his side, which makes his classmates wonder, what’s wrong with Mark?” Issue: Missed opportunities for inclusion. Possible Solution/Strategy: All Mark needs is someone to keep an eye on him, should he require assistance. He should be taught to request help when he needs it, and his paraeducator should silently check with a quick glance or signal that he understands assignments and is on task or, when appropriate, encourage peers to work with him. This will allow Mark to have a more normalized experience while enabling his paraeducator to circulate the room, assisting other students.

The Need for Systemic Supports In this section, we outline the critical systemic supports needed to impact issues previously addressed in this chapter. Specifically, we discuss the need for teacher preparation programs to instruct pre-service teachers in collaboration and supervision strategies. Principals also have a responsibility to create policies and procedures that support role clarification, supervision, and training.

Minding the Gap in Teacher Preparation As noted previously, supervision and training for paraeducators typically falls to the responsibility of the teacher. Thus, teacher preparation programs need to be responsive to this shift in practice and equip special education and general education teachers with (a) the necessary leadership and collaborative skills to work effectively with each other and with paraeducators (Chopra & Uitto, 2015; Wallace et al., 2001) and (b) the competencies to differentiate instruction, ensuring success for all students, irrespective of the diversity in their needs and abilities (Blanton, Pugach, & Florian, 2011; Hardman, 2009). Arts education teacher preparation programs must address this knowledge and skill gap, and provide research-based content that thoroughly prepares future teachers for their roles as leaders, collaborators, and supervisors of paraeducators, hereby improving the outcomes of students with disabilities in their classes (Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008; Galbraith, 1997).

Administrative Supports In addition to special education and arts teachers’ assuming the role of supervisors for paraeducators, principals also hold the responsibility for establishing norms and creating a collaborative culture among teachers and paraeducators to ensure the successful inclusion of students with disabilities (Ashbaker & Morgan, 2006; Biggs et al., 2016; Carter & Hughes, 2006; Chopra & Uitto, 2015: French, 2003; Ghere & York-Barr, 2007). Administrative support may include policies and practices concerning (a) role clarification among teachers and paraeducators, (b) professional development for teachers in providing orientation and ongoing on-the-job training and coaching to paraeducators, and, most essentially, (c) support for planning time and communication among team members (Chopra & Uitto, 2015). Acknowledging that finding a common planning time is often impossible for a variety of reasons, administrators may need to think creatively when

118

Utilizing Paraeducators

encouraging teachers and paraeducators to meet. For example, the principal and assistant principals in one school we observed chose to cover the lunch and playground duties two to three times a week to allow teachers and paraeducators to meet and plan on a regular basis. This may be a powerful yet hard example to follow, but it does highlight that when administrators are committed to encouraging collaboration among educational teams, they find a way to make it happen.

Conclusion The basic premise underlying this chapter is that special education teachers, in collaboration with curriculum experts, such as arts education teachers, are ultimately responsible for guiding the work of paraeducators and providing for student accommodations, modifications, and specific instructional strategies and materials. Regardless of how special education services are provided and how arts educators and special educators negotiate their roles as licensed professionals, both have a critical role in the training and supervision of paraeducators. Pre-service and in-service teacher preparation in collaboration and supervision strategies is critical for teachers’ success, and equally important are supports from school administrators. With appropriate training and supervision, the utilization of paraeducators in arts education allows students with disabilities to express themselves creatively, produce authentic art, and, above all, experience successful inclusion.

References Allington, R. L., & Cunningham, P. M. (1996). Schools that work: Where all children read and write. New York, NY: HarperCollins College Publishers. Anderson, V., & Finney, M. (2008). ‘I’m a TA not a PA!’: Teaching assistants working with teachers. In G. Richards and F. Armstrong, (Eds.), Key issues for teaching assistants: Working in diverse and inclusive classrooms (pp. 73–83). London, UK: Routledge. Ashbaker, B., & Morgan, J. (2006). The role of administrators in paraeducator supervision to support ethnic minority students with special needs. Educational Considerations, 34, 16–19. Ashbaker, B., & Morgan, J. (2010). Assisting with early literacy instruction: A manual for paraeducators. Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Biggs, E. E. Gibson, B. G., & Carter, E. W. (2016), Accomplishing more together: Influences to the quality of professional relationships between special educators and paraprofessionals. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 5, 1–17. Blacher, J. (2007). Holding on to their kitestrings: Paraprofessional support in inclusive settings. Exceptional Parent, 37(10), 74–76. Blalock, V. E. (1984). Factors influencing the effectiveness of paraprofessionals with disabled populations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas, Austin. Blanton, L. P., Pugach, M. C., & Florian, L. (2011, April). Preparing general education teachers to improve outcomes for students with disabilities. Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education and The National Center for Learning Disabilities. Retrieved from www.aacte.org Broer, S. M., Doyle, M. B., & Giangreco, M. F. (2005). Perspectives of students with intellectual disabilities about their experiences with paraprofessional support. Exceptional Children, 71(4), 415–430. Brown, L., Farrington, K., Ziegler, M., Knight, T., & Ross, C. (1999). Fewer paraprofessionals and more teachers and therapists in educational programs for students with significant disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24(4), 250–253. Carroll, D. (2001). Considering paraeducator training, roles, and responsibilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(2), 60–64. Carter, E. W., & Brock, M. E. (2015). Promoting Social competence and peer relationships. In F. E. Brown, J. J. McDonnel. M. E. Snelll (Eds.), Instruction of students with severe disabilities (8th ed. pp. 372–403). Retrieved from www.pearsonhighered.com/etextbooks/Pearson eText with LooseLeaf Version Carter, E. W., & Hughes, C. (2006). Including high school students with severe disabilities in general education classes: Perspectives of general and special educators, paraprofessionals, and administrators. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 31, 174–185.

119

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack Carter, E. W., O’Rourke, L., Sisco, L., & Pelsue, D. (2009). Knowledge, responsibilities, and training needs of paraprofessionals in elementary and secondary schools. Remedial and Special Education, 30, 344–359. doi:10.1177/0741932508324399 Carter, E. W., Sisco, L., Brown, L, Brickham, D., &. Al-Khabbaz, Z. A. (2008). Peer interactions and academic engagement of youth with developmental disabilities in inclusive middle and high school classrooms. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 113(6), 479–494. Causton-Theoharis, J., & Burdick, C. (2008). Paraprofessionals: Gatekeepers to authentic art production. Studies in Art Education, 49(3), 167–182. Council for Exceptional Children. (2016). What every special educator must know: Ethics, standards, and guidelines for special educators. (7th ed.). Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children. Chopra, R. V. (2009). Parent paraeducator collaboration in inclusive classrooms: Reality and issues in the context of students with disabilities. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag. Chopra, R. V., & French, N. K. (2004). Paraeducator relationships with parents of students with significant disabilities. Remedial & Special Education, 25, 240–251. doi:10.1177/07419325040250040701 Chopra, R. V., Sandoval-Lucero, E., Aragon, L., Bernal, C., de Balderas, H., & Carroll, D. (2004). The paraprofessional role of connector. Remedial and Special Education, 25(4), 219–231. Chopra, R. V., Sandoval-Lucero, E., & French, N. K. (2011). Effective supervision of paraeducators: ­Multiple benefits and outcomes. National Teacher Education Journal, 4(2), 15–26. Chopra, R. V., & Uitto, D. J. (2015). Programming and planning within a multifaceted classroom. In D. K. Chambers (Ed.), Working with teaching assistants and other support staff for inclusive education, (pp. 175–194). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Conley, S. G., Gold, J., & Levine, H. (2009). Support personnel in schools: Characteristics and importance. Journal of Educational Administration, 48, 309–326. doi:10.1108/09578231011041035 Cramer, E. S., Coleman, M. B., Park, Y., Bell, S. M., & Coles, J. T. (2015). Art educators’ knowledge and preparedness for teaching students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Studies in Art Education. ISSN: 0039–3541 (Print) 2325–8039 (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/loi/usae20 Da Fonte, M. A., & Capizzi, A. M. (2015). Working collaboratively with support staff for inclusive education. In D. K. Chambers (Ed.), Working with teaching assistants and other support staff for inclusive education (pp. 195–218). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. Daniels, V. I., & McBride, A. (2001). Paraeducators as critical team members: Redefining roles and responsibilities. NASSP Bulletin, 85(623), 66–74. Donnellan, A. (1984). The criterion of the least dangerous assumption. Behavioral Disorders, 9, 141–150. Douglas, S. N, Chapin, S. E., & Nolan, J. F. (2016). Special education teachers’ experiences supporting and supervising paraeducators: Implications for special and general education settings. Teacher Education and Special Education, 39(1), 60–74. Downing, J. R., Ryndak, D. L., & Clark, D. (2000). Paraeducators in inclusive classrooms. Remedial and Special Education, 21, 171–181. Doyle, M. B. (2008). The paraprofessional’s guide to the inclusive classroom: Working as a team (3rd ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul Brookes. Drecktrah, M. (2000). Preservice teachers’ preparation to work with paraeducators. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23, 157–164. Eccleston, St. T. (2010). Successful collaboration: Four essential traits of effective special education specialists. The Journal of International Association of Special Education, 11(1), 40–47. Etscheidt, S. (2005). Paraprofessional services for students with disabilities: A legal analysis of issues. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 30(2), 60–80. Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Thousand, J. (2003). What do special educators need to know and be prepared to do for inclusive schooling to work? Teacher Education and Special Education, 26(1), 42–50. Fisher, M., & Pleasants, S. (2012). Roles, responsibilities, and concerns of paraeducators: Findings from a statewide survey. Remedial and Special Education, 33, 287–297. doi:10.1177/0741932510397762 French, N. K. (1998). Working together: Resource teachers and paraeducators. Remedial and Special Education, 19, 357–368. French, N. K. (2001). Supervising paraeducators: A survey of teacher practices. Journal of Special Education, 35, 41–53. French, N. K. (2002). Managing paraeducators in your school: How to hire, train, and supervise non-certified staff. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. French, N. K. (2003). Paraeducators in special education. Focus on Exceptional Children, 38, 1–16. French, N. K., & Cabell, E. A. (1993). Are community college programs for paraeducators feasible? Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 17(2), 131–140.

120

Utilizing Paraeducators French, N. K., & Chopra, R. V. (1999). Parent perspectives on the roles of paraprofessionals. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 24, 259–272. French, N. K., & Chopra, R. V. (2006). Teachers as executives. Theory into Practice, 45(3), 230–238. French, N. K., & Pickett, A. L. (1997). Paraeducators in special education: Issues for teacher educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20, 61–73. Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2017). Interactions: Collaboration skills for school professionals (8th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. Galbraith, L. (1997). Enhancing art teacher education with new technologies: Research possibilities and practices. Art Education, 50(5), 14–19. Ghere, G., & York-Barr, J. (2007). Paraprofessional turnover and retention in inclusive programs: Hidden costs and promising practices. Remedial and Special Education, 28, 21–32. Giangreco, M. F. (2003). Working with paraprofessionals. Educational Leadership, 61(2), 50–53. Giangreco, M. F. (2010). One-to-one paraprofessionals for students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms: Is conventional wisdom wrong? Intellectual & Developmental Disabilities, 48(1), 1–13. doi:10.1352/ 1934-9556-48.1.1 Giangreco, M. F., & Broer, S. M. (2005). Questionable utilization of paraeducators in inclusive schools: Are we addressing symptoms or causes? Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 20, 10–26. Giangreco, M. F., Broer, S. M., & Edelman, S. W. (2002). “That was then, this is now!” Paraprofessional supports for students with disabilities in general education classrooms. Exceptionality, 10(1), 47–64. Giangreco, M. F., Broer, S. M., & Suter, J. C. (2011). Guidelines for selecting alternatives to overreliance on paraeducators: Field-testing in inclusion-oriented schools. Remedial and Special Education, 32, 22–38. doi:10.1177/0741932509355951 Giangreco, M. F., Carter, E. W., Doyle, M. B., & Suter, J. C. (2010). Supporting students with disabilities in inclusive classrooms: Personnel and peers. In R. Rose (Ed.), Confronting obstacles to inclusion: International responses to developing inclusive schools (pp. 247–263). Abingdon, Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge. Giangreco, M. F., & Doyle, M. B. (2004). Directing paraprofessional work. In C. K. Kennedy & E. M. Horn (Eds.), Including students with severe disabilities (pp. 185–204). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S. W., Broer, S. M., & Doyle, M. B. (2001). Paraprofessional support of students with disabilities: Literature from the past decade. Exceptional Children, 68, 45–63. Giangreco, M. F., Edelman, S., Luiselli, T. E., & MacFarland, S. Z. C. (1997). Helping or hovering? Effects of instructional assistant proximity on students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 64, 7–18. Giangreco, M. F., Suter, J. C., & Doyle, M. B. (2010). Paraeducators in inclusive schools: A review of recent research. Journal of Education and Psychological Consultation, 20, 41–57. Giangreco, M. F., Yuan, S., McKenzie, B., Cameron, P., & Fialka, J. (2005). “Be careful what you wish for...”: Five reasons to be concerned about the assignment of individual paraeducators. Teaching Exceptional Children, 37, 28–34. Guay D. M. (1993). Cross-site analysis of teaching practices: Visual art education with students experiencing disabilities. Studies in Art Education, 34(4), 222–232. Guay, D. M. (2003). Paraeducators in the art classrooms: Issues of culture, leadership and special needs. Studies in Art Education, 45(1), 20–39. Guay, D. M. (2006). Special needs students in the art room: A journey. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.), Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 3–13). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Guay, D. M., & Gerlach, K. (2006). Clarifying roles for paraeducators in the art room. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.), Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 189–205). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Hardman, M. (2009). Redesigning the preparation of all teachers within the framework of an integrated program model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25, 583–587. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. (2004). Pub. L. No. 108–446, 118 Stat. 2647. Jones B. A. (2012). Fostering collaboration in inclusive settings: The special education students at a glance approach. Intervention in School and Clinic, 47(5), 297–306. Jones, K. H., & Bender, W. N. (1993). Utilization of paraprofessionals in special education: A review of the literature. Remedial and Special Education, 14, 7–14. Jorgenson, C. (2005). The least dangerous assumption: A challenge to create a new paradigm. Disability Solutions, 6(3), 4–15. Katsiyannis, A. H., Hodge, J., & Lanford, A. (2000). Paraeducators: Legal and practice considerations. Remedial & Special Education, 21, 297–304.

121

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack Kurth, J. A., Lyon, K. J., & Shorgen, K. A. (2015). Supporting students with severe disabilities in inclusive schools: A descriptive account from schools implementing inclusive practices. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 40(4), 261–274. Lamar-Dukes, P., & Dukes, C. (2005). Twenty ways to consider the roles and responsibilities of the inclusion support teacher. Intervention in School and Clinic, 41(1), 55–59. Malley, S. M. (2018). Conceptual and historical foundations of education in and through the arts for students with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 16–31) New York, NY: Routledge. Marks, S. U., Schrader, C., & Levine, M. (1999). Paraeducator experiences in inclusive settings: Helping, hovering, or holding their own? Exceptional Children, 65, 315–328. Mastropieri, M. A. (2001). Is the glass half full or half empty? Challenges encountered by first year special education teachers. Journal of Special Education, 35, 66–74. McGrath, M. Z., Johns, B. H., & Mathur, S. R. (2010). Empowered or overpowered? Strategies for working effectively with paraprofessionals. Beyond Behavior, 19, 2–6. Minondo, S., Meyer, L. H., & Xin, J. F. (2001). The role and responsibilities of teaching assistants in ­inclusive education: What’s appropriate. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(2), 114–119. Mueller, P. H. (1997). The Vermont paraeducator survey. Paraeducator Newsletter, p. 16. No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110, 115 Stat. 1425 (2002). Murawski, W. W., & Dieker, L. A. (2004). Tips and strategies for co-teaching at the secondary level. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5), 52–58. National Education Association. (2016). ESP Careers: Paraeducators. Retrieved from www.nea.org/ home/64522.htm National Joint Committee on Learning Disabilities (NJCLD). (1999). Learning disabilities: Use of paraprofessionals. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 23–30. O’Neill, A. (2010). Identifying core competencies and skills for assistants. In R. Rose (Ed.), Confronting Obstacles to Inclusion: International Responses to Developing Inclusive Education (pp. 265–277). London, UK: Routledge. Parsons, M. B., & Reid, D. H. (1999). Training basic teaching skills to paraeducators of students with severe disabilities: A one-day program. Teaching Exceptional Children, 31(4), 48–54. Pickett, A. L. (1986). Paraprofessionals in special education: The state of the art–1986. New York: National Resource Center for Paraprofessionals in Special Education, New Careers Training Laboratory, Center for Advanced Study in Education, City University of New York. (ERIC No. ED 276 209). Pickett, A. (2003). Framing the issues. In A. L. Pickett & K. Gerlach (Eds.), Supervising paraeducators in educational settings: A team approach (pp. 1–44). Austin, TX: Pro-ed. Pickett, A. (2008). Roles and responsibilities of paraeducators working with learners with developmental disabilities. In H. Paratte & G. R. Peterson-Karlan (Eds.), Research-based practices in developmental disabilities (pp. 501–520). Austin, TX: Pro-ed. Pickett, A. L., Gerlach, K., Morgan, R., Likins, M., & Wallace, T. (2007). Paraeducators in schools: Strengthening the educational team. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Riggs, C. (2001). Ask the paraprofessionals. Teaching Exceptional Children, 33(3), 78–83. Riggs, C. G., & Mueller, P. H. (2001). Employment and utilization of paraeducators in inclusive settings. Journal of Special Education, 35(1), 54–62. Rubin P. M., & Long, R. M. (1994). Who is teaching our children? Implications of the use of aides in ­Chapter 1. ERS Spectrum, 12, 28–34. Rutherford, G. (2012). In, out or somewhere in between: Disabled students’ and teacher aides’ experiences of school. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 16(8), 757–774. Skar, L., & Tamm, M. (2001). My assistant and I: Disabled children’s and adolescents’ roles and relationships to their assistants. Disability and Society, 16, 917–931. Snow, K. ( January 2008). To ensure inclusion, freedom and respect for all, it’s time to embrace people first language. DisablityIsNatural.com, 1–4. Tews, L., & Lupart, J. (2008). Student with disabilities’ perspectives of the role and impact of paraprofessionals in inclusive education settings. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 5(1), 39–46. The Paraprofessional Resource and Research Center. (2017). PSA Plan Forms and Format. Retrieved from http://paracenter.org/library/k-12-paraprofessional-supervision-resources Uitto, D. J., & Chopra, R. V. (2015). Training programs for teacher assistants. In D. K. Chambers (Ed.), Working with teaching assistants and other support staff for inclusive education (pp. 241–262). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

122

Utilizing Paraeducators Voltz, D. L., Elliott, R. N., Jr., & Cobb, H. B. (1994). Collaborative teacher roles: Special and general educators. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 27, 527–535. Wadsworth, D. E., & Knight, D. (1996). Paraprofessionals: the bridge to successful inclusion. Intervention in School and Clinic, 31(3), 166–171. Wallace, T., Shin, J., Bartholomay, T., & Stahl, B. J. (2001). Knowledge and skills for teachers supervising the work of paraeducators. Exceptional Children, 67, 520–533. Weibe-Zederayko, M., & Ward, K. (1999). What to do when students can’t hold a pencil. Art Education, 52(4), 5. Weishaar, M. K. (2001). The regular educator’s role in the individual education plan process. The Clearing House, 75, 96–98. Werts, M. G., Zigmond, N., & Leeper, D. C. (2001). Paraprofessional proximity and academic engagement: Students with disabilities in primary aged classrooms. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 36(4). 424–440. Young, B., Simpson, R., Smith Myles, B., & Kamps, D. M. (1997). An examination of paraprofessional ­involvement in supporting students with autism. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 12(1), 31–38, 48.

123

Appendix A Pre-Collaboration Discussion Statements for Teachers • • • • •

My main goal regarding (co-teaching/collaborating/consulting) with the (arts teacher/special education teacher) is … My philosophy regarding teaching students with disabilities in the arts is … As a (teacher of the arts/special education teacher), I envision my role to be … I envision the role of the paraeducator to be … I have the following expectations in a classroom regarding: • discipline • classwork  • materials  • homework  • planning  • modifications for individual students  • grading  • noise level  • cooperative learning  • giving/receiving feedback  • other 

•

I would like to meet or email on a (daily/weekly/monthly) basis to review student academic progress and paraeducator implementation of arts lesson.

124

Appendix B Paraeducator Plan Tailored for Visual Art Education Student: Isabel 

Grade: 10 

Class: Visual Art Education 

Art Teacher: Ms. Crayola

Purpose of lesson: Create self-portrait block prints that reflect elements of Isabel’s identity. Long-term goals: Use knowledge and imagination to generate visual ideas and images in response to other artists’ works. Use printmaking techniques, tools, processes, and procedures to make images that apply design principles/elements and explore artistic conventions. Short-term objectives: Explore/discuss printmaking processes with peers. Use lines/shapes to convey tone/shadow. Analyze printmaking techniques found in works of other artists. Strengths: Isabel enjoys drawing. She learns best by watching someone and following along as they model what she is to do one step at a time. Needs: Isabel exhibits moderate cognitive impairment in both English and her native language, unable to read, write, or speak in either. Prompt Isabel to use her communication device or picture/symbol chart to increase spoken vocabulary. She would rather depend on you to communicate for her. Encourage peer and teacher discussion. Simplify and present directions one step at a time. Reinforce instruction with visual cues, pictures, lists, or guides. Materials: Picture/symbol art word chart, visual directions. No special art materials needed. Sequence of actions: Follow art teacher directions given to entire class. As paraeducator, support Isabel’s learning with attention to the following: • • •

• • •

Restate instructions in English and Isabel’s native language as needed to build vocabulary and understanding in both languages. Explain unfamiliar vocabulary and concepts; Encourage Isabel to communicate with peers and teacher using art pictures/symbols chart; After Isabel is seated with peers and you have re-explained assignment, allow her to work on her own. Walk around the room to work with other students. Check in on her every ten minutes with a silent signal or glance. Gradually increase length of time she is on her own; Refrain from offering your personal creative suggestions. This task should reflect Isabel; Isabel will dictate her art reflection to you. Write her answer “exactly” as stated on lined notebook paper. Skip lines, so she can then go back and rewrite what you wrote for her; Update parent contact notebook regarding activity, communication, and vocabulary goals.

Permissible adaptations, accommodations, modifications: • • •

Simplify reflection questions as needed (e.g. from “analyze” to “who” and “why”); Reduce amount of brainstorming ideas, rough drafts, or experimental prints as needed; Add extra time for task completion or reduce task requirements so she keeps pace with her peers.

125

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

Assessment/Data Collection: • • •

Evidence of completion: Completed art print and reflection. Communication: Frequency sheet, showing minimum of two peer exchanges daily. Art vocabulary: Quiz indicating Isabel is able to match text of new vocabulary words to pictures or, after hearing the new word, is able to point to the picture.

Student arrangement: Seat Isabel with other students at one of the tables, preferably near teacher. Behavior management strategies: Monitor for inappropriate social behaviors and redirect as necessary. She has a tendency to follow peers or staff she develops “crushes” on (see IEP BIP).

126

Appendix C IEP Summary Example Student:   Dawn    Grade:   11   Primary teacher/Case manager:   Mrs. Thompson    Date of IEP:   9/14   General ed. teacher:   Mr. Patal  

IEP Goals & Objectives: 1 Make choice between two objects using her communication device; 2 Learn four new vocabulary words based on art content: paintbrush, paint, apron, sketch pad; 3 Maintain eye contact when asked a question; 4 Have one interaction with a peer at the beginning and end of the class and more as opportunity allows.

Learning Strengths: Dawn loves to be with peers. She learns best by watching someone model what she is to do one step at a time, allowing her to follow. She loves to do things with her hands.

Accommodations/Modifications Stated on IEP: 1 Simplify directions to one step at a time; 2 Provide clear expectations in a visual schedule; 3 Limit physical prompting to only when necessary; use gestural prompts as needed; 4 Wait 10–15 seconds for her to respond with her communication device before reasking or prompting.

Communication Strategies/Needs: Dawn uses a communication device. New vocabulary needs to be added by the speech-language pathologist. Dawn needs considerable wait time while she locates words, particularly if they are new. She is using one-word communication consistently but is in the emergent stage of using two words, although she may need encouragement. In addition to the new art vocabulary, Dawn should be encouraged to communicate with her peers. She has a peer communication page on her device, and the paraeducator is familiar with it.

Behavior Supports: None needed

127

Chopra, Carroll, and Manjack

General Considerations (Home/School Communication, Homework Expectations, Grading, Health/Medication, etc.): Because of her limited verbal ability, Dawn has a back and forth notebook that her parents read daily. Either the arts teacher or the paraeducator can update parents on class work and communication attempts.

Support Services Listed on IEP: 1:1 support for 75 percent of the day SLP services one hour per week.

Assistive Technology: Tobii communication device

Additional Information: Dawn needs assistance during fire drills or other emergencies to exit the building. She should be in line of site of a supervising adult at all times.

128

Section III Developing Students’ Artistic, Academic, and Personal Growth

Arts educational opportunities for students with disabilities long predate academic opportunities. Before the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94–142) in 1975, arts therapies, and other arts offerings deemed as therapeutic, dominated opportunities for children with disabilities to engage in the arts. Once free and appropriate public education became available for all special education students, arts classrooms began to serve as widespread placements for students with disabilities. Inclusive opportunities for learning have often occurred first in arts classrooms, particularly for students with significant disabilities. Arts education offered in school and community settings in dance, drama, music, visual arts, and media arts have not precluded arts therapies for students with disabilities, which continue to provide vital services to individual students, both within and outside of schools. An additional approach to arts learning is through arts integration, which maintains a more recent history of pedagogical practices incorporating arts education within other subject areas. Michelle Kraft (Chapter 9) addresses inclusive practices within the visual arts classroom, with particular attention to transformative learning that takes place as students focus on commonalities while respecting differences. She indicates that in the open-ended and flexible structure of the art classroom, students are allowed to express a broad continuum of ways of knowing, encompassing a wide variety of learners’ special needs. Visual arts education and special education share an intersecting history as approaches to educating students with disabilities have historically valued arts education. In conclusion, Kraft addresses practices in inclusive visual arts education and the power of arts education to examine differences and increase self-determination. An examination by Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek (Chapter 10) of the role of ­music in the lives of students with disabilities begins with a brief history, emphasizing its significance as a therapeutic and educational modality in special programs and schools. Within current p­ ractice, educators recognize that, with appropriate individualized instructional supports, students with disabilities can develop musical skills corresponding with those of their peers. Darrow and Adamek address the particular preparation and knowledge base, instructional approaches, and assessment and transitional practices needed to include students with disabilities in music education. The authors also emphasize the value of music education in lifelong learning and pursuits, describing how music educators can positively influence the futures of students with disabilities. Dance education for students with disabilities continues to evolve from its roots in the modern dance companies of the 1960s. Jenny Seham (Chapter 11) describes the seminal work of dancers and their companies and more recent developments in their including people with disabilities in

129

Developing Students’ Artistic

dance. The influence of their work has resulted in principle-based instruction that emphasizes the elements and qualities of dance over form, allowing for diverse interpretations, inclusive of all dancers. Students with disabilities benefit from instructional practices that include the use of translations, collaborative partnerships, and universal design for learning. Seham provides an example of the structure and pace of a typical inclusive dance class and offers the rationale for giving all students opportunities to experience the joy of dancing. When students with disabilities have opportunities to engage in drama education and activities, they experience growth in a wide range of skills and knowledge. Sally Bailey (Chapter 12) indicates that drama is easily accessible and versatile, providing a useful tool for social-emotional and academic learning, and critical thinking skills. Students with disabilities engage in school drama as a distinct arts discipline or as it is integrated into other subjects as well as in communities, through extracurricular activities, or in formal theater. Bailey highlights the work of ­innovators in developing drama curricula that facilitate learning for students with disabilities in social, emotional, and academic domains. Instructional practices and outcomes associated with those ­practices are emphasized throughout the chapter. Alida Anderson and Katherine Berry (Chapter 13) examine the relationship between arts ­integration and special education. They provide a historical overview of the intersection of arts integration and special education, and trace the evolution of arts integration research. From their review of arts integration research with students with disabilities, they indicate cognitive, behavioral, and linguistic improvements. They point to the need for more high-quality interventions and the increased inclusion of students with disabilities in arts integration research, and offer recommendations for practice drawn from research and the synthesis of trends in arts integration and special education. Arts therapies have elicited positive outcomes for students with disabilities in mental health treatment programs and schools since the early 1900s. Adamek and Darrow (Chapter 14) define and describe the development and practices of art therapy, dance/movement therapy, and music therapy, with a particular focus on the needs of students with disabilities in school settings. They examine the benefits and research outcomes of each of the arts therapies and describe recent trends, with recommendations for the continuation of arts therapies in schools.

130

9 Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts Education Michelle Kraft

In a university-level visual arts pedagogy class that I taught to pre-service visual arts educators, my students and I partnered with a regional transition center for autism, offering a series of visual arts classes for the autist1 students. Over the weeks, as pre-service art educators and adult students with autism came to know each other through teaching and learning about art, we (the university class) marveled at the transformative experiences that the art class community offered for both groups of students. One university student, in teaching her art lesson, showed a YouTube video interview with Marilyn Cosho, an artist with Asperger’s syndrome (Miller, 2010). The student recalled the response of one young autist woman as she watched the video: “[She] raised her hand and stated, ‘That’s like me! I didn’t want anyone to see my artworks and thought people would... think I am weird’” (Personal communication, December 5, 2015). As our time together drew to an end, that same young woman with autism gathered together a body of her artwork in a mini-exhibition that she installed at the transition center for our university class to see. Another of the pre-service visual arts educators reflected upon this moving gesture: She took the time before our next lesson at the [transition academy] to put all her artwork up around the room, kind of like a mini-gallery show. She did that for us. [She] felt a strong need to show us her work. When you put work up on the walls for critique, it is a way to empower yourself, to show others what you have made and to invite comments. (Personal communication, December 5, 2015; Kraft, 2017) Visual arts educators have long understood the unique potential of the art classroom as a place for transformative learning for students experiencing a range of (dis)abilities (Malley, 2014); visual arts education’s history of including disability precedes special education legislation (Derby, 2011; Gerber & Guay, 2006), and visual arts classes are among the most frequent settings that include students experiencing moderate to severe/profound disabilities in pre-K-12 education (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Schiller, 1999). In this chapter, I provide an overview of approaches, benefits, practical strategies, and considerations for teaching a diverse student population in the unique setting of the K-12 visual arts class (expressed in this chapter as art class or art classroom) as a least restrictive environment (LRE). In doing so, I provide a brief summary of the parallel histories of visual arts and special education. I then examine the role of visual arts educational standards in curriculum design and assessment of a visual arts education that includes all learners. I investigate the art class as a site of transformative education and offer research-based resources, strategies,

131

Michelle Kraft

and models for an inclusive visual arts education that empowers and values the contributions of students experiencing disabilities in the classroom community.

Why Visual Arts? The art classroom can act as a catalyst for holistic, inclusive education in that art brings into focus our commonalities while being respectful of our differences (Campbell, 2005; Kraft & ­Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Additionally, the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA, 2006) are now aligned with one ­another to include the arts among the subjects defining a well-rounded education “with the ­purpose of providing all students access to an enriched curriculum and educational experience” (see ESSA, 20 U. S. C. §7801 – Definitions (52); IDEA, 20 U.S.C. §1401(4). In its structured open-endedness and flexibility, the art classroom offers a space for ­self-­representation and expression; communication; and thinking creatively and critically about ­culture, history, geography, family, and personal experience. Through art, students may e­ xplore and demonstrate their values, identities, and belief systems (Guay, 2006). Malley (2014) pointed out the exceptional potential of inclusive arts education as a “means of diverse and variable ­expressions, responses, and outcomes, allowing students opportunities to diverge from rote learning often required in other subjects” (p. 5). In its diversity, arts education encompasses a broad continuum of ways of knowing, “from the purely instinctual and unconscious to the fully cognitive” (Rolling, 2013, p. 12; see also Wexler & Luethi-Garrecht, 2015). Special educators Burnette and Lokerson (2006) cited an analysis of the National Educational Longitudinal Study (NELS: 88), which found that students with high engagement in the arts, especially those from low-income backgrounds, outperformed “arts-poor” peers in almost every assessment measure. Visual arts e­ ducation has the demonstrated capacity to serve a variety of learners’ special needs (socioeconomic, ­cognitive, ­physical, communicative, emotional, expressive, intellectual, etc.) in an environment and with materials that cultivate prediction and experimentation, cross-­d isciplinary synthesis of information and experiences, visual communication, self-advocacy through choice-making, and ­empowerment through self-representation. Art is both a creative and an intellectual endeavor, fluid and flexible, process- and product-oriented. In these ways, the visual arts are uniquely ­positioned as a space for the inclusive education of learners of all (dis)abilities.

Intersecting Histories of Visual Arts and Special Education Spaulding and Pratt (2015) noted that the education of those with disabilities has been historically marked by progression and regression between the 19th and 21st centuries. Similarly, visual art’s role in education traces an uneven past. Many of these fluctuations in both educational histories can be traced to issues related to power; Osgood (2005), a special education historian, posited that even contemporary debate over inclusion represents a function of the power relationships between those with and without disabilities. This section provides a brief overview of the intersecting ­h istories of visual arts education and special education, tracing the factors that have impacted current notions of visual arts education in the LRE.

The 18th into 19th Centuries: From Segregation to Enlightenment The earliest approaches to disability historically included practices of segregation from society. Those born with physical or cognitive impairments were viewed by society as divinely punished or cursed, associated with witchcraft, or morally failing; as a result, these individuals were either cloistered within families and kept out of the public eye, cast out, or, later, institutionalized.

132

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

The Enlightenment period in the mid- to late 18th century provided the philosophical underpinnings and scientific interests to advance the cause of education for those with disabilities and ­provided for democratic approaches to education in general and arts education, specifically. During this time, education came to be viewed as vital for all social classes: a necessary function of proper societal development (Efland, 1990). These philosophical influences—and the demands of early to mid-19th century commerce—valued visual arts education in its role toward ­developing skilled laborers: Growing manufacturing and commerce meant a growing need for design and drawing skills, notably in textiles, and art academies were established to meet the needs of industry. ­Similarly, newly established schools educating students with special needs, such as the Horace Mann School for the Deaf in Boston, founded in 1869, included drawing as part of their vocational training (City of Boston Archives, 2016). The same factors that led to the inclusion of visual arts education as an aspect of early school curricula also influenced the establishment of institutions for the education of people experiencing disabilities, all with a focus on advancing vocation and industry.

The Late 19th and Early 20th Centuries: Social Darwinism and Scientific Management The publication of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of the Species in 1859 gave rise to social ­Darwinism and signaled a period of regression for the education of and attitudes toward individuals with disabilities, which lasted until the mid-20th century. These ideas were manifested in the form of scientific eugenics and related laws, forced sterilization, the development of IQ tests, and the return to the segregation of individuals with disabilities from society (Longmore & Goldberger, 2000; Spaulding & Pratt, 2015). Social Darwinism and the Industrial Revolution led to models of social efficiency, which affected education in the arts too as more and more schools adopted the productivity models of business and applied them to schools. Sneddin’s (1913) scientific management became the efficiency model for schools, and the consequences for visual arts education and the education of those with disabilities were far-reaching (Kraft, 2001, 2006). Snedden promoted human capital theory, which focused upon individual ability and the probable future life role in ­weighing the costs of (vocational) education against economic benefits. He noted, “In native capacity and in educational need people are unequal at birth and can in no way be made equal” (Snedden, 1913, p. 20). Unlike his Enlightenment predecessors, who viewed education as an equalizing force for cultivating an engaged citizenry, Snedden believed that equality, in terms of one’s ability to benefit society, was unattainable; he advocated for the removal of students with intellectual disabilities from the general school setting, favoring their placement in specialized institutions. Visual arts education for students with disabilities took on the function of a rehabilitative tool: a way to “fix” what was “broken,” resulting in more productive members of society (Blandy, 1991; Kraft, 2006). The relegation of visual arts education to a therapeutic role persists today in medical models and approaches to disability.

The 20th and 21st Centuries: From Progressive Education to Equality and Accountability The mid-20th century saw a steady rise in the number of students identified as experiencing disabilities. The Industrial Revolution and the Great Depression led to more government intervention toward the welfare of children through policy mandates, such as child labor laws and compulsory education. During World War II, individuals with impairments worked in factories, thereby broadening public awareness of the valuable contributions of the community of people with disabilities; war-effort-centered arts education, such as poster-making and designing and

133

Michelle Kraft

the creation of booths for selling war bonds, also predominated (Efland, 1990). After the horrors of World War II, visual arts educators, such as Viktor Lowenfeld—influenced by Freudian and Jungian psychoanalytical theories—viewed visual art as a socially acceptable means for channeling emotion. Such ideas led to the eventual rise of child-centered education focused upon p­ ersonal development (Derby, 2011), and the visual arts came to be viewed as a means of ­peacefully ­unifying cultures (Efland, 1990). By the late 1950s, the federal government—in the wake of equal protection provided by the 1954 Supreme Court verdict in the Brown v. the Board of Education case—began the passage of a series of laws contributing to the educational needs of students with disabilities, all leading to the current Individuals with Disabilities Education Act ([IDEA] see Malley, 2018, as well as Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, for more on this history). During the 1970s, while Congress passed the earliest iterations of IDEA (in the form of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975), the accountability movement in education represented an updated version of the s­ ocial efficiency movement of the early 20th century. The accountability movement, influenced by cost-benefit applications from business, was predicated upon the assumption that all students should progress through the same learning objectives at roughly the same pace. Consequently, (visual arts) education became increasingly standards-based, with assessment outcomes organized along learning objectives common to all students in a given subject and class. The enactment of the No Child Left Behind Act ([NCLB] 2001) at the advent of the 21st ­century marked the contemporary era of accountability, affecting both visual arts education and special education. Congress intended IDEA, with its 2004 reauthorization, to complement NCLB, which mandated that all IDEA directives be incorporated into state plans for school improvement. Although NCLB reinforced visual arts as a core academic subject in language, many visual arts educators have criticized it as devaluing arts education through practices associated with its ­priorities; its over-emphasis on math, science, and English; its impact on scheduling for art classes; and its role in diminishing fine arts budgets (Chapman, 2005, 2007; Fehr, 2008; Sabol, 2010; see also Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Likewise, a 2010 study found that 67 percent of ­v isual arts teachers indicated that NCLB had affected their art classes in a variety of negative ways, ranging from scheduling conflicts to the removal of students from class for remediation in other subject areas (Sabol, 2010).

Implications of Developments in Special and Visual Arts Education As Spaulding and Pratt (2015) suggested, the history of special education is marked by a pendulum swing of progressive and regressive movement, based upon prevailing attitudes toward disability, rising out of emerging societal, scientific, and economic concerns. Similarly, the history of visual arts education in schools has been affected by the same trends. In their parallel evolutions, both special and visual arts education have functioned at the service of industry and vocation or even in the efforts of World War II. Both educational histories were shaped by social Darwinism and standards of efficiency in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. The increase of compassionate, child-centered approaches in the education of students with disabilities later in the century was compatible with the concurrent emphasis on individualized growth/expression in the art class setting. This provided enormous potential between the inherent qualities of visual arts education and the philosophical underpinnings of the special education mandate, which required that the ­educational needs of students possessing a range of (dis)abilities be met. Toward the end of the 20th and beginning of the 21st centuries, however, the pairing of IDEA and NCLB proved to be more problematic in that NCLB focused upon the standardization of knowledge and the assessment outcomes of students, while the very cornerstone of IDEA was individualized education through the instrument of the individualized education program ([IEP] Bloomfield, 2007). Seemingly, NCLB

134

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

(re-)marginalized students experiencing disabilities (through standardization, disaggregation of standardized test data, and other assessment-centered practices) in opposition to IDEA’s individualized education requirements. NCLB simultaneously—while declaring the arts to be core academic subjects—created practices that have relegated arts education to the sphere of “specials”: a dismissive term adopted by some sectors of education to separate arts education from what they consider the (true) core academic, testable subjects. In the mid- to late 20th ­century, there were great gains in moving from a medical/rehabilitative model of disability toward a ­sociopolitical understanding of disability as an issue related to environment and diversity (with the passage of IDEA and even the Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA]). Nonetheless, there is still much work to be done toward attending to the individual rights and educational needs of disability within the current climate of educational standardization. The sections that follow examine some of the additional barriers and challenges facing inclusive visual arts education for students experiencing disabilities and issues surrounding curriculum, assessment, and educational environment for visual arts educators creating inclusive classroom communities.

Overcoming Barriers and Maximizing Benefits Balancing the educational system’s requirements for high achievement by all students with the reality of teaching a wide variety of learners in the inclusive classroom may seem to be an insurmountable task. Many visual arts educators who might otherwise aspire toward including students of difference worry that classroom interruptions caused by supportive efforts to meet the needs of students with disabilities may impede the education progress of the whole class. (These interruptions—which may occur with more frequency in art classes than in other subjects that are perceived as more “academic”—may include, but are not limited to, removing students from class to attend to other educational supports and services or other academic subjects.) In advocating for the shift from the medical view of disability to a sociopolitical orientation of disability, many educators point out that environmental factors often pose the disabling condition, moving the focus away from the person as the site of inherent deficit (Blandy, 1991; Davis & Watson, 2002; National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research [NIDRR], 2000). In this way, disability is viewed as “the social process that turns an impairment into a negative by creating barriers to ­access” (Davis & Watson, 2002, p. 12). Once the environment or social process is adjusted, disability may be greatly reduced, or may not exist at all, though the impairment may still be present. Barriers to including students experiencing disabilities in the art class may include (a) the ­absence of visual arts teacher involvement in the IEP planning process (Kraft, 2001; Schiller, 1999; Wexler, 2009), (b) individual teacher attitudes regarding inclusion and disability (Benin & ­Cartwright, 2006; Derby, 2011; Eisenhauer, 2008; Erickson, 2004; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Reid & Knight, 2006), (c) a misunderstanding regarding special education law and its intent (Danforth, 2007; Jaeger & Bowman, 2005; Kraft, 2001), (d) the dearth of pre-service opportunities to work with learners experiencing moderate to severe disabilities (Allison, 2008; Gerber & Fedorenko, 2006; Guay, 1994; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Osgood, 2005), (e) apprehension of extensive modifications for those experiencing severe disabilities (Gerber & Fedorenko, 2006), and (f ) a lack of time for planning and collaboration (Gerber & Fedorenko, 2006). The Northern Officers Group (NOG, n.d.), an organization of people with disabilities, ­working within local government in the UK, pointed to the problem of language, particularly the use of the word “normal,” in shaping barrier-causing misconceptions about disability. They explained, The word “normal” can be used in two very different ways. Firstly, “normal” can be an actual pattern; that is, what is described as normal is that which is average, common or standard. For example, walking can be said to be normal because most people walk. Secondly, normal can

135

Michelle Kraft

also be used to denote a prescribed pattern; that is, it becomes a value judgment. For example, walking is normal because it is believed that people should walk to get around, that it is right and proper to walk. (p. 5) From the perspective of those with disabilities then, NOG identifies several sociocultural/­ disabling factors to inclusion, such as (a) inflexible procedures and practices within organizations; (b) information, architecture, and transportation that are inaccessible, (c) the segregation of social provisions; and (d) negative cultural representations of disability. Envisioning the ­classroom as an interdependent community in which all members have valuable contributions to offer (Kraft, 2006; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013) and creating safe, nurturing environments for choice-­m aking, advocacy, and self-representation (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Osgood, 2005) are helpful s­ trategies in maximizing learning that includes all students.

Considerations for Curriculum Visual arts education is an academic discipline that includes its particular theoretical dimensions and practices. It has its own educational standards, student learning outcomes, and objectives. While it may, in some cases and to some people, be therapeutic in nature, it is not art therapy. Medical models2 of special education often conflate the two fields, subsuming visual arts learning standards with objectives concerning peer socialization and medical rehabilitation (Derby, 2011, p. 96), but as visual arts educator Kerry Freedman (2003) pointed out, “The primary purpose of... student art is not therapeutic, it is social and cultural” (p. 148; see also Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; and Blandy, Pancsofar, & Mockensturm, 1988). Art therapist Lucy Andrus (2006) indicated that visual arts education and art therapy are distinctive in the how and why of their individual practices. With art therapy, clients engage in the use of art processes and materials to negotiate conflict and express feelings, and they and their therapists interpret the products the clients create for meaning and to set a course of treatment. Meanwhile, in visual arts education, students study information related to artists, their work, and history and culture related to art; the artworks that they make are critiqued and interpreted for meaning, demonstration of art concepts, and assessment of learning (Andrus, 2006). The following section provides an overview of the National Core Arts Standards (NCAS) for visual arts education, connecting these to issues of curriculum. It also offers considerations for individualizing visual arts education to meet students’ differentiated learning needs and for assessing inclusively.

Visual Arts Standards and Art Class Curriculum IDEA stipulates that students’ learning must correspond to educational standards adhering to their IEPs. In the art class, standards-based visual arts instruction is foundational to meaningful learning and assessment. In 2014, the National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS) r­ eleased the National Core Arts Standards (NCCAS, 2014) to replace the 1994 National Standards for Visual Arts. Arts educators from across the US provided input in the creation of these voluntary standards. In addition, the John F. Kennedy Center for Performing Arts’ Office of VSA (­formerly Very Special Arts) and Accessibility appointed a special education committee to review the ­standards for inclusivity as the NCCAS drafted them and develop corresponding resources and strategies for including students experiencing disabilities in art classes (Malley, 2014). The NCAS are organized around Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe’s (2005) curricular ­approach, which is grounded in the use of essential understandings and enduring ideas. The standards for visual arts are organized along four artistic processes—creating, presenting, responding, and

136

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

connecting—as well as by grade level. The Anchor Standards correspond to each artistic process, and each includes a statement of enduring understanding and essential questions. Corresponding to these are proficiency statements by grade level. Model Cornerstone Assessments (MCAs) provide information specific to framing curriculum. On the NCAS website, along the bottom of the home page, and embedded within the MCA Visual Arts menu, is the link “Inclusion,” which takes educators to inclusion strategies for the standards, organized by fine arts discipline. Malley (2014) noted that standards are not themselves curriculum, but they provide a f­ramework upon which to build arts curriculum and assessment including all learners: “Full access to the standards by all students, regardless of disabilities, was considered in the design to enable arts teachers to facilitate the achievement of students with disabilities at the same levels expected for all ­students” (p. 8). (For more on the visual arts National Core Art Standards and suggestions on how to use them, visit the NCAS website at www.nationalartsstandards.org/. See also Malley (2014) and Kraft (2016b).)

Individualizing Visual Arts Education Balancing educational excellence with equality of opportunity while simultaneously addressing the specific learning needs of students in an inclusive art class seems overwhelming. The ­challenges of teaching and learning with a backdrop of ever-widening ability variance results in instructional and learning demands that teachers and students often find difficult to manage (Davis & Watson, 2002). The combination of diverse learners in an art class has the potential to create educational spaces that include both students of high cognitive intelligence and students experiencing severe intellectual disabilities, with a full range of students whose abilities lie within a continuum between these two poles (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Recognizing that learners are different is the first step toward developing a differentiated ­curriculum. Visual arts teachers may find that modifications that work well for students experiencing disabilities may also be extended to their typically abled peers—both for reasons of educational benefit and to lessen any possible stigma caused by alternative instructional strategies targeted at a select few. Application of universal design for learning (UDL) principles in curriculum and assessment design, instructional delivery, classroom arrangement, and art materials and tools (discussed later in this chapter) are helpful in modifying teaching and learning to meet a ­variety of (dis)abilities. In this way, tasks may be adjusted—through multiple approaches—­ according to content, process, and product expectations without diminishing learning objectives, thereby augmenting full participation in learning. Understanding that students may possess multimodal ways of knowing, which are not ­necessarily worse or better than others, may prove helpful to teachers in envisioning alternative ways for students to present their learning (Kraft, 2017; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). For ­example, Wexler and Luethi-Garrecht (2015) pointed to the exclusivity of language as a means of ­formulating abstract thinking. They cited Amanda Baggs (2010), an autist computerized-voice user/typer, who created the YouTube video In My Language and explained, To me, typical language takes place in the clouds, and I have to climb or fly up there just to use and understand it. This is exhausting no matter how fluent I sound or how easy I make it look. The sky will always be a foreign country to me. (quoted in Wexler & Luethi-Garrecht, 2015, p. 16) Without language acquisition, or with difficulty in verbalization, students’ reception, processing, and expression of information will manifest in other ways, which may seem different to those around them. The task of educators becomes locating and identifying educational strategies

137

Michelle Kraft

that attend to students’ multimodalities. The sections that follow explore the roles of assessment, assistive technologies, UDL, and collaboration among stakeholders in meeting students’ varied ­educational needs in the art classroom.

Assessing for Inclusion Sabol (2004) defined assessment as, first, identifying learning goals and purposes and, next, ­selecting the methods and procedures for evaluating student attainment of those goals. Many assessment techniques considered by other academic disciplines to be alternative have long been common practice in the art classroom. Evaluation methods, such as portfolio, critique, exhibition, and consideration of process as well as product, are all varied modes of assessment that are widely used in visual arts education but considered innovative in other fields. Modifying instruction and assessment to allow for students’ multimodal ways of demonstrating learning need not be difficult or time-consuming to implement: For example, a student-learning objective that states, “The student will discuss the process for selection of work to include in a portfolio,” does not allow for students whose primary mode of communication is not through verbalization. Simply changing the wording from discuss to share, however, would be a more appropriate assessment for all learners. (Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2014, p. 152) Neither visual arts nor special education fit tidily into cost-benefit analyses or standardized modes of educational efficiency; this is because both visual arts and disability education are so ­individuated. Perhaps, though, the qualities common to both arenas create a fertile landscape for a meaningful assessment of student learning that is diverse and includes a variety of data collection methods (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). As is characteristic of both special and visual arts education disciplines, meaningful assessment is contextual. Inclusive visual arts teachers often employ a variety of formative and summative assessment measures—which are highly adaptable—to obtain a full picture of student learning.

Examples of Formative Assessments Formative assessments are in-process and, when coupled with summative assessment, may allow for a more comprehensive view of student learning in the inclusive art classroom. Formative ­a ssessments can be conducted formally or informally and may include such artifacts as class critique or discussion, sketchbooks or journals, or teachers’ own observational field notes. Sabol (2004) noted that formative assessments reveal the cognitive processes behind the products of art and may be used for providing instructional advice and for goal-setting for completion of work.

Examples of Summative Assessments Summative assessments are formal in nature, evaluating a finished product. The process of summative assessment should, therefore, be transparent, linked to educational standards (like the NCAS), and respond to explicitly stated criteria so that students understand how they will be evaluated (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. 66). Visual arts educators may offer students a variety of options, from which they may choose how their work will be evaluated; allowing students to participate in the assessment process considers their multimodalities and fosters empowerment through choice-­ making. For example, some students may choose to create a video (which allows for e­ diting, narrative, and expressive interpretation) as a way to showcase a body of artwork, while others

138

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

may choose a virtual gallery exhibition or a traditional portfolio. If the criteria for assessment are clear and students understand what evidences they must provide to demonstrate learning, then the destination of meaningful evaluation may be achieved by means of diverse paths. Below are two examples of summative art assessments that are easily adaptable to a variety of learners’ needs.

Portfolios Portfolios use student artworks and other artifacts to provide a strong summative assessment of student learning outcomes over an extended period of time. Kraft and Keifer-Boyd (2013) offered several considerations for portfolios as an assessment tool for learners with various (dis)abilities: 1 Portfolios should include a range of formative and summative artifacts, including in-­progress/ preparatory exercises, referential material, documentation, and evidences of research and planning—all telling the story of how and why the work was created—as well as the finished works themselves; 2 Within a constructive framework, visual arts teachers should facilitate student choice-­m aking in selecting the artwork and artifacts that will be included in the portfolio. Within this individuated approach lies the beauty of portfolios: They are highly adaptable, equitable, and participatory forms of evaluation; 3 Students should also include self-assessments/-reflections on their progress and evaluations of goals; in doing so, they should substantiate their choices for the artifacts and art that they chose for presentation within the portfolio. Students may choose to provide this information in a variety of formats to accommodate their different communication modalities—such as written, recorded or filmed, or shared in person. An important consideration for assessing students with disabilities is the need for information sharing. Educating students identified as having moderate to severe/profound disabilities is most often a collaboration between many stakeholders: the visual arts educators, special educators, students with disabilities, parent(s), paraeducators, professionals providing educational support, and diagnosticians. “The assessment process for students with special educational needs is not fully realized if the results of the assessments are not recorded and shared” (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. 73). For this reason, another helpful tool to include in a student’s portfolio may be an instrument by which the visual arts teacher documents a student’s processes and acts of self-determination through his or her decision-making in selecting work for the portfolio (Downing, 2008). These results may then be shared with the special educator, becoming a part of the student’s wider educational documentation.

Exhibition Student art exhibitions function as effective summative performance assessments that empower students to demonstrate their goals and competencies, both as a group and individually. In addition, exhibitions reach beyond the realm of the classroom into the community, becoming broadly participatory and part of the narrative of the local. Wexler (2009) explained, The question of the equitable representations of heritage, culture, and identity might be solved by returning to the local communities, “closest to home,” where they arise. The intersection of land, history, culture, and politics in the community inform art from the point of view of participation rather than exclusion. Art, as inseparable from its context, takes on new meaning as narrative is written into place by its people. (p. 202)

139

Michelle Kraft

In the university pedagogy class to which I referred at the beginning of this chapter, it was the summative art exhibition at the end of the field experience that most demonstrated the powerful community that we had created together. The adult students with autism were present, as were the pre-service visual arts educators who taught the art lessons; also in attendance were parents and friends of the autist students; staff and faculty from the autism transition center; and university faculty, staff, and students. One pre-service visual arts educator noted how the exhibition connected the community, allowing all to be fully engaged: “They [the adult students with autism] loved seeing their work displayed and showing everyone who came by. The community setting [in which members demonstrated care for one another] ... remained clear through [their] pride and the way [one adult autist] insisted upon guiding [another student] through the gallery” (Personal communication, December 5, 2015; see also Kraft, 2017). Through the exhibition as an assessment instrument, students and teachers may engage in constructive critiques and (self-)reflection on their learning experiences. The exhibition acts as a collective portfolio of students’ art educational outcomes, evidencing both individual achievement and accountability to the class community (Freedman, 2003) as a least restrictive learning environment in which all participate. The exhibition, when used for assessing student learning, provides the vehicle for problem-solving, making and supporting aesthetic judgments, exercising choice-making, synthesizing outcomes, and (self-)reflection on learning competencies.

Find Cards Keifer-Boyd developed “find cards,” which can be used for both formative and summative evaluation, in the 1970s as a differentiated assessment strategy for working with multi-generational groups in m ­ useum settings; we adapted their use to working with students experiencing disabilities (Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2014). Find cards may be customized to address a variety of learners’ (dis)ability levels and to attend to a diversity of visual arts learning situations. The process involves devising a question or prompt for the learner to find an artwork that demonstrates a stated quality, then a second, follow-up question that allows for elaboration. For example, a teacher asks a student at an art exhibition to Find an artwork that you think is peaceful, then asks, What things in the work make it seem peaceful? Find cards can also be completed in teams or groups, with students sharing responses with one another and with the class as a whole. Using find cards as an assessment activity “elicits a sense of student agency in selecting artworks, and yet focuses a student team’s search and discussion in an open-ended translation of curricular ­content from the combined strengths of the team” (Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2014, p. 153).

(Self-)Reflection Engaging students in continual self-reflection acts as an effective formative and summative means of evaluation through which students examine the layered meanings of the finished artwork as well as the creative process (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. 69; see also Nordlund, Speirs, & Stewart, 2010). In addition, it facilitates self-regulated learning by creating a motivating environment that respects and accommodates students’ personal values and goals (Anderson & Milbrandt, 2005). Kraft and Keifer-Boyd (2013) shared one example of how self-assessment might be used in working with a student experiencing severe disabilities: One teacher asked Sam, as she saw him working on his clay sculpture, if he thought that ghosts were scary or nice. “Scary,” Sam responded, and he then worked further to incorporate these qualities into his piece. Once the... teacher helped Sam identify the characteristics that he wanted in his artwork, he was able to assess the expressive qualities of his piece and to modify his work accordingly. (p. 71) 140

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

Visual arts teachers must not be too reliant on self-assessment alone, though. By adopting the stance of facilitator in identifying students’ particular modes of making meaning, teachers can then aid students in using these interpretive strategies, empowering them to implement changes to their work based upon their findings.

Including Differences Assistive Technologies and Innovating the Visual Arts Environment IDEA (2004) defined assistive technology devices as “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off the shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain, or improve functional capabilities of a child with a disability” (20 U.S.C. § 602 (1)(B)). Assistive technologies may be as high-tech as elaborate programmable communication devices or as low-tech as a rubber band used to help hold a paintbrush in place. For students with physical impairments, such as weaknesses in grip, low-cost options, such as pencils wrapped in kneaded erasers, non-skid film on surfaces, extenders (such as sticks) attached to art tools, or commercial grips, may prove invaluable in enabling students to work with materials in the inclusive art classroom. High-tech devices for input or communication may include closed-circuit television, computer screen magnification, speech readers, Braille note-takers, descriptive video services, optical character recognition (visually impaired), captioned television, alternative input devices, switches, touch-sensitive screens, pneumatic switches, and voice recognition (Nyberg & Trend, 2007). For the unique LRE needs of the art class, it is important that the visual arts teacher has input in the IEP planning process in order to collaboratively analyze and attend to the specific needs of working with art materials, tools, and learning competencies. When properly selected and used, assistive technologies can provide an important component in facilitating empowerment, self-determination, and choice-making (Foster, 2007).

Universal Design for Learning This chapter has already examined what Douglas Blandy (1991) referred to as an “ecological ­perspective” as a lens for viewing disability—seeing it as a state of environment rather than a deficit inherent within a human being. Similarly, the NIDRR (2000) acknowledged the contextual implications of disability, viewing it as a condition of an individual’s characteristics (which may include impairment) and the characteristics of his or her built, natural, cultural, and social environments. When the visual arts educator understands disability this way, he or she is free to use creative strategies to mitigate the disabling instructional, assessment, or environmental conditions in order to maximize ability and full participation within the art class. UDL is one approach to achieving this. Founded in architectural and product design, universal design’s ([UD] 2015) aim is to recognize and design for the diversity of humanity, physically and chronologically, and to account for differences in cognition and perception (for example, OXO kitchen utensils employ UD principles). Universal design for learning applies the same concepts to educational curriculum and delivery in order to optimize learning to meet diverse student needs (CAST, 2015). For example, Wexler and Luethi-Garrecht (2015) discussed the creation of optimal art space for creative/collaborative learning that is inclusive, using: 1 Ergonomic chairs that roll, allowing for flexibility of movement, 2 Furniture that changes position for changes in tasks, such as height-adjustable, multi-­functional tables/work spaces, 3 Peripheral demonstration areas (including movable tables) and display spaces (using vertical display units), 141

Michelle Kraft

4 Augmented lighting for focus on work areas, which takes into account factors like lighting color and distribution, reflection, and exterior light, 5 Considerations for sound (pitch, duration, volume), 6 Care in using imagery and typography in media presentations, including optimizing contrast and attention to length of exposure to high luminance. They add that, when working with autists, flexibility of work space allows them “to engage and disengage from the community of their peers when needed” (Wexler & Luethi-Garrecht, 2015, p. 17). Principles of UDL may pair seamlessly with the selection of assistive technology devices, allowing these two strategies to work in tandem in including all; in addition, IDEA’s “permissive use of funds” clause allows for typically abled students to benefit from supplementary aids and services provided for the student who is disabled in the general classroom setting (see IDEA, 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1413 (a)(4)). Extending UDL supports to students of all (dis)abilities may yield educational benefits and create a more normative social and educational experience for differently abled students.

Collaborating for Inclusion of All It is not reasonable—nor is it aligned with the special education mandate—to expect general classroom teachers to educate included students without any support or assistance (IDEA, 2004; ­Schiller, 1999). The collaborative process among stakeholders is a beneficial and important component toward providing education in the LRE for students experiencing disabilities. When visual arts educators, special educators, and—where appropriate—paraeducators join forces, the collective knowledge of these stakeholders can successfully address the educational needs of students with different abilities. Visual arts educators possess content-related knowledge and matching instructional skills, while special educators and paraeducators offer knowledge on assessment and adaptation, along with a familiarity with students’ multimodal needs, preferences, and strengths (Gerber & Fedorenko, 2006). Collaboration among these educators facilitates “joint reflection upon the learning experience [and] provides the educator team the space for responsive intervention and redirection of accommodations where necessary” (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. 48). Gerber and Fedorenko (2006) pointed out that successful coordination among educators conveys consistent expectations (such as with evidence-based practices) to students, allows for better retention and comprehension of learning, and enables educators to reinforce and enrich one another’s materials. Many students experiencing severe/profound disabilities may require the supplemental service of paraeducators in art classes as the LRE. Special educators will work with paraeducators in defining their roles for aiding students with disabilities, but visual arts educators are responsible for all students’ learning in their art classes, and it is important that they do not abdicate that responsibility to paraeducators (Guay & Gerlach, 2006). Although studies (Gelzheiser, McLane, Meyers, & Pruzek, 1997; Kraft, 2001) indicate that the presence of a paraeducator in a general classroom may preclude social interactions among a student with special needs, his or her peers, and the content educator, a paraeducator may be a helpful advocate in fostering peer interaction and encouraging independence and autonomy (Guay & Gerlach, 2006; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). To prevent a student’s over-dependence on a paraeducator, Downing (2008) suggested that—where possible—the student with disabilities work with a variety of paraeducators. It is also helpful for special educators, visual arts educators, and paraeducators to collaborate on strategies that enable paraeducators to move about the classroom, aiding other students, from time to time; this builds community while lessening the stigma that may come with the constant presence of an adult at a particular student’s side (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Advance planning, communication, and collaboration among all educators facilitate troubleshooting and interventions that maximize the success of students included in art classrooms as the LRE.

142

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

Examining Difference through Visual Arts Education Visual arts education may serve as an important critical lens through which students examine disability, tolerance, and the power structures that perpetuate how people view those who are different than them. For example, visual studies of villains in film may reveal the role of disfigurement and physical disability as historical manifestations of evil (e.g. Mr. Potter in It’s a Wonderful Life, Quasimodo in The Hunchback of Notre Dame, or James Bond’s various archenemies). This section surveys multiple frameworks for reflecting upon difference in an inclusive art class, including: (a) adopting a disability studies approach, (b) facilitating students’ own self-determination through choice-making, (c) examining disability in visual culture, and (d) empowering students to visually (re-)present themselves as a way of sharing their own experiences of their (dis)ability.

Disability Studies Approaches Disability studies, beginning in the 1990s, reframed disability through a social model rather than a medical model (Dowd, Sewell, & Truesdell, 2007), indicating that it is the social forces at play, such as barriers posed by built environments and political structures, that determine disability. Disability studies contends that disability is not inherent in the individual, but is shaped by environmental, political, and economic forces. Therefore, there is no objective concept of disability, nor dichotomous categories of disability and ability. Instead, there is a subjective continuum of disability and ability. (Dowd, Sewell, & Truesdell, 2007, p. 20) Derby (2011) added that any minority status assumed by those with impairments arises from the shared embodied experience of navigating in a world design that excludes, or poses barriers to, those possessing certain attributes. Notably, disability studies includes the voices and scholarship of those from within disability communities, acknowledging that those whose experience is from within disability may authentically speak to the experience of disability. For example, Savarese (2013), a disability activist who works closely with autism, advocated a stance of “neurocosmopolitanism” in our interactions with those whose neurologies are different from our own. He describes neurocosmopolitanism as a means of estranging ourselves from what is expected and considered “normal,” like when we travel to another culture. In this way, we may remain hospitably open to the notion of neurodiversity: that there may be different ways of perceiving the world that are not inherently worse or better than others. Such comfort with difference may also bring about “a willingness to be educated about that difference by people with autism” (Savarese, 2013, pp. 194–195). Similarly, Lydia Brown (n.d.) in the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (whose members have adopted the slogan “Nothing About Us Without Us”) examines disability and language from both the identity-first and person-first positions before concluding, It is impossible to affirm the value and worth of an Autistic person without recognizing his or her identity as an Autistic person. Referring to me as ‘a person with autism,’ or ‘an individual with ASD’ demeans who I am because it denies who I am. (p. 15) The visual arts educator including autist students may find that she or he must adopt an attitude of not-knowingness as a means of realizing and allowing for students’ neuro-differences in perceiving. Such a stance allows the visual arts educator to diverge from using a medical model to define

143

Michelle Kraft

and fix what is “wrong” with students to partnering with them to better understand (and teach to) different ways of sensing and understanding their environments.

Self-Determination through Choice-Making Amerman and Carr-Jones (2007) pointed out that self-advocacy, a goal of IDEA and special education, implies self-knowledge. Allowing students opportunities for choice-making is an important function of creating that takes place in the (inclusive) art classroom. In the expressive choices that students make when they research for, plan, design, create, and display works of art, they reveal aspects of themselves as a form of visual self-advocacy: Effective self-advocates believe they have the right to make choices in school, life, and future goal-setting. Self-advocates are involved in all the decision-making processes that may affect their lives. They understand the connection between their involvement in the process and the outcome of their plans. (Amerman & Carr-Jones, 2007, p. 24) For example, the visual arts educator and paraeducator who are collaborating to include a student with severe/profound disabilities in an art class may facilitate choice-making when they know the student’s preferences and interests. Using constructive prompts, they may aid the student in the selection of color, placement, medium, and other expressive qualities in creating. For the student who experiences limited mobility or movement control, educators and peers may create stencils under the direction of the student so that she or he may use them as tools for painting (see Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2003). Through the activity of forming materials, we become aware of our bodies in relation to that matter; consequently, the materialness of art-making contributes to the making and re-making of self in relation to the world, leading to self-knowing (Wexler, 2009). Such self-knowing, allowing for self-determination, may be a positive outgrowth of inclusion in the art class, and the empowerment and responsibility attained through self-advocacy must, too, be facilitated through stakeholders’ active involvement in the IEP process (Amerman & ­Carr-Jones, 2007; Kraft, 2001; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013).

Examining Disability in Visual Culture In 1917, the film The Black Stork (which was later rereleased during the growing eugenics movement under the title Are You Fit to Marry?) portrays the story of a physically impaired (but cognitively normative) infant who grows up to become a murderous criminal because of the continual torment he received from others due to his hunched back (Haiselden, Wharton, & Wharton, 1917). The film’s producer, Dr. Harry J. Haiselden plays a doctor who refuses to save the newborn infant; the child is then saved by other doctors. Haiselden advocated for the infanticide of “defective” newborns and had recently been acquitted in the 1915 case of newborn John Bollinger, in which he had convinced the child’s parents to allow the baby, who was disabled, to die. Longmore and Goldberger (2000) pointed out, In the 1920s, 1930s, and 1940s, movies presented characters with disabilities... as either uncontrollable villains or helpless victims. This continued a cultural motif in which disabled figures embodied the loss of control and the dependency Americans have found so troubling and displaced onto outsider figures. Whether represented as menacing or pathetic, physically handicapped people were thereby defined as unfit for normal social circles. (p. 895)

144

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

Such portrayals of disability in visual culture did not begin with film nor were they confined to the 20th century. Derby (2014) recounted 19th-century uses of photography to visualize (and animalize) physiognomies of mental illness through “exaggerated facial expressions and anatomical cranial and facial structures” (p. 25). Similarly, Los Angeles State College special education coordinator and International Council for Exceptional Children President F. E. Lord (1956) used simplified stick figure caricatures, with over-exaggerated physical features, to “illustrate the heterogeneity within typical special classes” of students with special educational needs (p. 322). His figurative illustrations possess varying degrees of wavy arms, legs, mouths, or eyes; enlarged heads “to show deviation”; and other physical markers as ways of visually signifying difference (p. 323). Lord’s accompanying captions interpret the figures for the educator-reader. For instance, Figure 1’s “typical normal child” possesses a head size signifying “normal intelligence,” while his “straight arms and legs suggest normal motor control”; meanwhile, the eight figurative examples in another of his illustrations (stick figures that include varying degrees of no ears to question marks where ears should be) tell the reader that she or he is “on your own now to make your own interpretations” (p. 323). Even in the early 1970s, an infamous poster for the Muscular Dystrophy Association of America (MDAA) featured a photograph of a young boy in leg braces with a forlorn expression, shot from a power angle above. The caption above him read, “If I grow up I want to be a fireman.” This portrayal of disability as dependent and powerless echoes a similar image from almost four decades earlier, which showed “a sad boy wearing leg braces and leaning forward on crutches in front of a white cross and the words ‘Help Crippled Children’” on the first Easter Seal stamp (Longmore & Goldberger, 2000, p. 895). By examining and critiquing such artifacts of visual culture, including similar depictions in art history, visual arts educators may facilitate reflection upon societal beliefs and structures that have traditionally marginalized some physiologies and neurologies while simultaneously privileging others (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013).

Self-(Re-)presentation through Art Critical reflection upon depictions of impairment within visual culture opens space for students experiencing disabilities to reclaim and re-present their own experiences and self-portrayals. As an adult, disability activist Ben Mattlin, who was the poster child in the MDAA example above, said of his experience: They had me stand in leg braces and they told me the caption was going to be: ‘If I grow up, I want to be a fireman.’ I was 6 [or] 7 years old. I was told I had a normal life expectancy at that point [and] I did not want to be a fireman. So I was quite upset.... I knew I wouldn’t be a fireman. That was absurd.... It felt untrue. [I] felt exploited. It gave me a sense of what it meant to be a disabled kid that was not flattering, and did not feel like reality. It made me distance myself from... my people, from people like me. And when I got over that and came to associate with other disabled people, it was a... realization that there are some pretty cool people out there. (National Public Radio, 2012, pp. 3–4) As an adult, Mattlin was empowered to reflect upon and represent his own experiences of his disability. Derby (2014) called upon the arts and entertainment industries to employ actors with disabilities to represent disabled communities on stage and in film as a means of disability rights advocacy. He added that such self-representations contribute not only to our understanding of disability, but also to the “ways in which disability intersect [sic.] other forms of identity”

145

Michelle Kraft

(Derby, 2014, p. 27). By similarly allowing students in the art class opportunities to (visually) represent themselves, their lives, and their experiences, visual arts educators may facilitate the means for disrupting disability stereotypes (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Kraft, 2017); in doing so, students may reveal the complexities of personal identity, defying simplistic categorizations created by disability labels.

Beyond K-12 To ensure the achievement of goals initiated by IDEA in schools, visual arts education that seeks to include disability in fully participatory ways must also attend to these aims beyond the K-12 classroom, reaching into transition programs, community arts, and university visual arts and visual arts educator preparation programs. The two of these most closely linked to ensuring IDEA goals as extensions beyond the K-12 art classroom are: (a) the transition programs that may serve students with disabilities after they leave the public school and (b) pre-service preparation programs for visual arts educators (see Dorff, 2018).

Transition Programs and Visual Arts Education The 1990 reauthorization of IDEA provided for the inclusion of a transition plan in a student’s IEP as a way of meeting goals for independent living, employment, community participation, and education after they leave the public schools after the age of 21. By age 14, students are included in IEP planning; their IEP team works with various transition services to coordinate future support for them by the time they are 16. Rios and Foster (2007) noted that this support includes assessment of needs and life goals and alignment of secondary school coursework with job placement and career goals. After graduation, students may be served by regional transition centers. The need for such transition services emerged from research in the 1970s as a way to aid students in the move from high school to adulthood (Rios & Foster, 2007). Many of these transition centers—such as the Burkhart Transition Center for Autism at the Burkhart Center for Autism Education and Research at Texas Tech University—offer programs in visual arts as a means of self-empowerment (Kraft, 2016a). Such programs may serve as effective tools in facilitating self-representation and in meeting post-graduation challenges toward developing tolerance and acceptance within communities and work places (Kraft, 2017; Kraft, 2016a; Rios & Foster, 2007).

Preparing Visual Arts Educators to Include Disability Teacher attitudes and comfort in working alongside students experiencing disabilities are integral parts of the successful inclusion of difference as envisioned by IDEA. As a result, more and more universities are offering courses dedicated to preparing visual arts educators to work with students with disabilities (Allison, 2008; Bain & Hasio, 2011; Cramer, Coleman, Park, Bell, & Coles, 2015; Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2003; Kraft, 2016b; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013; Reavis, 2009). Because the art classroom is such a unique setting, with its own particular media (some of which may pose dangers) and discipline-specific learning standards, it is important that pre-service preparation programs include field experiences for working in visual arts alongside students experiencing moderate to severe disabilities (Kraft, 2001; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Through pre-service preparation, visual arts educators may become aware, too, of the importance of the self-, art class-, and ­student-advocacy that comes with serving in IEP team planning. Likewise, embedded field experiences in working with difference allow for increased familiarity and relationship-building,

146

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

which may lead to the future successful inclusion of disability in the specific setting of the art class (Kraft, 2016b; Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013).

Looking Forward: Reflections and Conclusions Opportunities for self-representation are powerful tools in educating students of all (dis)abilities. Derby (2011) argued that visual arts education rarely acknowledges disability as a cultural category, which is evidenced by its absence in art historical study and curricular concerns. Providing students in inclusive art classes with avenues for self-representation allows them to dismantle pervasive visual culture stereotypes of disability. In doing so, visual arts teachers may support students in reclaiming their own disability experiences in an empowering way. In the final exhibition with pre-service visual arts educators that I described at the beginning of the chapter, one university student recalled a conversation with a parent of an adult student experiencing severe disabilities. A self-portrait created by the adult student had a moving impact on the student’s mother; the university student recalled what the parent told her: “[The student] had never been asked to draw herself. It may be the first time she really saw herself. Her mother was blown away at what she had drawn... [The student] was allowed to let her creativity show” (Personal communication, December 5, 2015; see also Kraft, 2017). Wexler and Luethi-Garrecht (2015) reminded us that, although cognitive ways of knowing are endowed with greater value in our system of education, we cannot ignore the richness of ways we know the world through feeling, intuition, and kinesthetic processes. While educational histories in the visual arts and disability have undergone both peaks and valleys, the current (and future) opportunities for including all students, aligning with the intent and spirit of the special education mandate, offer great promise. Inclusive art classroom communities hold empowering possibilities for realizing in(ter)dependence, self-determination/-representation, and the full participation of learners of all (dis)abilities. There exist numerous resources that are helpful to visual arts educators in creating inclusive classrooms. In the section that follows, I provide an overview of some of these resources, informational websites, and models for inclusive visual arts education programs.

Models and Resources for Inclusive Visual Arts Education3 The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts’ Office of VSA Arts and Accessibility includes a strong arts educational component. VSA provides numerous resources for arts educators and those experiencing disabilities in arts education on their website, many of which are described in the following:

Resources for Visual Arts Standards The new standards for visual arts education also include accompanying resources to aid teachers as a foundation for implementation. For example: •

•

The NCAS website provides the standards for building curriculum in the fine arts, including visual arts. There is a link within the website, within each fine arts discipline, that takes the user to strategies for inclusion. www.nationalartsstandards.org/ The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts publication Students with Disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding Principles for Teachers, by Sharon M. Malley (2014), is available in PDF format on the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and NCAS w ­ ebsites. It is a helpful resource for understanding and using the NCAS: www.kennedy-center.org/­ education/vsa/resources/GuidingPrinciples2014.pdf, www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/ default/files/Guiding%20Principles%20for%20Inclusion.pdf

147

Michelle Kraft

Resources for Inclusive Arts Instruction and Teaching Strategies There are many online resources that provide strategies for teaching the arts inclusively. VSA Arts, ARTSEDGE, and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts offer several such resources, and there are several VSA publications related to disability and the arts, many of which include lesson plans. These are available at: www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/ edu_parents.cfm. Additionally: •

•

• • •

•

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Office of VSA and Accessibility has published three issues of Exemplary Programs and Approaches. These are available in PDF format at the links below and include information, resources, and models from fine arts educators across the US • http://education.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/Finalprofessionialpapersbook2013.pdf • http://education.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/2013_VSA%20Intersections_Exemplary_Programs_Approaches_2014.pdf • http://education.kennedy-center.org/pdf/Professional_Papers_Vol3.pdf Participants may register to attend a live series of free webinars, covering a range of topics related to arts education and disability, produced by VSA Arts and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Past webinars are recorded (and transcribed) and available as well: www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/webinars.cfm An annotated bibliography of source material on disability and arts education is available at www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/ArtEdandSpecialEdbibliography2012.pdf ARTSEDGE provides resources and lesson plans for arts educators at http://artsedge.­kennedycenter.org/educators.aspx?_ga=1.100518361.638083664.1363449250 Incredible Art Department has, for over 20 years, provided resources on visual arts education and inclusion. The easily navigable website includes links to special education law resources, curricular strategies, assessment tools, and much more: www.incredibleart.org/ The Center for Diversified Art offers resources for K-12 visual arts teachers and for adult artists. Their website includes a listing of disability arts organizations and resources for inclusion and accessibility: www.diversifiedart.org/resources.html

Resources for Assistive Technologies Several low-tech and high-tech resources for the use of assistive technologies in meeting students’ special needs in the classroom are available online. For example: •

• •

This VSA Texas report describes the curriculum for an inclusive high school New ­Media Arts ­program: http://education.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/07_TransitionTo Employment_Texas_FINAL.pdf The Center for Implementing Technology in Education website is www.cited.org/index.aspx The Center on Technology and Disability website is www.ctdinstitute.org/

These sites provide resources for educators in learning about available assistive technologies, i­ncluding libraries, lesson plans, and webinars with information and strategies for technology and disability. •

Media Access Generator (MAGpie) is free, downloadable subtitling/captioning/­audio-­ description software for use with digital multimedia. It is available at http://ncam.wgbh.org/ webaccess/magpie/

148

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts

•

•

•

VoiceThread® is a free Internet application that enables students to display artwork and to audio-record responses. It is helpful for use in art critiques for those with mobility, reading, and communication challenges. It is available at https://voicethread.com/ Virtual Ability Island (2011), a support group within the virtual environment of Second Life®, is a place to meet with artists with disabilities. The site enables socializing, sharing, and referrals to resources and groups. A helpful directory of Web tools, offering multimodal strategies for communication for ­inclusive art classes, is Go2Web20.net

Conferences and Organizations for Inclusion and Visual Arts Education Numerous teacher organizations provide support and resources for visual arts educators in including difference. For example: •

•

•

The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts sponsors the VSA Intersections: Arts and Special Education Conference, which includes fine arts educators working with, or from within, disability communities from across the US Information is available at www.­kennedycenter.org/education/vsa/programs/sec_2015.cfm The National Art Education Association holds its annual conference each spring. The ­organization and conference include the Special Needs in Art Education (SNAE) issues group. • Conference information is available at www.arteducators.org/events/national-convention • Information on the SNAE issues group is found at www.arteducators.org/community/ articles/75-special-needs-in-art-education-snae The Council for Exceptional Children (CEC) now has a Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education. Their website is http://community.cec.sped.org/darts/home

Notes 1 There is a great deal of debate—even from within the disability community itself—about the use of “identity-first” versus “person-first” language. The term “autist” is one adopted from within the autism community, rooted in disability studies theory. In this chapter, I use both person-first and identity-first language. 2 Even Viktor Lowenfeld (1957) referred to his work as “art education therapy,” connecting his vocation of art education to his work with students with disabilities. (See also Andrus, 2006). 3 Many of these resources appear originally in Including Difference: A Communitarian Approach to Art ­Education in the Least Restrictive Environment (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013) and in “Situating the Standards of Visual Arts Education to Include Disability” (Kraft, 2016b) in Trends: The Journal of the Texas Art ­Education Association.

References Allison, A. (2008). Critical theory and preservice art education: One art teacher’s journey of equipping art teachers for inclusion. [Dissertation] University of North Texas. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. (2008). 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. Amerman, T., & Carr-Jones, J. (2007). Self-advocacy. In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 23–26). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Anderson, T., & Milbrandt, M. K. (2005). Art for life: Authentic instruction in art education. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Andrus, L. (2006). Art education, art therapy and therapeutic teaching: Definitions, distinctions and ­common ground. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 177–188). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Baggs, A. (2010). Up in the clouds and down in the valley: My richness and yours. Disability Studies Quarterly, 30(1). Retrieved from http:// dsq-sds.org/issue/view/43

149

Michelle Kraft Bain, C., & Hasio, C. (2011). Authentic learning experience prepares preservice students to teach art to children with special needs. Art Education, 64(2), 33–39. Benin, D., & Cartwright, L. (2006). Shame, empathy and looking practices: Lessons from a disability studies classroom. Journal of Visual Culture, 5(2), 155–171. Blandy, D. (1991). Conceptions of disability: Toward a sociopolitical orientation to disability for art ­education. Studies in Art Education, 32(3), 131–144. Blandy, D., Pancsofar, E., & Mockensturm, T. (1988). Guidelines for teaching art to children and youth experiencing significant mental/physical challenges. Art Education, 41(1), 60–66. Bloomfield, D. C. (2007). No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 43–45). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Brown v. Board of Education. (1954). 347 US. 483. Brown, L. (n.d.). Identify first language. Autistic Self Advocacy Network. Retrieved from http://autisticadvocacy. org/home/about-asan/identity-first-language/ Burnette, J., & Lokerson, J. E. (2006). Art teachers and special education law. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 15–25). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Campbell, L. (2005). Spiritual reflective practice in preservice art education. Studies in Art Education, 47(1), 51–69. CAST. (2015). About Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved from www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl. html#.VoLsA80vQ jZ Chapman, L. H. (2005). No child left behind in art? Art Education, 58(1), 8–16. Chapman, L. H. (2007). An update on No Child Left Behind and national trends in education. Arts Education Policy Review, 109(1), 25–36. City of Boston Archives. (Accessed July 11, 2016). Sloyd models and working drawing made by the ­pupils of the Horace Mann School. [Photograph. Collection No. 0420.047. Horace Mann School for the Deaf records, box P-3.] Retrieved from https://cityof bostonarchives.omeka.net/exhibits/show/horacemann-school/history/vocational-training Cramer, E. S., Coleman, M. B., Park, Y., Bell, S. M., & Coles, J. T. (2015). Art educators’ knowledge and preparedness for teaching students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Studies in Art Education: A Journal of Issues and Research, 57(1), 6–20. Danforth, S. (2007). Disability as metaphor: Examining the conceptual framing of emotional behavioral disorder in American public education. Educational Studies: A Journal of the American Studies Association, 42(1), 8–27. Davis, J., & Watson, N. (2002). Countering stereotypes of disability: Disabled children and resistance. In M. Corker & T. Shakespeare (Eds.), Disability/postmodernity: Embodying disability theory (pp. 159–174). New York, NY: Continuum. Derby, J. (2011). Disability studies and art education. Studies in Art Education, 52(2), 94–111. Derby, J. (2014). Animality-patriarchy in mental disability representations. Visual Culture & Gender, 9, 18–30. Retrieved from http://vcg.emitto.net/ ­ rockett & Dorff, J. B. (2018). Preparing to teach students with disabilities in and through the arts. In J. B. C S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 91–104). New York, NY: Routledge. Dowd, T. G., Sewell, A., & Truesdell, K. L. (2007). Disability studies. In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 20–21). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Downing, J. E. (2008). Are they making progress? Assessing the skills of students with severe and multiple disabilities in the general education classrooms. In J. E. Downing (Ed.), Including students with severe and multiple disabilities in typical classrooms (3rd ed., pp. 261–286). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks. Education for all Handicapped Children Act of 1975. (1975). 20 U. S. C. §§ 1401 et seq. Efland, A. (1990). A history of art education: Intellectual and social currents in teaching the visual arts. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Eisenhauer, J. (2008). A visual culture of stigma: Critically examining representations of mental illness. Art Education, 61(5), 13–18. Erickson, M. (2004). Interaction of teachers and curriculum. In E. W. Eisner & M. D. Day (Eds.), ­Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 467–486). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. ­M ahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. Fehr, D. E. (2008). Developing arts education policy at the federal level: The first ten months of the National Education Task Force. Studies in Art Education, 49(4), 381–384.

150

Inclusion and Disability in Visual Arts Foster, J. (2007). Assistive technology. In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 78–81). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Freedman, K. (2003). Teaching visual culture: Curriculum, aesthetics, and the social life of art. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Gelzheiser, L. M., McLane, M., Meyers, J., & Pruzek, R. M. (1997). Do general and special education teachers foster peer interactions of students with disabilities? (Government Document No. A 57.2:B 541101). Albany, NY: The University at Albany. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 408 757). Gerber, S. A., & Fedorenko, J. (2006). Building collaborative partnerships. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 161–176). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Gerber, B. L., & Guay, D. M. (2006). (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Guay, D. M. (1994). Cross-site analysis of teaching practices: Visual art education with students experiencing disabilities. Studies in Art Education, 34(4), 222–232. Guay, D. M. (2006). Special needs art students in the art room: A journey. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 3–14). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Guay, D. M., & Gerlach, K. (2006). Clarifying roles for paraeducators in the art room. In B. L. Gerber & D. M. Guay (Eds.). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art (pp. 189–206). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Haiselden, H. J. (Producer), Wharton, T., & Wharton, L. (Directors). (1917). The Black Stork [Motion picture.] US: Sheriott Pictures Corporation. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004. (2004). 20 U. S. C. §§ 1401 et seq. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Art of 2004 Regulations. (2006). 34 C. F. R. §§ 300 et seq. Jaeger, P., & Bowman, C. A. (2005). Understanding disability: Inclusion, access, diversity, and civil rights. Westport, CT: Praeger. Keifer-Boyd, K., & Kraft, L. M. (2003). Inclusion policy in practice. Art Education, 56(6), 46–53. Keifer-Boyd, K., & Kraft, L. M. (2014). IDEA←→empowerment through difference←→find card strategies: Communitarian approaches to empowerment. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA intersections: Arts and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 147–158). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Retrieved from www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/ resources/2013_VSA%20Intersections_Exemplary_Programs_Approaches_2014.pdf Kraft, L. M. (2001). A historical/legal analysis and case study of a high school art classroom as a least restrictive environment for students experiencing disabilities. (Doctoral dissertation, Texas Tech University). Retrieved from Dissertation Abstracts International, 62, 02A (Accession No. AA13005249). Kraft, M. (2006). Art education and disability: Re-envisioning educational efficiency. The Journal for Social Theory in Art Education, 26, 302–320. Kraft, M. (2016a). Art on the spectrum. Bowerbird: Art review of the Panhandle and West Texas. Retrieved from www.thebowerbirdlbk.com/single-post/2016/1/11/Art-on-the-Spectrum# Kraft, M. (2016b). Situating the standards of visual arts education to include disability. Trends: The Journal of the Texas Art Education Association, 30–36. Retrieved from https://www.taea.org/TAEA/Docs/2016/ TRENDS-2016.pdf Kraft, M. (2017). Self-representation and empowerment: Preservice art educators and adult learners with autism. Examining the Intersection of Arts and Special Education, 3 (pp. 34–53). Washington, DC: John F. ­Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts’ Office of VSA and Accessibility. Retrieved from http://­ education.kennedy-center.org/pdf/Professional_Papers_Vol3.pdf Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference: A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Longmore, P. K., & Goldberger, D. (2000). The League of the Physically Handicapped and the Great ­Depression: A case study in the New Disability history. The Journal of American History, 87(3), 888–922. Lord, F. E. (1956). A realistic look at special classes. Exceptional Children, 22(8), 321–342. Lowenfeld, V. (1957). Creative and mental growth. New York, NY: Macmillan. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the core art standards: Guiding principles for teachers. ­Washington, DC: John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M. (2018). Conceptual and historical foundations of education in and through the arts for students with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 16–31). New York, NY: Routledge.

151

Michelle Kraft Miller, R. (2010). Asperger’s syndrome: Marilyn Cosho [YouTube video]. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/ watch?v=VWNg5JjUQ0E National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014). A conceptual framework for arts learning. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover, DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards. org/content/conceptual-framework National Institute on Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). (2000). National institute on ­disability and rehabilitation research long-range plan, 1999–2003. Washington, DC: Office of Special ­Education and Rehabilitative Services. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED444330) National Public Radio (­Producer). (August 31, 2012). Against the odds, a “miracle boy grows up.” Retrieved from www.npr.org/2012/08/31/160259194/against-the-odds-a-miracle-boy-grows-up No Child Left Behind/Elementary and Secondary Schools Act. (2001). 20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq. Nordlund, C., Speirs, P. & Stewart, M. (2010). An invitation to social change: Fifteen principles for teaching art. Art Education, 63(5), 36–43. Northern Officers Group Equality Unit. (n.d.). Defining impairment and disability. Leeds, UK: Centre for Disability Studies, University of Leeds. Retrieved from http://pf 7d7vi404s1dxh27mla5569.wpengine. netdna-cdn.com/files/library/Northern-Officers-Group-defining-impairment-and-disability.pdf Nyberg, J., & Trend, D. (2007). Digital divide and special education. In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 17–20). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Osgood, R. L. (2005). The history of inclusion in the United States. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press. Reavis, L. J. (2009). Art teacher preparation for teaching in an inclusive classroom: A content analysis of pre-service programs and a proposed curriculum. [Doctoral dissertation]. Georgia State University. Reid, D. K., & Knight, M. G. (2006). Disability justifies exclusion of minority students: A critical history grounded in disability studies. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 18–23. Rios, A., & Foster, J. (2007). Transition services in special education. In A. N. Bursztyn (Ed.). The Praeger handbook of special education (pp. 153–155). Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. Rolling, J. H., Jr. (2013). Art as social response and responsibility: Reframing critical thinking in art ­education as a basis for altruistic intent. Art Education, 66(2), 6–12. Sabol, F. R. (2004). The assessment context: Part one. Art Education Policy Review, 105(3), 3–9. Sabol, F. R. (2010). No child left behind: A study of its impact on art education. Reston, VA: National Art ­Education Association. Savarese, R. (2013). From neurodiversity to neurocosmopolitanism: Beyond mere acceptance and inclusion. In C. D. Herrera & A. Perry (Eds.), Ethics and neurodiversity, (pp. 191–205). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Scholars Press. Schiller, M. (1999). Access to art education: Ethical and legal perspectives. In A. L. Nyman & A. M. ­Jenkins (Eds.), Issues and approaches to art for students with special needs (pp. 7–16). Reston, VA: National Art ­Education Association. Snedden, D. (1913). Problems of educational readjustment. Cambridge, MA: The Riverside Press. Spaulding, L. S., & Pratt, S. M. (2015). A review and analysis of the history of special education and disability advocacy in the United States. American Educational History Journal, 42(1), 91–109. Universal Design. (2015). The resource for Universal Design news. Retrieved from www.universaldesign.com/ Wexler, A. (2009). Art and disability: The social and political struggles facing education. New York, NY: Palgrave. Wexler, A., & Luethi-Garrecht, A. (2015). Beyond accommodations: Designing for nonverbal/nonauditory learners in the inclusive art room. Art Education, 68(2), 14–21. Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for ­Supervision of Curriculum Development.

152

10 Including Students with Disabilities in Music Education Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

Music is a reflection of its time in history and its place within cultures; music education is also a reflection of time and place. The study of music in the US was once considered to be only for the elite or singers and organists who serviced Protestant churches. In 1838, due to the efforts of singing teacher Lowell Mason, music became a curricular subject in the Boston public schools because of its “moral, physical, and intellectual nature.” Music was considered moral because it played an important part in religious observances. It was considered physical because “singing was exercise for the lungs.” It was considered intellectual because it “contributes to memory, comparison, attention, and intellectual faculties” (Mark & Gary, 2008, pp. 13–14). It would be nearly 150 years before music became a part of the general curriculum for students with disabilities. However, music as therapy was employed in programs for students with disabilities long before it was recognized as an academic subject in public schools. Published histories of music education do not often recognize these early instances of music for students with disabilities. As far back as the early 1800s, when Jean-Marc-Gaspard Itard (1775–1838) and others utilized music in the diagnosis and treatment of speech and hearing disorders, music has played an important role in the education of students with disabilities. In addition, music was found to be effective to teach auditory and speech skills to students with cognitive disabilities (Solomon, 1980). Early uses of music in special education settings were primarily with children who had intellectual or sensory disabilities. Music was used as a way to facilitate learning and to reinforce students’ academic achievements. In a review of the early literature related to music in special education, four themes emerged: (a) Music was used to train or educate students with disabilities; (b) singing was used to improve speech, breathing, and articulation abilities; (c) music activities were used as diagnostic tools prior to the development of diagnostic audiology equipment; and (d) music was used in the education of deaf and hard of hearing students since the early 1800s (Solomon, 1980). Music for students with hearing loss was more obscure than for most other disabilities because it was regarded as impractical; however, in 1848, the early efforts of William Wolcott Turner and David Ely Bartlett on behalf of music education for children who were deaf showed that even a child with little hearing could learn music and convincing reasons existed to support such an endeavor (Darrow & Heller, 1985). Throughout the early history of music education in the US, music was an important part of the curriculum in schools for children who were blind or deaf and for students with intellectual disabilities. Singing, rhythm activities, playing instruments, and moving to music were the ­primary activities used to enhance students’ education (Solomon, 1980). These same activities

153

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

were a part of the general curriculum for students without disabilities; however, the purposes of engaging them in such activities were often different. Music education was provided so that these students had opportunities to develop useful leisure skills that might, in turn, allow them to ­a ssimilate more easily into their communities (Adamek, 2002). Thus, music was seen as a facilitator for integration, and in many of these accounts of music with students with various disabilities, the primary goal of the activities was non-musical. Many of the music programs in special schools included opportunities for students with disabilities to participate in musical ensembles. The purpose of these ensembles was rarely to study music but rather was to serve as a means to represent the school at various community functions. There are numerous accounts of musical organizations specifically for students with disabilities (British Deaf Band Tour in North America, 1991; Darrow, 2006; Sheldon, 1997). Such groups participated in “Very Special Arts Festivals” across the country during the 1970s, 1980s, and into the 1990s. Though segregated, such performing groups helped to cultivate a social and musical identity for their members (Smith & Plimpton, 1993). The study of music as an academic discipline was not considered appropriate for students with disabilities until the advent of PL 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act in 1975. Opportunities for students with disabilities to participate in music experiences increased concurrently with the growth in public school educational opportunities. From the beginning of the inclusion movement to today, the music classroom has served as a common placement for students with disabilities (Atterbury, 1990; Graham & Beer, 1980). Although music educators have generally welcomed students with disabilities, their placement in music classrooms has not been without controversy (Darrow, 1999). Too often, the placement of students with disabilities into music classes was due to administrators’ misconceptions about the academic nature of music study. They believed that any student could be integrated into a class to listen to music without specialized supports. Researchers found that administrators were unaware that music educators are responsible for implementing a structured curriculum that involves music reading, writing, creating, and listening as well as performing vocally or instrumentally (Goeke, 1994).

Research on Music in Special Education Jellison and Draper (2015) compiled an extensive review of music in special education research from 1975–2013. This review documents the increase in services and the effectiveness of music for students with disabilities in a variety of educational settings. Although this finding is promising, the authors identified a pressing need to expand research to determine effective evidence-based practices in music education and conduct research that specifically addresses musical outcomes for students with disabilities in inclusive music education settings. The researchers found: • • • • • •

no studies after 2007, few inclusion studies, less than half of the studies were carried out in music classrooms, no studies were carried out in secondary-level classrooms, music learning variables were rarely examined, and only three studies were published in music education journals.

These findings indicate that many questions remain about students’ participation in inclusive music classrooms and that effective teaching strategies are yet to be identified for classrooms and ensembles that include students with a wide range of abilities. Researchers in the field of music therapy have developed a substantive research base to document the effectiveness of music interventions for non-musical outcomes. Jellison and Draper concluded that there is a need for

154

Including Students with Disabilities

the music education research community to identify evidence-based practices for quality music education. The most current review of music educators’ perceptions of inclusion effectiveness indicated that only 61 percent of respondents (across all levels) reported that students with “special needs” are effectively integrated into music (VanWeelden & Whipple, 2014). In discussing their research, Jellison and Draper (2015) posed the following questions: What can be done to help teachers meet the educational needs of children with disabilities in inclusive music classrooms and rehearsals? What do successful teachers—those who report meeting the needs of students with disabilities—do? What strategies can be used to effectively adapt music instruction without compromising the quality of the regular music program? What do we know about the level of participation and music learning of children with disabilities in inclusive music classrooms and ensembles at all levels? Given the large percentage of children who have specific learning disabilities, what interventions facilitate their music learning? What factors facilitate the continued music participation of children with disabilities at the secondary level, particularly in performing ensembles? What strategies will lead to non-musical benefits for children with disabilities and their typically developing peers as they learn music together? Finally, Jellison and Draper challenged music education researchers to closely study the experiences of students with disabilities and those of their teachers to ultimately find ways for a diverse group of students to participate happily and successfully in meaningful music experiences in school and throughout life. Historically, researchers in the field of music therapy—who also shared an interest in the field of special education—have been concerned with the effects of music on the academic d­ evelopment of children with disabilities. Their research was primarily published in music therapy journals, such as the Journal of Music Therapy and Music Therapy Perspectives. Over the past decade, as the music therapy profession has found increasingly greater acceptance in the field of medicine and aging, the editorships and editorial boards of these journals have followed this trend in the profession. In their examination of the Journal of Music Therapy, Yun-Springer and Silverman (2014) found that the populations most studied were other (n = 31, 16.94 percent), nondisabled persons (n = 24, 13.12 percent) and medical/surgical (n = 16, 8.74 percent), Alzheimer’s/dementia (n = 12, 6.56 percent), and school-age populations (n = 12, 6.56 percent). These data indicate that music therapists and music educators concerned with the influence of music and inclusive practices on the musical and academic development of students with disabilities may need to turn to journals in music education and special education to disseminate their work.

Including Students with Disabilities in the Music Classroom As with other academic subject matter, the ability to adapt music instruction to the learning characteristics of students with varied abilities often requires disability-related information and knowledge of special education practices. A number of authors have emphasized the importance of understanding the causes and characteristics of disabilities commonly represented in the music classroom (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Hehir, 2007). Knowledge about a disability increases the likelihood that a music educator can adapt instruction to the needs of the student. Reading and understanding a student’s individualized education program (IEP) and conferring with IEP team members, family members, and the student are excellent resources to consider when searching for ways to adapt instruction. Research has indicated that disability-related information and ­k nowledge of adaptive strategies are also related to music educators’ attitudes and willingness to include students with disabilities in the music classroom (VanWeelden & Whipple, 2014; ­W hipple & VanWeelden, 2012). Music education comprises a subject content area that lends itself well to infusing disability-­ related information. Several authors have suggested ways of bringing disability information into the academic curriculum (Ferguson, 2001; Hehir, 2007; Storey, 2007).

155

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

Ability Awareness Teachers and students can participate in music activities while simulating a specific disability. Research indicates that disability simulations during music activities can increase sensitivity toward persons with disabilities (Colwell, 2012). However, some disability advocates have suggested that such simulations often reinforce stereotypes and emphasize a “deficit” model of disability (Ferguson, 2001).

Disability Content in Music Curricula and Activities The study of disability can be included in school curricula as is the study of other minority and cultural groups. Such curricular information can influence music students’ perceptions of persons with disabilities (Colwell, 1999; Johnson & Darrow, 1997). Persons with disabilities have been and are well represented in the musical arts, and studying these musicians is one way to infuse disability information into the music curriculum.

Teacher In-Service Music educators often need training in how to successfully integrate students with disabilities into musical ensembles and classrooms, particularly those educators who have had little to no experience with individuals who have disabilities. Wilson and McCrary (1996) found that a university course addressing the inclusion of students with disabilities in music positively influenced pre-­ service music educators’ attitudes and actions.

Disability Literature Literature about various cultures is often integrated into school curricula. Books about musicians with disabilities, such as Extraordinary measures: Disability in music (Straus, 2011) and Music, disability and society (Lubet, 2011), as well as works written by persons with disabilities can be included in the music curriculum.

Use of Role Models Students with disabilities need positive role models. There are numerous well-known composers and artists, such as Ludwig van Beethoven, Itzhak Perlman, and Andrea Bocelli, who have disabilities and others who are less well known, such as Thomas Quasthoff and Adrian Anantawan. These individuals, as well as fellow student musicians, can serve as positive role models, not only for students with disabilities but for all students (Darrow, 2015a).

Academic Preparation A number of universities that offer teacher preparation programs in music education include, and often require, courses in special education or special music education. Using a stratified state ­sampling, Colwell and Thompson (2000) examined teacher education programs in music education to determine the course offerings in special education available to music education ­m ajors. All 171 schools offering a degree in music therapy were included in the sample. Results revealed that 74 percent of schools had a course in special education available, with 86 percent of these requiring at least one course, totaling 140 courses available. One hundred and ten courses were ­non-­music content-specific, and 30 were music content-specific. Eighty-nine percent of the non-music content courses were required, and only 43 percent of the content specific courses were

156

Including Students with Disabilities

required. These data indicate that most music educators receive or have available to them academic coursework in special education, and many pre-service music teachers receive c­ ontent-specific ­information related to students with disabilities. Music educators without academic preparation in teaching students with disabilities can attend one of the many sessions or preconference workshops sponsored by The National Association for Music Education (NAfME; www.nafme.org) at their in-service conferences. NAfME also sponsors a special research interest group (SRIG) devoted to research in music and students with disabilities. In addition, NAfME has published special issues of the Music Educators Journal, books, and monographs on the topic of music instruction for students with disabilities. Most of these publications can be found by entering disabilities in the search box on the NAfME website. Music educators who are unable to attend conferences or workshops can take courses online. Nearly all universities with a degree in special education offer online courses. At least two online courses are offered in special music education: one at the University of Kansas and another jointly sponsored by the Florida Music Education Association and the Florida Department of Education. Finally, a number of books are listed in the appendix to this chapter.

Approaches to Music Instruction for Students with Disabilities Many music educators, especially ensemble directors, may have over 100 to 200 students in a single class. Identifying and understanding the various disabilities represented in their classes and familiarizing themselves with the related adaptive strategies required to meet the needs of their students can be daunting. Consequently, numerous special educators advocate for applying the principles of universal design for learning (UDL) to address instruction in diverse classrooms (Bowe, 2000; Burgstahler, 2007a, 2007b). A UDL music curriculum is designed from inception to meet the needs of as many students as possible. This eliminates the need for after-the-fact adaptations and modifications. A universally designed curriculum also reduces the likelihood that a ­student will be stigmatized by disability-specific adaptations that highlight the learner’s differences. Applying the principles of UDL requires that music educators engage in a new way of thinking about and planning for instruction. First, they must consider how they plan to present music information to their students and then be mindful to explore as many other ways that the same material can be presented as possible. Fortunately for music educators, music experiences are often multimodal. That is, music can be experienced through the ears and eyes as well as kinesthetically and tactually. Picture song books, standard and iconic notation, as well as numbered and colored notation are all ways to present music visually. Chord charts and guitar tablature are iconic ­representations of music notation routinely used in music education. Second, music educators must determine how they expect students to respond, and then consider the many other avenues that students might utilize to express their understandings of the information. Presentation of the learning material, and students’ responses to it, may incorporate visuals, manipulatives, and technology or other assistive devices. Playing music as a kinesthetic experience, feeling the vibrations of musical sound on various instruments, and moving to music are all ways of responding to music. The multitude of adapted acoustic and electronic instruments, discussed in the next section, add to the varied ways that students can respond to music. Third, music educators must consider the fact that not all students share the same interests and motivations, and the educators must consequently determine how they can best stimulate and encourage student learning. Students can sing and play music, move or listen to music, or create music, depending on their interests. Students may have a special interest in technology, sports, art, or dance. All of these interests can be incorporated into music instruction. For example, one music educator used basketball terms to denote the subdivision of beats. Rather than the­­t raditional counting terms “ta” and “ti,” she used “bounce” for ta, “dribble” for ti, “pass” for rests, etc.

157

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

The principles of UDL can be applied to any of the established music approaches or method books. For further reading, see Darrow’s (2015b) application of the principles of UDL to three general music approaches: Orff, Dalcroze, and Kodaly. It is beyond the scope of this chapter to apply the principles of UDL to every method or approach used in music education; however, any music educator who takes the initiative to know her/his students’ needs and interests, and plans accordingly, is likely to experience greater success than those who dismiss such student variables as unimportant. In addition to knowing students’ needs and interests, understanding classroom and instructional conditions that contribute to student learning can also be helpful. When teaching students with significant disabilities, Gerrity, Hourigan, and Horton (2013) found that repetition, student choice, and increased response time were teaching strategies that led to student growth and learning. Likewise, having in place clear directions, expectations, and a behavior plan and fostering a positive atmosphere free of distractions were also identified as important conditions that must be met for learning to take place.

Assistive Technology in Music Learning Because of recent special education initiatives—such as UDL and differentiated instruction—and technological advances—such as tablets and electronic instruments—opportunities for s­ tudents with disabilities to participate in musical experiences have increased greatly over the past several years. It is important to remember that the use of assistive technology and UDL is not just beneficial to students with disabilities, but that assistive technology was mandated by the ­Individuals with Disabilities Education Act in 1997 (IDEA, 1997), and UDL was supported by the r­ eauthorization of the Act in 2004 (IDEA, 2004). Utilizing UDL and assistive technology ensures that students with various disabilities have equal access to a music education. Before utilizing any technologies to assist students with disabilities, music educators can first seek guidance from occupational and physical therapists or assistive technology specialists who are often employed by school districts to design materials and technologies that will aid students with disabilities to function more fully in their education. These professionals can often create inexpensive alternatives to expensive technologies and adapt or modify musical instruments ­commonly used in the music classroom. Music educators can also examine commercial products, such as tablet apps and types of various computer software. It is also important that music educators give students with disabilities a variety of assistive devices to explore. Students can then determine which device best suits their needs and interests. Expediency and ease should never be the reasons why students with disabilities are relegated to the same adapted instruments or devices for all music-making experiences. Along with adapted devices, modern technology has greatly increased the potential for ­students with disabilities to participate in music-making (Alper, 2016). Assistive technology can be described along a continuum, from low- to high-tech assistive devices. Low-tech can be described as any device that uses no electronic component and is relatively inexpensive. Mid-tech are ­electronic devices that are not expensive and can be used intuitively. High-tech devices are based on computer technology, relatively expensive, and often require training to use (Dell, Newton, & Petroff, 2008, pp. 5–6).

Low-Tech Assistive Devices Some simple low-tech solutions include picture songbooks, visual illustrations, enlarged musical scores, magnifying glasses, written note names or fingerings on musical scores, and color-coded music notation. Instruments with simple commercial or homemade rubber or Velcro grips can aid students in manipulating the instruments. For students who have difficulty writing, Velcro and flannel boards can be used to place notes or icons. A large-scale staff drawn or painted on the floor allows students to use gross motor movements to process music notation. 158

Including Students with Disabilities

In the area of music performance, there are a number of low-tech instruments that enable ­students with even the most severe disabilities to participate in music-making. Percussion ­instruments, such as drums, sticks, claves, sand blocks, woodblocks, sleigh bells, and triangles, etc., can all be played with one hand or two hands, or alone or with a partner. Music notation for pitched instruments, such as large xylophones or handbells, can be written such that a student plays one bell or multiple bells, depending on their physical and cognitive capabilities. Some ­x ylophones also allow bars to be removed so that students are only manipulating the bars they need to perform the music. In addition, most bells and xylophones are marked with note names. Students who cannot read notation can be cued when they are to perform, thus enabling them to perform without ­k nowledge of note names or the ability to read music.

Mid-Tech Assistive Devices Some mid-tech assistive devices fall into the category of electronic switches, which allow students with limited mobility to participate in music-making experiences. Other examples of mid-tech assistive music devices are speakers, singing songbooks, earphones, electronic keyboards, tablet apps, and simple commercial software.

High-Tech Assistive Devices Dancing Dots™, Lime Lighter Low-Vision Music Reading Devices™, and Soundbeams™ are examples of high-tech music assistive devices that are quite expensive for the individual user and require training to use efficiently. Other more typical high-tech assistive devices are augmentative and alternative communication devices, trackballs, touch pads, head mouses, screen readers, voice recognition software, texting, word prediction program software, etc. These devices are also ­relatively expensive and require special computers and software. To view such devices in use, Adam Goldberg, a music teacher in Queens, NY, who teaches students with autism spectrum disorder and significant intellectual disabilities, has graciously shared online videos, illustrating mid- and high-tech devices as well as his musical adaptations and arrangements. Goldberg uses tablets and software such as GarageBand™ and ThumbJam™ to teach jazz improvisation to his students. GarageBand™ has many applications, such as smart ­piano, smart guitar, smart strings, and percussion instruments, that can be used to perform standard ­a rrangements as well. It is a valuable app that all music professionals working with students with disabilities should have on their tablets. As a student’s muscular disease progresses and he is no ­longer able to play percussion in his school band, his director finds a way to use percussion apps on the tablet. Because of such technological advances, increased numbers of students with disabilities are able to participate in school music ensembles. Their participation in music classes and ­ensembles now requires music educators to be accountable for their musical progress.

Assessing the Music Learning of Students with Disabilities All students benefit when their musical growth is assessed, and it is the responsibility of all music teachers to appropriately evaluate their students on their musical progress. In the past, researchers found that music educators often had different educational objectives and grading practices for students with disabilities than they had for students without disabilities (Frisque, ­Niebur, & Humphreys, 1994; Gfeller, Darrow, & Hedden, 1990). With the passage of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) in 2002, schools and educators were held accountable for how well students with disabilities performed in the general curriculum, not just on the goals in their IEPs (NCLB, 2002). Consequently, music educators were also being asked to assess how well students with ­d isabilities were performing in music classes and ensembles. 159

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

In December 2015, President Obama signed the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) (P.L. 114–95), which replaced the widely criticized NCLB. Though the testing essentials of NCLB ­remain, accountability now rests with states and districts. In states that choose to assess yearly progress in music, music educators will need to include students with disabilities in their annual music assessment reports. Music educators need to be aware of ESSA’s guidelines for the use of alternative tests and the quota of students who can be administered alterative tests (Darrow, 2016). Music educators should also be aware of the types of testing accommodations allowed under ESSA. In the past, music educators expressed concern about applying established grading policies to students with disabilities (Darrow, 1999); fortunately, music educators today feel more prepared to instruct and assess students with disabilities (VanWeelden & Whipple, 2014; Whipple & ­VanWeelden, 2012). To adhere to present-day accountability measures, music educators may need to be flexible and utilize an evaluation system that accounts for students’ varied abilities. Alternative assessment procedures can be employed to ensure that students are not subjected to ­d iscriminatory testing due to their disabilities. Music educators can avoid discriminatory a­ ssessments by: • • • •

varying the expected products or outcomes of music learning, allowing for multiple and flexible expressions of music learning, allowing students to choose among assessment options, or allowing students to design their own methods of demonstrating what they know.

Allowing varied methods of learner assessments in the music classroom necessitates assigning multiple criteria for mastery of the music content unless the criteria are worded in such a way as to allow for multiple means of responding. Testing accommodations and alternate assessments are strategies that can be used to increase the participation of students with disabilities in music. Testing accommodations refer to alterations in the presentation and response formats, timing or scheduling, and setting of music assessment. Some students may need testing accommodations that provide equal access to showing what they know. Testing accommodations and alternative assessments do not give students an advantage over other students. Such assessment procedures only enable students to be assessed without being disadvantaged by their disabilities. Ward (2006, p. 1) listed some of the more common testing accommodations. Many of these testing procedures can be applied to the music classroom: • • • • • • • • • • •

Allow extra time to complete the test or to learn the music; Read test or music audition directions orally; Repeat test or music audition directions as needed; Ask the student to repeat directions in his/her own words; Have the student highlight key words in the directions and/or questions; Allow the student to take the test in a small-group setting or to audition in private without distractions; Allow the student to mark his/her answers directly on the test form or to mark note names or fingerings in the score as needed; Provide frequent breaks; Break up the testing or music auditions into several sessions; Read specific parts of the test to the student; Allow the student to answer orally instead of writing the answers.

Various alternative assessments are often allowed for students with significant cognitive disabilities. These assessments might include music portfolios, one-on-one music assessments, music learning checklists, and paper- or computer-generated music tests that utilize a teacher-recorded correct or incorrect forced-choice answer format (Almond & Case, 2004). 160

Including Students with Disabilities

The Music Educator’s Role in Facilitating the Transition of Students with Disabilities from School to Community Life Many students with disabilities continue to need support throughout their educational careers and into young adulthood. Even students without disabilities often have difficulties navigating the complexities of life after high school (Achieve, Inc., 2014). However, students with disabilities may experience more challenges than most young adults during life transitions. Of all students with disabilities, those with intellectual disabilities have the poorest post-school outcomes (­G rigal, Neubert, & Moon, 2005). These students may lack appropriate communication and/or social skills, have a greater need for predictability, and may thus have more problems when routines or patterns of behavior are disrupted. Unfortunately, most life transitions involve an inherent degree of unpredictability, especially the transition from school to adult life. Most adults are able to cope with life’s challenges if their qualities of life are generally positive. Nearly all young adults, with or without disabilities, enjoy music; therefore, musical engagement has the potential to contribute positively to their qualities of life. Music is highly valued and can serve as a motivator and reward for engaging in many activities that support an individual’s personal development. Because of its pervasiveness; universal appeal; and flexibility in terms of tempo, complexity, and genres, music is particularly suited to support the development of social skills and personal agency, and to provide avenues for engaging in community life (Deci & Ryan, 2002). Participation in music, either active or passive, can make one’s transition to adulthood and community life less stressful, and help one be more socially and cognitively engaged. Persons with disabilities often find that transition into community life is easier if they have developed leisure skills that can supplement their social lives (Wehman, 2013). Unfortunately, researchers have found that students with disabilities have limited involvement in extracurricular programs during their school years (Kleinert, Miracle, & Sheppard-Jones, 2007). In one study, 62 percent of parents of students with disabilities indicated that their child never participated in teams, clubs, and organizations in their school or community (Coster et al., 2012). Music participation is one of the most popular of all curricular and extracurricular activities for both students and adults (Adamek & Darrow, 2017). Structured music activities for young adults with disabilities can be enjoyable, motivating, flexible, and challenging while providing opportunities for them to practice important life skills that will be beneficial in their social and employment settings. If students with disabilities are not engaged in music or other extracurricular programs during their school years, they are less likely to know what similar activities exist for them after high school. Music educators can do much to encourage the continued musical and social growth of ­students with disabilities by presenting opportunities for music-making in the community, both before and after graduation. Community bands, church choirs, open microphone nights at various venues, music lessons, and civic choirs are all opportunities for active music-making. Local concerts at schools, colleges, or community venues, as well as restaurants or bars that host musical entertainers, are all opportunities for listening to music with others. Such musical opportunities are generally open to all individuals, regardless of musical skills or abilities. Students’ engagement in such activities may need to be facilitated by a local musician, music educator, or parent. As part of the transition plan for students with disabilities, music educators can work with students to determine their interests in various community music activities. The necessary skill sets, such as concert etiquette or navigating transportation to various music venues, can be a part of their IEP goals before graduation. Participation in music organizations or performance events may make the transition from school to community life more rewarding and less threatening for older students with disabilities. 161

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek

Looking to the Future and Fostering Lifelong Learners The role of music educators in the lives of students with disabilities must not conclude with their graduation from academic life. All individuals can be lifelong learners, open to the changing world around them and the opportunities these changes provide. Lifelong learning is the pursuit of knowledge at any age and in any context. It not only enhances social inclusion, active citizenship, and personal development but also self-sustainability as well as competitiveness and ­employability (Longworth & Davies, 2013). The term implies that learning is not confined to childhood or to schools nor to pursuit of a degree. Instead, learning occurs throughout life and in a wide range of places and situations. Neuroplasticity, the brain’s ability to reorganize itself by forming new neural connections throughout life, is dependent on lifelong cognitive exercise. Neuroplasticity allows the n ­ eurons (nerve cells) in the brain to compensate for injury and disease and to adjust their activities in response to new ­situations or changes in their environment (MedicineNet, 2016). Research on neuroplasticity indicates that our brains continually remold neural connections as we learn, e­ xperience, and adapt (University of ­Cambridge, 2014). Advocates of lifelong learning have ­primarily focused on the older adult community. As music educators, we can encourage all individuals to be lifelong learners of music, particularly those with disabilities for whom the cognitive benefits may otherwise be dismissed. Music can play an important role in lifelong learning programs for adults with disabilities. The ability to develop musical skills remains over the course of a life span. Learning a new ­instrument, taking singing lessons, or making music with others are opportunities to engage the mind and promote socialization. Technological advances in music now allow individuals who may be place-bound to engage with music at home, regardless of their physical or cognitive abilities. Music ensembles provide an excellent opportunity for the musical development, socialization, and enhancement of memory skills. Learning and memorizing new music can be an enjoyable and effective strategy for exercising memory and other cognitive functions. Although many of the non-musical goals of music study are highlighted here and elsewhere in this chapter, as music educators, we must remember that musicality resides in all people and that individuals with disabilities can be competent musicians, not “courageous,” “brave,” or “­inspiring” musicians but competent musicians (Darrow & Hairston, 2016). Persons with disabilities have been and are well represented in the musical arts, and the value of music study ought not to be relegated merely to the pursuit of non-musical goals. Although our ultimate goals for ­individuals with ­d isabilities may be the promotion of their personal autonomy and the e­ nhancement of their qualities of life, we can embrace these goals while ensuring that their intellectual and musical lives are serviced as well. As music educators, we can maximize the benefits of music study for persons with disabilities by considering the whole person and individualizing our p­ ractices based on the needs and preferences of our students. Musical goals, set in consultation with the student, are generally met with enthusiasm and are ultimately the most attainable.

Conclusions Access to quality music programs remains as much a concern for students with disabilities as it does for those without disabilities. The benefits of musical experiences for students with disabilities are well supported by research that links the positive impact of such experiences to ­academic and social/emotional success (Jellison & Draper, 2015). Because of recent special education initiatives—such as UDL and differentiated instruction—and technological advances—such as tablets and electronic i­nstruments— opportunities for students with disabilities to participate in musical experiences have increased greatly over the past decade. With the passage of ESSA in 2015, the opportunity now exists to broaden musical opportunities for all underserved students—including those with disabilities. In addition, music educators who work with these students are being asked to consider their qualities of life post-high school. Music educators may wish to look to the future and consider adults with disabilities as lifelong learners who can benefit from musical engagement together with other community members. 162

Including Students with Disabilities

References Achieve, Inc. (2014). Rising to the challenge: Are high school students prepared for college and work? Retrieved ­September 15, 2016 from www.achieve.org/rising-challenge-powerpoint Adamek, M. (2002). In the beginning: A review of early special education services and legislative/regulatory activity affecting the teaching and placement of special learners. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Models of music therapy interventions in school settings (2nd ed.), Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2017). Preparing for life: The role of music in facilitating the transition of older students with disabilities to adulthood. In J. Burnette (Ed.), Intersection of arts education and special education (pp. 73–90). Washington, DC: John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Adamek, M. A., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education (2nd ed.). Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Almond, P. J., & Case, B. J. (2004). Alternate assessments for students with significant cognitive disabilities. ­Retrieved from http://images.pearsonassessments.com/images/tmrs/tmrs_rg/AlternateAssessments.pdf ?WT.mc_ id=TMRS_Alternate_Assessments_for_Students Alper, M. (2016). Remixing special education: Reaching marginalized students through music technology. Flypaper. Retrieved from http://flypaper.soundfly.com/editorial/special-education-music-technology/ Atterbury, B. W. (1990). Mainstreaming exceptional learners in music. Englewood Cliffs, JU: Prentice-Hall. Bowe, F. G. (2000). Universal design in education: Teaching nontraditional students. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey. British Deaf Band Tour in North America. (1991, February). Silent News, p. 5. Burgstahler, S. (2007a). Universal designing of instruction (UDI): Definition, principles guidelines, and examples. Seattle: DO-IT, University of Washington. Retrieved from www.washington.edu/doit//Brochures/ Academics/instruction.html Burgstahler, S. (2007b). Equal access: Universal design of instruction. Seattle: DO-IT, University of Washington. Retrieved from www.washington.edu/doit/Brochures/Academics/equal_access_udi.html Colwell, C. (1999). Effects of information on elementary band students’ attitudes toward individuals with special needs. Journal of Music Therapy, 35(1), 19–33. Colwell, C. M. (2012). Reflections on a disability simulation by pre-service music educators and student music therapists. In L. E. Shraer-Joiner (Ed.), Proceedings of the 18th International Seminar of the Commission on Music in Special Education, Music Therapy, and Music Medicine (pp. 9–24) ISBN: 9780987351166 (ebook), Nedlands, WA: International Society for Music Education. Colwell, C. M., & Thompson, L. K. (2000). “Inclusion” of information on mainstreaming in undergraduate music education curricula. Journal of Music Therapy, 37(3), 205–221. Coster, W., Law, M., Bedell, G., Liljenquist, K., Kao, Y.-C., Khetani, M., & Teplicky, R. (2012). School participation, supports and barriers of students with and without disabilities. Child: Care, Health, and Development, 39(4), 535–543. Darrow, A. A. (1999). Music educators’ perceptions regarding the inclusion of students with severe ­d isabilities in music classrooms. Journal of Music Therapy, 36(4), 254–273. Darrow, A. A. (2006). Sounds in the silence: Research on music and deafness. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 25(1), 5–14. Darrow, A. A. (2015a). Ableism and social justice: Rethinking disability in music education. In C. Benedict, P. Schmidt, G. Spruce & P. Woodford (Eds.), The Oxford handbook on social justice in music education: From conception to practice (pp. 204–200). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Darrow, A. A. (2015b). Applying the principles of universal design for learning to general music ­approaches. In C. Abril & B. Gault (Eds.), Oxford handbook on approaches to teaching general music: Methods, issues, and viewpoints (pp. 308–326). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. Darrow, A. A. (2016). The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA): What it means for students with disabilities and music educators. General Music Today, 30(1), 41–44. doi:10.1177/1048371316658327 Darrow, A. A., & Hairston, M. (2016, July). Disability porn: A qualitative analysis of comments on music and persons with disabilities found on International YouTube posts. Paper presented at the Special Music Education and Music Therapy Commission of the International Society for Music Education, Edinburgh, Scotland. Darrow, A. A. & Heller, G. N. (1985). Early advocates of music education for the hearing impaired: William Wolcott Turner and David Ely Bartlett. Journal of Research in Music Education, 33(4), 269–279. Deci, E., & Ryan, R. (Eds.), (2002). Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Dell, A., Newton, D., & Petroff, J. G. (2008). Assistive technology in the classroom. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). (2015). PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq.

163

Alice-Ann Darrow and Mary Adamek Ferguson, P. (2001). On infusing disability studies into the general curriculum. Washington, DC: Special Education Programs (ED/OSERS). Retrieved from www.urbanschools.org/pdf/OPdisability.pdf Frisque, J., Niebur, L., & Humphreys, J. T. (1994). Music mainstreaming: Practices in Arizona. Journal of Research in Music Education, 42(2), 94–104. Gerrity, K. W., Hourigan, R. M., & Horton, P. W. (2013). Conditions that facilitate music learning among students with special needs: A mixed-methods inquiry. Journal of Research in Music Education, 61(2), 144–159. Gfeller, K., Darrow, A. A., & Hedden, S. (1990). The perceived effectiveness of mainstreaming in Iowa and Kansas schools. Journal of Research in Music Education, 38(2), 90–101. Goeke, R. E. (1994). Responses among music teachers and principals in the state of Kansas regarding outcome-based public schools’ classroom assessment and related curricular topics. Unpublished master’s thesis, The University of Kansas, Lawrence, KS. Graham, R., & Beer, A. S. (1980). Teaching music to the exceptional child. Englewood Cliffs, JU: Prentice-Hall. Grigal, M., Neubert, D. A., & Moon, M. S. (2005). Transition services for students with significant disabilities in college and community services: Strategies for planning, implementation, and evaluation. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Hehir, T. (2007). Confronting ableism. Educational Leadership, 64(5), 8–14. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997. (1997). PL 105–17, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act (IDEA). (2004). 20 U.S.C. §1401 et. seq. Jellison, J. A., Draper, E. A., (2015). Music research in inclusive school settings 1975–2013. Journal of Research in Music Education, 62(4), 325–331. Johnson, C. M., & Darrow, A. A. (1997). The effect of positive models on band students’ attitudinal ­statements regarding the inclusion of students with disabilities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(2), 173–184. Kleinert, H. L., Miracle, S., & Sheppard- Jones, K. (2007). Including students with moderate and severe intellectual disabilities in school extracurricular and community recreation activities. Intellectual & ­Developmental Disabilities, 45(1), 46–55. Longworth, N., & Davies, W. K. (2013). Lifelong learning. New York, NY: Routledge. Lubet, A. (2011). Music, disability and society. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. Mark, M. L., & Gary, C. L. (2008). A concise history of American music education. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. MedicineNet. (2016). Neuroplasticity. Retrieved from www.medicinenet.com/medterms-medical-­dictionary/ article.htm No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. (2002). Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425. Sheldon, D. A. (1997). The Illinois school for the deaf band: A historical perspective. Journal of Research in Music Education, 45(4), 580–600. Smith, J. K., & Plimpton, G. (1993). Chronicles of courage: Very special artists. New York, NY: Random House. Solomon, A. (1980). Music in special education before 1930: Hearing and speech development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(3), 236–242. Storey, K. (2007). Combating ableism in schools. Preventing School Failure, 53(1), 56–58. Straus, J. N. (2011). Extraordinary measures: Disability in music. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. University of Cambridge. (2014). Research: Lifelong learning and the plastic brain. Retrieved from www.cam. ac.uk/research/features/lifelong-learning-and-the-plastic-brain VanWeelden, K., & Whipple, J. (2014). Music educators’ perceptions of preparation and supports available for inclusion. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 23(2), 33–51. Ward, W. C. (2006). Common testing accommodations and modifications for students with disabilities. Handout number 109. Retrieved from www.superduperinc.com/handouts/pdf/109_Testing_Accommodations_ Modifications.pdf Wehman, P. (2013). Life beyond the classroom: Transition strategies for young people with disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brooks Publishing Co. Whipple, J., & VanWeelden, K. (2012). Educational supports for students with special needs: Preservice music educators’ perceptions. Update: Applications of Research in Music, 30(2), 32–45. Wilson, B., & McCrary, J. (1996). The effect of instruction on music educators’ attitudes toward students with disabilities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44(1), 26–33. Yun-Springer, A. B., & Silverman, M. J. (2014). Levels of evidence in the Journal of Music Therapy from 2000–2009: Descriptive analyses by year and clinical population. Music Therapy Perspectives, 32(2), 185–190.

164

Including Students with Disabilities

Appendix I Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in Special Education (2nd ed.), Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association, Inc.. Atterbury, B. (1990). Mainstreaming exceptional learners in music. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Blair, D. V. (2014). Songs for you and me: Sing along songs for children, parents and teachers [iBooks]. Retrieved from https://itunes.apple.com/us/book/songs-for-you-and-me/id821772963?ls=1&mt=11 Blair, D. V, & McCord, K. A. (2015). Exceptional music pedagogy for children with exceptionalities: International perspectives. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Clark, C., & Chadwick, D. (1980). Clinically adapted instruments for the multiply handicapped: A sourcebook. St. Louis, MO: Magnamusic-Baton. Florian, L., (Ed.). (2007). The SAGE handbook of special education. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Hammel, A. M., & Hourigan, R. M. (2011). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label-free approach. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Hammel, A. M., & Hourigan, R. M. (2013). Teaching music to students with autism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Jacquiss, V., & Paterson, D. (2005). Meeting SEN in the curriculum: Music. London, UK: David Fulton Publishers. Jellison, J. (2015). Including everyone: Creating music classrooms where all children can learn. New York, NY: ­Oxford University Press. Mixon, K. (2011). Reaching and teaching all instrumental students (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: R&L Education. NAfME. (2004). Spotlight on making music with special learners: Selected articles from state MEA journals. Lanham, MD: R&L Education. Ockleford, A. (2013). Music, language and autism. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Ott, P. (2011). Music for special kids: Musical activities, songs, instruments, and resources. Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Schraer-Joiner, L. (2014). Music for children with hearing loss: A resource for parents and teachers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Sobol, E. S. (2008). An attitude and approach for teaching music to special learners (2nd ed.), Lanham, MD: R&L Education.

165

11 Dance Education for Students with Disabilities Jenny Seham

Together, we can leave a lasting legacy of artistry, education and endless possibilities for all. Mary Verdi-Fletcher (Dancing Wheels, n.d.)

In 2015, the dancing dreams of a five-year-old girl with cerebral palsy inspired educators at the New York City Ballet (NYCB) to team up with medical specialists and create dance learning and performance opportunities for 19 children previously excluded from these activities. Prompted by the email query of one visionary parent seeking dance for her disabled child, producers and participants achieved what they had never even considered possible. The children, all with cerebral palsy, experienced “joy,” “independence,” and “freedom” (Mordecai, 2015). Teachers and organizers experienced a profound transformation in how they viewed students and dancers with disabilities. “We (teachers and organizers) had not been prepared for how connected we would feel,” said one workshop teacher, NYCB principal dancer Adrian Danchig-Waring. “[I]n fact, we had underprepared for how energetic, enthusiastic and physically capable these kids turned out to be” (Mordecai, 2015). This story underscores both the limitless possibility and the too often paralyzing problem ­facing dance accessibility for children with disabilities. As Danchig-Waring noted, we were “underprepared.” The dancers felt underprepared for how great the experience would be, how ­connected they would feel, and how energetic and capable their students would be. Likely, they were also surprised by how much they had to offer as technically trained dancers passionately committed to their art. They had not taught a child with a disability until one mother decided to pursue her child’s dream to be a ballerina. Throughout the project, children, parents, medical professionals, and other experts contributed to movement translations and adaptations that met the needs of these students. The children became dancers. The professional dancers changed their perceptions of ballet dancing and increased their capacities to teach. Together, the children and professional dancers exceeded all expectations and, buoyed by unequivocal success, expanded and continued the program. The delivery of accessible dance programming usually faces numerous obstacles, such as the lack of time, space, funding, support, and expertise. The most insidious barrier, however, is a lack of belief in the capacity of all students to meaningfully engage in dance. Forming teaching and learning partnerships increases community and helps to reimagine negative or limiting beliefs.

166

Dance Education

Best practices for teaching dance to students with disabilities begin with respectful, mutual communication between and among student and teacher; student and peer partner; teacher and health professional or disability expert; parent and teacher; and dance teacher and special education teacher, paraeducator, administrator, dancer with or without disability, artist with or without disability, and others. In this chapter, many of these partnerships are described in presenting universal and specific best practices for inclusive dance teaching. Ways are also suggested for overcoming obstacles, providing dance access, and defending this core standard: the rights of all children to access “joy” and “freedom” by dancing.

Setting the Stage The history of dance education reveals innovative teachers and artists defying social mores by ­creating dance spaces for people with disabilities. These individuals initiated revolutionary changes in our long-held, limiting constructs of dance bodies, dance performance, and dance learning. Their students and others, inspired by new, expanded definitions of dance ability, carried the movement forward and continued to advocate for the recognition, acceptance, accessibility, and sustainability of dance education for students with disabilities. Despite the social disabilities that still handicap full access to dance, many pre-K-12th grade special education students learn dance as a performing art in both self-contained and inclusive classrooms. They may also encounter dance in physical education classes. Some schools utilize innovative curricula that integrate dance as a pedagogical tool for students to embody and comprehend constructs in math, science, and language arts. Dance also accompanies theater, ­music, poetry, and visual arts in schools with comprehensive, multiple arts programming (NYC ­Department of Education, 2015a; Urban Arts Partnership, 2013–2015). Small in number but mighty in spirit and talent, there are a few certified dance teachers within school systems who provide dance classes for special education students. In addition, many physically and non-physically integrated professional dance companies as well as other dance o ­ rganizations and independent studios now offer classes for mixed ability students through outreach to schools as well as at their studios (Axis Dance Company, 2016; Boston Ballet, n.d.; ­Dancing Wheels, 2017). Providing successful, sustainable, inclusive dance programming, however, tends to be the exception rather than the rule in educational settings. One goal is that through training, advocacy, awareness, targeted funding, and collaborative efforts, we will achieve dance access for all students of all abilities. The other is that dance pedagogy for students with disabilities will follow dynamic standards of excellence and best educational practices for art-making, which maximize the potential of diverse learners.

Societal Disability: Marginalization of Dance in Schools As a nation, we are underprepared and too often unwilling to provide conditions necessary for the successful, sustainable inclusion of dance education in the public school sector. Dance in public schools was segregated from other arts education and taught through physical education departments until 1994, when it finally became recognized as an arts discipline. It took eight more years, until 2002, to pass legislation determining that dance be taught by a qualified dance educator (Bonbright, 2007). Societal ignorance that undervalues dance learning along with cultural prejudice regarding disabled students still seems to permeate national educational policy. Forward movement toward systemic change frequently stalls, despite the growing body of empirical evidence on the benefits of dance learning and large-scale successes of engaging children with various disabilities in multiple dance forms.

167

Jenny Seham

Research studies have demonstrated the direct impact of dance on agency, creativity, lived experience, transcendence, learning through the body, cognition, creative problem-solving, ­k nowledge acquisition, and reinforcement (Hanna, 2008). Further research has noted the impact of dance as a means to acquire, reinforce, or assess learning in other disciplines (Hanna, 2008). Dance offers kinesthetic learning to students with struggles or deficits in other, more traditional learning modalities and has proven successful in reaching and engaging these students (Hanna, 2008). Best practices for teaching dance in special education begin with setting standards-based target goals for cognitive and social learning as well as for dance-making. Yet schools rarely designate adequate space, time, or budgetary considerations to the inclusion of dance education (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). The US Department of Education’s 2012 report on arts education in public schools showed a decline from 20 percent of public elementary schools’ offering instruction designed specifically for dance in 1999–2000 to only 3 percent in the 2009–2010 school year (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). Administrators who do not embrace a philosophy of whole child education often consider arts in general and dance specifically to be extraneous and expendable. Even where dance education does exist, insufficient time, inadequate space, and a paucity of administrative and other staff support serve to exclude students in special education from participation. Furthermore, dance teachers frequently lack knowledge and experience in how to include or advocate for the inclusion of diverse learners, both onstage and in their classrooms (Bonbright, Bradley, & Dooling, 2013).

Disability Dance Pioneers: Contributions to Emerging Awareness Dance for students with disabilities has evolved out of work by pioneers outside of school s­ ettings. The liberation from constraints in dance artistry and education owes much to visionaries in ­contemporary dance history, such as artist, educator, and parent Hilde Holger. During the 1960s, Holger expanded the definition of dance by creating performance spaces for dancers with cognitive and physical disabilities. She discovered new methods of student engagement while teaching dance to her son who had Down syndrome. In 1968, Holger staged the first performance of a dance company that included dancers with intellectual disabilities at the Sadler’s Wells Theatre in London. She continued to produce dance works for people with disabilities and was at the vanguard of Dance Movement Therapy in the United Kingdom. Holger’s student Wolfgang Stange went on to establish the integrated ability Amici Dance Theatre Company in 1980. Companies influenced by Holger included the physically integrated DV8 Physical Theatre, begun in London in 1986, and the Axis Dance Company, founded by Judith Smith in 1987 in Berkley, California (Thiman, 2001). Another pioneer in this movement, Mary Verdi-Fletcher created the physically integrated dance company Dancing Wheels in 1990 (Dancing Wheels, 2017). Born with spina bifida, ­Verdi-Fletcher broke crutches, braces, and wheelchairs as she defined herself as a dancer, creating new, rigorous dance movement that would express and serve her body (Cleveland Women’s Journal, n.d.). Today, Dancing Wheels Dance Company and School provides dance classes for people of all abilities as well as educational outreach programs, lectures/performances, intensive ­workshops, and teacher training (Dancing Wheels, 2017). A representative though not exhaustive list of physically integrated dance companies across the country includes: AXIS Dance in Oakland, California; Dancing Wheels in Cleveland, Ohio; DanceAbility International in Portland, Oregon; Full Radius Dance in Atlanta, Georgia; Heidi Latsky Dance in New York, New York; Infinity Dance in New York, New York; and Karen Peterson Dance in Miami, Florida. These companies teach and perform contemporary ballet, modern, jazz, tap, hip-hop, contact improvisation, and ballroom dance, together representing a full range of the dance disciplines performed by companies that are not physically integrated.

168

Dance Education

Many have a long history of providing outreach and education in schools, while others have more recently embraced this aspect of community engagement. All of the companies mentioned above currently offer learning opportunities to children or teachers of children with disabilities through classes, workshops, residencies, or trainings.

Expanding Awareness and Professional Development Fortunately, the availability of professional development for teachers is growing. Existing and emerging resources and events receive better publicity and are made universally accessible through social media. The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts VSA, an international leader in supporting and promoting arts education for students with disabilities, offers free online webinars that instruct teachers on how to deliver arts learning to students in special education. Led by special education innovators, arts educators, and experts in arts and special education, many webinars specifically pertain to strategies for dance inclusion teaching (Rasera, 2014; Seham & Muradwij, 2014). Academic journals such as Arts Education Policy Review and popular magazines like Dance Teacher and Dance Studio Life have increased their publication of articles devoted to dance teaching in special education. In 2015, celebrating the 25th anniversary of the passing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the National Dance Education Organization (NDEO) distributed the first special issue of the Journal of Dance Education ( JODE), which focused on teaching dance to students with disabilities. JODE continues to feature articles on teaching dance to students with disabilities. A proliferation of first-time, local, regional, and national inclusion arts conferences over the past few years offered groundbreaking access to information on inclusive dance teaching as well as the promise of ongoing professional development. In 2013, VSA included a dance education strand in the first National Conference on Examining the Intersection of Arts ­Education and Special Education at Washington, D.C.’s John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. This has become an annual event, now titled VSA Intersections: Arts and Special ­Education Conference. Luna Dance Institute in Berkeley, California, a multi-year recipient of VSA Arts and MetLife Foundation grant funding for inclusive public school arts programming, presented the first ­California Bay Area Conference on Dance and the Brain in 2015. This conference highlighted the importance of collaboration among artists, educators, and scientists when developing best inclusive dance practices. One example is Luna Dance Institute’s practice of partnering children on the autism spectrum with typically learning peers in their inclusive dance classes. It works with researchers who study and report empirical evidence on the benefits of engaging children on the autism spectrum with typically learning peers in mutually enjoyed experiences (Wolf berg, Bottema-Beutel, & DeWitt, 2012). The research supports other existing programs and complements enthusiastic student, parent, and teacher testimonials, lauding the benefits of diverse learner partnerships (Seham, 2012). In 2016, the physically integrated AXIS Dance Company, in partnership with Dance/USA, Dance/NYC, Gibney Dance, Boston Dance Alliance, and VSA Massachusetts, launched a series of national and regional gatherings on the future of physically integrated dance in the United States. Collaborating stakeholders in performing arts and academia included Keshet Dance Company, ­ hicago, Access Living, Loyola University Chicago, Bodies of Work/University of Illinois at C Momenta Dance Company, University of South Florida, REVolutions Dance, VSA Florida, and Rutgers Dance Department (AXIS Dance Company, 2016). The 2016 National Convening on Physically Integrated Dance was the first event of its kind to be held in the United States since the First International Festival for Wheelchair Dance, presented by Dance Umbrella in Boston in 1997 (AXIS Dance Company, 2016). The community engagement and national scope of this

169

Jenny Seham

effort continues to resonate and contribute mightily to the changing landscape of dance education and information access.

Accessible Dance Education: Including Diverse Bodies and Minds The arts open your heart and mind to possibilities that are limitless. They are pathways that touch upon our brains and emotions and bring sustenance to imagination. Human beings’ greatest form of communication, (the arts) walk in tandem with science and play, and best describe what it is to be human. Jacques d’Amboise (NDI, n.d.)

Adapting Ballet: Rigor and Revision Dance history provides many examples of breaking from tradition to introduce new dance disciplines and aesthetics. Most often, the tradition being challenged is classical ballet, and the evolution of changing forms and aesthetics is played out upon professional stages. Classical ballet dancers, however, must be counted among the change-makers who have provided greater access to dance for students with disabilities. In 1976, NYCB dancer Jacques d’Amboise broke through barriers in ballet education outreach by offering dance classes to public school children without excluding students based on body type or ability. His efforts laid the groundwork for others to come to a new vision for the rigors and rewards of ballet training. D’Amboise founded National Dance Institute (NDI), trained other dance teachers, and exponentially increased to thousands the number of public school children receiving dance education. When asked to bring NDI to a self-contained class of children who required the use of wheelchairs for mobility, d’Amboise created a teaching team consisting of special education teachers, dance teachers, physical therapists, and a professional wheelchair-using dancer. The team spent a year with these students, learning how to create a dance pedagogy that would include different dancing bodies. In the second year of the program, students using wheelchairs were joined by dance partners from a general education class to ­facilitate individualized attention, a sharing of knowledge, and an expansion of dance definitions and practice. The resulting partner model continues to thrive and has been replicated in other schools (Seham, 2012). In 2002, Michelina Cassella, then director of physical and occupational therapy at Boston Children’s Hospital, and Boston Ballet dancer Gianni Di Marco realized their vision of accessible ballet by founding an adaptive dance program specific to the needs of children with Down syndrome. Classes for children on the autism spectrum were added in 2010. Program developers made adjustments according to the cognitive, physical, and emotional needs of the participants. In classes for students with Down syndrome, for example, drumming or percussion is typically used to help emphasize rhythm and timing. Piano accompaniment is preferred for students on the autism spectrum, many of whom have sensory sensitivity. Boston Ballet believes everyone should have the opportunity to dance and is committed to working with families to ensure that programming is accessible (Boston Ballet, n.d.). Other professional ballet companies now offering adaptive dance programming based on the Boston Ballet model include Houston Ballet, Colorado Ballet, Orlando Ballet, Ballet Arizona, and Festival Ballet Providence. These ballet stories underscore the substantial movement and growth in how, and to whom, dance education is delivered. From ballroom to contact improvisation, African, contemporary, tap, hip-hop, and many others, each dance discipline shares in the history and future of inclusive dance education and performance.

170

Dance Education

Principles and Concepts versus Focus on Form Challenges to traditionally held views of dance teaching and performance transpire daily in classrooms and studios, on stages, and in the form of different dancing bodies’ physically expressing new definitions of dance. These innovations serve to foster growing acceptance of a disability dance aesthetic that allows all children to see themselves as dancers. Many inclusion teachers and choreographers eschew form-based teaching that emphasizes the achievement of specific, traditional dance poses and ways of moving. Instead, these artists and educators approach the process of dance learning and creating by introducing and working on principles or concepts of movement. Principle-based instruction presents elements and qualities of dance without restricting movement to a narrowly defined physical execution. “Everybody cannot jump, however, the principles of a jump such as lightness, rebound, float, and the direction of up or out can be found in most bodies through practice and training” (Anderson, 2015, p. 89). A principle-based approach encourages teacher/student collaboration, interpretation, and innovation. It does not diminish rigor but rather promotes the creation of dance movement that includes and is designed by people with disabilities. This, in turn, contributes to the development of a disability dance aesthetic (Anderson, 2015). Educators also employ principle-based teaching to describe and teach the movement aesthetics of various dance disciplines. Making dance learning accessible includes translation of techniques to allow for the embodied experience and understanding of distinct dance styles. Dance teacher Ana Rubenstein described the preparation and process for teaching a physically integrated classroom: When I sit down to think about teaching ballet, I have to think deeply about the aesthetic core. What are the most important elements of this form? If ballet is about line and extension and smooth transitions between shapes and storytelling that’s what I will focus on. If I’m teaching African dance, it’s really about that relationship to the ground, the energy of fast-­ firing movement, bouncing, call-and-response. (Lea, 2016, p. 5) Interpreting movement concepts and instruction to teach diverse learners necessitates an extension of vocabulary, an expansion of language, and access to multiple means of communication. Blind dancers, for example, might easily engage with the storytelling aspect of ballet by imaginatively responding to narrative prompts with physical or facial movement. They would need detailed verbal description and tactile modeling, however, to comprehend and execute line and extension. Strong, rhythmic cues, using clapping or percussion, can help guide a dancer with Down syndrome and keep behaviorally dysregulated students on track but may have an adverse effect on a sensory sensitive dancer with autism spectrum disorder. It is always important to consider the specific needs and learning styles of the students being taught. In mixed ability classes, often the instruction is based upon the needs of typically learning students, then adjusted to include diverse learners. However, the inclusionary pedagogic practice of translation recommends starting with “sit-down dancers,” students who use wheelchairs or dance from a seated position (with or ­w ithout disabilities), and translating movement for “stand-up” dancers (Tomasic, 2014).

Translation Translations of movement, time, and space facilitate the inclusion of dancers with diverse abilities. Tomasic (2014) detailed information on how to create “successful movement, spatial, and temporal translations to facilitate a meaningful physically integrated dance experience for all participants” (p. 183). His guidelines provided language and instructional tools relevant to all inclusive

171

Jenny Seham

dance settings, with a particular focus on physically integrated dance. However, translations can be thoughtfully implemented in classes in which students have differences in cognitive processing or emotion regulation. Some translations are “direct,” or shared by all dancers, such as breathing patterns. Others are “indirect,” indicating an interpretation of movement, space, or time that serves the intention or concept of the instruction. Stand-up dancers, for example, would initiate the movement for a ­ballet tendu devant (forward extension of the pointed foot) from a standing turned-out position. One foot extends forward with a straight leg, maintaining contact with the floor until the heel, arch, and ball of the foot press up with only the pointed toe maintaining floor contact. ­Tomasic cautioned teachers and others not to superficially copy the movements of stand-up d­ ancers but to interpret or translate the movement intention. Tendu devant is the basis for many more ­complex and strenuous ballet movements and choreography. Ballet dancers and dance students must practice tendu devant to strengthen their feet, hip rotation, and turn-out. A translation of this foundational movement for a sit-down dancer addresses the specific shoulder positions used for propulsion and the bodily stress endured with the repetition of motion necessary for dance ­practice (Kulig et al., 2001). In the tendu devant, external rotation of the glenohumeral (shoulder) joint of the sit-down dancer is used as a means to counterbalance the repeated internal rotation of the arm present during wheelchair propulsion, not as a means to mimic the external rotation of the stand-up dancer’s hips. The counterbalance of this external rotation facilitates muscular balance and potentially decreases shoulder injury. (Tomasic, 2014, p. 195) This example demonstrates the importance of identifying goals and intentions that can be ­variously translated when working in integrated settings. Careful translation of goals and intentions leads to meaningful dance instruction and assessment practices.

Standards-Based Practices for Inclusive Dance in the Classroom Best practices for inclusive dance pedagogy in schools incorporate standards-based goals and assessments of learning. Some dance teachers or teaching artists new to this aspect of teaching may find assessment and goal planning daunting. Teachers with years of classroom or studio experience sometimes interpret organizational demands for accountability as demeaning and irrelevant, ­especially in the context of a lack of support or understanding of their work. Others feel constrained and restricted by educational standards. “With common-core (standards) and assessments,” one fourth grade special educator stated, “as a teacher, you feel like your creativity has been taken away” (Heitin, 2014, p. 48). Common Core educational standards are meant to be a goal-setting guide for what to teach and how to assess learning. They are not intended to dictate how to teach or to limit curricular design. One program, Everyday Arts for Special Education (EASE), provides an example of utilizing standards-based design and assessment to validate and promote the importance of the arts in special education classes. EASE collaborated with the NYC Department of Education and the Los Angeles School D ­ istrict (LAUSD) to design and deliver arts-integrated teaching to students in special education. The program weaves dance into comprehensive, multi-grade, standards-based, empirically founded, innovative pedagogy and practice, which emphasizes collaborative team teaching and provides ongoing professional development and program assessment (Urban Arts Partnership, 2013–2015). To establish and maintain best practices for teaching students in special education, EASE program designers made ongoing professional development and assessment foundational to their

172

Dance Education

five-year plan. Teachers received initial training, ongoing professional development workshops, in-school daily support, and meticulous, step-by-step lesson plans, which integrated arts-based games and instructional tools. Teachers also participated in EASE program assessments throughout the school year. The special education teacher who felt that her “creativity had been taken away” by Common Core standards and assessments participated in all aspects of EASE, including the goal-setting and assessment processes, and had this to say: “EASE brought the fun back (to teaching)” (Heitin, 2014, p. 48). Dance teachers and teaching artists too often experience dismissive appraisals of their work, which do not acknowledge or appreciate the complexity of skills being transferred. Although reveling in the “fun” that arts learning can bring to the classroom, these practitioners also want arts education to garner the respect and credit it deserves. EASE offers instructional materials that clearly delineate the complex contributions of arts teaching to student learning and to social and behavioral development. It is important for dance teachers and teaching artists to embrace all that they bring to educational practice and give language to their considerable talents as educators. Every EASE arts activity follows an outline that: • • • • • • • •

Reminds teachers what is important, Presents targeted learning and behavioral skills, Highlights and reviews the art-making benchmark for the activity, Lists necessary materials, Begins with the basics, Offers adaptations and variations, Provides next steps through teachers’ extensions of the activity, and Offers teacher feedback on the activity.

The following is a summary of a very small portion of EASE instructional materials that p­ ertains to a dance lesson and is available through the Urban Arts Partnership (2014) website. These ­instructions illustrate best inclusive dance practices, such as preparation; goal-setting of social, cognitive, and behavioral skills; goal-setting of dance-making skills; incremental learning; ­repetition of skills; adaptation of material for special learning needs; and assessment of student and teacher. The activity described is “Freezedance,” in which students move to ­music and freeze in a position when the teacher stops the music (Urban Arts Partnership, 2014): I Know what’s important! • Clear consistent prompts • Clear modeling • Waiting for the desired outcome. II Skills include: A B

Communication: vocalization, communicating needs and preferences and choice-making. Socialization: personal boundaries, following directions, leadership skills, self-regulation. 1 2 3

Approaching challenges, Self-control when dealing with others, Conducting oneself appropriately.

C Other academic and personal behaviors: Persistence: Persist through task completion. D Gross motor skills.

173

Jenny Seham

III NYC Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts, Benchmarks for Dance Making (NYC Department of Education, 2015a): Through movement exploration, observation, replication, and recall, students develop kinesthetic and self-awareness; build fine and large motor skills; and invent dance movements to create their own short dances. Students achieve the ability to: A B C D E

Execute basic locomotor (traveling) movements, Control traveling, freezing, starting, and stopping, Understand personal and general space, Move in different levels (low, middle, high) and directions (forward, back, side, up, down), Invent original body movements in response to music, images, words, ideas, or symbols.

I V Materials: CD player (or computer), CD with dance music (having a good, clear beat is ideal), optional “GO” and “STOP” cards, optional masking tape. V Adaptations for Students with Physical Limitations A See what independent movements the students can do. Bobbing heads, wiggling fingers, or even blinking eyes can be dancing! B Teacher/paraprofessional can gently move the students in a manner that is safe and comfortable for them and stop when the music stops; C A student can lead by pointing to GO or STOP cards or by pressing play and pause on the CD if able; other students and teacher/paraprofessional can move and stop. The outline continues, providing specific activity instructions, multiple prompt options, a­ daptations for seated participants and those with physical limitations, and advanced m ­ odifications. A representative teacher reaction to this activity states, “Very effective. My students love it. I do it almost every day. Teaches self-control, how to follow instructions, etc.” (Urban Arts Partnership, 2014, p. 14). Dance teachers and teaching artists can increase competencies for goal-setting, assessment, and working with special education students by participating in EASE training. They can also access online instructional resources, curriculum documents, and various dance activities specific to teaching students with disabilities (Urban Arts Partnership, 2013–2015).

Resources for Teaching Dance in Special Education According to NDEO, dance literacy encompasses “discovering the expressive elements of dance; knowing the terminology that is used to comprehend dance; having a clear sense of embodying dance; and being able to reflect, critique, and connect personal experience to dance” (NDEO, n.d., p. 4). Imparting this literacy to pre-K through twelfth graders inclusive of students with disabilities requires a passionate commitment to dance-making, a fundamental belief in the e­ xceptional ability of all students to engage in arts learning, expert knowledge and skills for teaching dance, skills in designing curriculum, and specific knowledge and skills for teaching and assessing the progress of all students. Most dancers endure rigorous, ongoing training from an early age in order to perform and maintain the highest standards of artistry. Logically, if they become dance teachers, dancers apply their own dance learning experiences to methods of teaching. Some enter institutes of higher learning to study the pedagogy and practice of dance education. Very few receive early training in teaching dance to students with disabilities. The many initiatives presented in this chapter, most developing in recent years, highlight the nascent aspect of dance education for special education students. Although some graduate

174

Dance Education

programs offer classes in teaching diverse learners, this is a relatively new course of study not available in all programs and not always affording practicum for mentorship and hands-on experience. Several written resources available online map necessary knowledge and skill sets, and many organizations, notably The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts VSA, NDEO, Arts in Special Education Consortium (ASEC), Luna Dance Institute, and the Council for ­E xceptional Children’s (CEC) Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education (DARTS), provide ­opportunities for knowledge and skill acquisition. Other online resources provide outlines and ­instructions for teachers. One comprehensive reference, published in 2005 and revised in 2015, is the Blueprint for Teaching and Learning in the Arts in Dance, Grades PreK-12 (NYC Department of Education, 2015a) and its companion piece, Dance Education for Diverse Learners: A Special Education Supplement to the Blueprint for Teaching in Dance (NYC Department of Education, 2015b). Keeping pace with national standards, as part of the 2015 revision, these documents now contain guidance for aligning the arts and the Common Core State Standards.

The National Core Arts Standards in Dance The National Core Arts Standards (NCAS) are “a process that guides educators in providing a unified, quality arts education for students in Pre-K through high school” (NCCAS, 2014a, p. 1). Within each of four artistic process categories, Creating, Performing/Presenting/­Producing, Responding, and Connecting, the NCAS provide anchor standards to identify instructional goals and target assessment. Teachers can engage students in multiple artistic processes and address many dance standards within one lesson: The dancer imagines, envisions, or improvises movement (creating), executes the movements (performing), reflects on them (responding), and connects the experience to all other contexts of meaning or knowledge.... In a single class, students can learn by solving movement problems, showing their ideas through movement, thinking critically about them, and relating them to other ideas, experiences, contexts and meanings. (NCCAS, 2014b, p. 5) The standards help teachers design, develop, and articulate comprehensive lesson plans for dance learning that can be assessed in student evaluations, guided by the Model Cornerstone ­A ssessments (MCAs). Grade-specific standards and assessments reflect incremental and comprehensive dance learning and serve the overarching goal of providing students with the ­k nowledge and ­experience for lifelong dance engagement. The NCAS for dance incorporate core dance constructs, such as embodiment of technical dance skills, functional alignment, coordination, balance, core support, clarity of movement, weight shifts, flexibility, range of motion, ­choreographic devices, dance structures, cultural movement practice, and genre-specific dance terminology (NCCAS, 2014c). The quality of teaching students with disabilities relies upon both teacher knowledge and teacher beliefs. Core knowledge for teaching arts in special education can be found in guiding principles included with the NCAS (Malley, 2014). The six guiding principles for teachers include maintaining high expectations, promoting communicative competence, knowing how to select and use appropriate accommodations for individual students, making use of evidence-based ­practice, targeting instruction and using formative indicators of student performance, and making use of universal design for learning (UDL).

175

Jenny Seham

Universal Design for Learning The best practices for providing dance education to pre-K through twelfth grade students with disabilities incorporate the three principles of UDL at every stage of planning, teaching, and assessment: • • •

Principle 1: Provide multiple means of representation; Principle 2: Provide multiple means of action and expression; Principle 3: Provide multiple means of engagement.

UDL serves as the firm and essential foundation from which teachers can scaffold successful dance teaching methods for diverse learners. Adopting UDL does not preclude incorporating the ­r igorous pedagogical practices specific to multiple dance disciplines but rather embraces an inclusive philosophy that invites the expansion of existing practices. Students need to gain ­k nowledge, skills, and enthusiasm for learning (CAST, 2015). Teachers need to design curriculum that is flexible and can accommodate students with and without disabilities. UDL recognizes that each learner has his or her own background, strengths, needs, and interests, and provides ways to ­incorporate flexible paths to learning.

Procedures for Teaching Dance to Diverse Learners Teaching inclusive dance compels expanded and dynamic thinking about dance education and performance. Scaffolding dance instruction gives universal access to all dance genres and wide-ranging techniques by providing means for students to participate in their own ways and at their own paces. The following guidance from Seham (2012), unless otherwise noted, provides teachers with strategies for teaching a dance class inclusive of students with disabilities.

Preparation and Planning Teachers should expect to increase their time for preparation before the initiation of a program or class, throughout the teaching process, and while organizing a performance or culminating event. Teaching dance to diverse learners foundationally requires (a) belief in the capacity of all students to meaningfully engage in dance learning, (b) knowledge of multiple communication methods, and (c) dedication to discovery and expansion of teaching methods through interaction with individual students and other partners. Preparation consists of • •

• • •

Learning as much as possible about the physical abilities, cognitive capacities, and emotional needs of students before the first class, Talking with classroom teachers, physical therapists, occupational therapists, parents, and any other teachers or caregivers who can provide insight and information regarding each student’s learning needs, Making sure that the dance space accommodates the mobility needs of the students and that there is an accessible entrance to the classroom or stage, Coming to class prepared with multiple ways to present material and ready to modify, accommodate, and adjust, Training peer partners and any other additional class participants prior to the initiation of the program or class.

176

Dance Education

Critical to the delivery of accessible dance programming is the ability to purposefully, spontaneously, and collaboratively translate dance instruction and choreography to serve a diversity of bodies and minds. Educators enter the classroom ready to present material in multiple ways and equally prepared to adjust the lesson plan to meet the emergent needs of students. Inclusive classroom teaching and choreography always involves observation, innovation, improvisation, and reciprocal interaction with the students and other partners (Seham, 2012).

Classroom Structure The classroom structure for dance in inclusive or self-contained special education classrooms resembles that of dance classes in general education or studios. Special education students perform warm-ups, learn dance skills, practice and repeat these skills, incrementally learn sequences and choreography, engage in floor and locomotor work, cool down, and come together for a final thank you or reverence. Before and throughout each of these elements, however, special education dance teaching requires greater preparation, understanding, integration of concept teaching, and presentation of material in multiple forms.

Pre-Class Before the first class: 1 Establish collaborative teaching, learning, and program administration partnerships with principals, classroom teachers, physical therapists, occupational therapists, parents, c­ aregivers, and other stakeholders. Meet with as many of these partners as possible. Learn about the specific learning needs of each student. Specifically address tactile teaching, and find out whether there are cultural or sensory restrictions or preferences. Maintain teaching partnerships throughout the course or program; 2 Observe students engaged in other activities, preferably in a classroom setting; 3 Check the dance space for accessibility. Is there room to move? Is it quiet? Is there adequate space or, if necessary, ramps, to exit and enter the dance space? 4 Prepare peer and other partners to be incorporated as collaborators who listen, observe, and expand teaching possibilities, not just assist; 5 Meet with the musician or prepare a variety of taped music. Consider other musical options, such as percussion instruments for the teacher, students, and other participants to play. If working with a musician, consider this individual an invaluable teaching partner who will also expand upon teaching possibilities.

Set Goals and Translate Concepts Write goals and assessment targets using National Core Arts Standards for Dance to assure grade appropriateness and inclusive language. Think about which dance concepts to introduce and how to translate these concepts for diverse learners. Collaborate and share these goals and concepts with teaching partners or assistants.

Centering Practice and Call to Class Before the warm-up, provide time and space for dancers to enter the classroom and center themselves by calmly finding their places in the dance class and focusing on an initiated breath pattern. This is a time to greet a dance partner, if that is part of the classroom practice; to transfer sit-down

177

Jenny Seham

dancers from wheelchairs, if they choose to be transferred; or to safely deposit canes used by blind dancers. Group breathing practices serve as a ritual way to transition from other activities, refocus attention, maximize concentration, and encourage full group concentration. The teacher might also or alternatively establish a ritual of calling students to class with the same mindfulness goals. Successful call to class rituals include: 1 Call and response: Clap, stomp, drum, or otherwise call out a brief rhythm for students to repeat. For Deaf students, do this with movement. Repeat this, maintaining or changing the simple call, until all students have joined in; 2 Making an entrance: Give students a certain number of counts to arrive at their spots in the classroom or on the stage. Invite one student at a time. Often, the first few can be students rewarded for readiness. Repeat until each student has reached his or her spot, or vary this to have two students, small groups, half the class, or the whole class enter. Challenge them with different counts and different tempos. Modify this call to class by introducing different ways to make an entrance: low-level, high-level, as an animal (their choice), as a superhero, as if moving through mud, as if blown by the wind, with a certain emotion. The possibilities are endless and open to infinite interpretations by each student; 3 Checking in: Form a circle and check in with student readiness, ideas, and feelings. Starting in a circle also facilitates social skills building by seeing or otherwise acknowledging and greeting ongoing students and welcoming any new students or visitors (Nelson, 2015).

Welcome/Introduction/Warm-Up All students benefit from clear instructions and class structure. Some may benefit further from a brief written and/or verbal description of what will happen during the class. Usually, this becomes less necessary over time, as the class structure becomes familiar. The very beginning of class might be the time to introduce the day’s concept to the students, though this can also be done after warmups. It can also be a good strategy to quickly initiate warm-ups, once the students are in their places. Students with disabilities may come to class with lower fitness levels because of a limited access to physical education and activities. Students with visual impairments, for example, have been found to have lower cardiovascular endurance, muscular endurance, flexibility, and balance than their sighted peers (Seham & Yeo, 2015). Warm-ups deliver essential exercises for core strength and supportive breathing and specific muscle strengthening and stretching. These practices should target the dance discipline being taught, the specific needs of the students in class, and the concepts being studied. Introduce basic movements or concepts of dance that can be performed, built upon, and incorporated into more complex movement and choreography later in the teaching process. Pre-class preparation allows the teacher to familiarize herself with the specific movement needs or restrictions of her students. The following provides examples of warm-ups that address specific movement requirements: 1 In a mixed class of sit-down and stand-up dancers, indirect translations of warm-up targets include core, hips, and lower extremities for stand-up dancers and shoulders, hands, and wrists for sit-down dancers. All of the students benefit from strengthening and stretching the core, working on breath initiation and support, and, most likely, attention to hip and shoulder flexibility and strength. Stretches that focus on lengthening the anterior muscles of the torso and shoulder are also important for sit-down dancers (Tomasic, 2014); 2 A variety of dancers benefit from warming up with pliés and relevés (knee bends and heel raises), in both parallel and turned-out positions. This exercise strengthens the tibialis muscles and is particularly important for students with Down syndrome, who commonly present with

178

Dance Education

weak ankles (Albin, 2016). Do not emphasize neck and head rolls for students with Down syndrome as neck muscle weakness may not support repetition of this movement (Albin, 2016); 3 Jump and jump and jump, being careful to translate this movement; know about any physical restrictions; and teach knee flexion for stand-up dancers. Jumping is joyfully experienced by many, addresses cardiovascular weakness, and is an active way to warm up the body and mindfully turn the focus to dancing.

Concept Introduction and Exploration Introduce dance concepts and incrementally build upon them. Beginning concepts might be breath support, weight change, elongation, rise, fall, or following rhythm. These can include skipping, jumping, catching, throwing, body-half movement, and core-distal movement. Some concepts, such as breath support, relate to all dance disciplines and all dancers, regardless of ability. Others might emphasize physical aspects that are strengths or weaknesses or challenges. Some teachers recommend introducing one new concept per week (Albin, 2016) or “the word of the day” (Nelson, 2015, p. 111). Many utilize Laban movement concepts, such as levels, rhythm, and flow as foci (Nelson, 2015). As with all learning, dance concept exploration involves incremental learning. Introduction of a skipping concept, for example, can begin with walking, jumping, and practice of weight shifting. For stand-up dancers, this can evolve to jumping from the right to left foot, then move into a traveling exercise. Introduce concepts that target cognition, behavior, social awareness, and dance-making. These will overlap considerably but should be distinct and related to the students being taught. DanceAbility’s curriculum for early childhood education, for example, has “topics,” with accompanying movement activities that include cooperation, communication, personal expression, inclusion/­ exclusion, interdependence, and disability/is-ability (DanceAbility, n.d.). The communication topic begins with activities that express emotion through facial expressions and then through actions. Students then use receptive skills to identify the emotions expressed by the face or movement of the teacher or another student. Expressive and receptive skills are practiced with partner mirroring. Students take turns being the leader in creating a movement or sequence of movements and having their partner follow them (DanceAbility, n.d.).

Repetition of Skills Some students easily learn certain movement skills, while others require much repetition. ­Repetition without variation proves tedious for some and frustrating for others. Vary the dance instructions by: • • • • • •

Changing the level, Changing the speed of movement, Changing the quality of movement, Breaking down a sequence or step into smaller parts and working on the expression of a single movement or movement concept, Integrating scarves, balls, or other props, Integrating games, such as Around the World, in which students in four teams face each other, forming a square: one team on each side. Students on Team A dance Step A, then B dances Step B, and so forth. This exercise can change direction or tempo to practice steps. The ­students then move around the world to the next position, e.g. Team A moves to the B ­position and B to C, etc., and the dance is repeated with each team now practicing a different step,

179

Jenny Seham

•

Having each student take a turn showing the step to the class. This allows an important rest for some and promotes ongoing learning through listening to or observing the step executed by peers. It also supports social learning and positive peer interaction.

Locomotor Exercises A full range of locomotor exercises can be part of every class, with time, space, and movement translations provided or created, according to the needs of individual students. For students with ­v isual impairments, this is a particularly important aspect of class as opportunities to freely and safely run, walk, skip, leap, turn, and travel are rarely, if ever, offered outside of dance class (­Seham & Yeo, 2015) Another way to develop locomotor movement skills is to create stations or an obstacle course where students can navigate cones, floor spots, hoops, benches, and yoga blocks, each in their own ways (Nelson, 2015).

Floor Work A 10-year-old blind student with autism moves to the floor and rolls for eight counts to the right, then eight counts to the left to begin his original choreography for a dance piece about the H ­ arlem Renaissance. There is comfort in the contact and freedom in the support given by the floor. This student moves freely, independently, and fully engages his body without assistance from his sighted partner. Rolling action allows students to feel grounded and make connections between their lower and upper bodies. Students can press against the floor and propel themselves using feet, legs, arms, or other parts of the body, investigating turns and other locomotion with the support of the floor or wall. Floor work benefits all students and should always include sit-down dancers who want to move out of their chairs. The floor provides a point of contact to push against or be supported by in the exploration of movement and development of muscle tone, flexibility, and balance: Students with cerebral palsy, for instance, are often negotiating very complex balancing postures with their spasticity and unique neuro-muscular patterns. Thus, it becomes counterproductive to the movement or conceptual goal if they lack basic support to begin to access and initiate a movement idea. (Morris, Baldeon, & Scheuneman, 2015, p. 126)

Improvisation/Creative Problem-Solving Creative problem-solving begins at the entrance to the classroom, when students navigate the space to arrive at a dance spot. It is good to devote a specific time during class to further developing these skills. Poetry, history, the weather, the seasons, sounds, shapes, colors, current events, and world music are all good prompts to inspire movement and dance. Plan this section, but ­a llow for the events of the day or the ideas of the students to guide improvisation. Improvisational exercises can grow from individual expressions to dyadic partner work, then to small and whole group collaborations.

Cooldown Cooldown allows for the stretching of muscles, return to focused breathing, or reflection and review of the class activities. The cooldown leads into the final goodbyes and a thank you ritual.

180

Dance Education

Reverence Many dance disciplines incorporate a ritual of thanking the teacher and musician at the end of a class or rehearsal. This is an important practice for special education classes, especially when ongoing goals might be emotional and behavioral control with respect for others. The special education dance class should include a thank you from the teacher to the students, recognizing their good work and participation. It should also include a thank you to partners and any other participants in the day’s work. As in all of the classroom rituals and repetitive exercises, this one can maintain a structure of call and response—thank the student, thank the teacher, etc.—engaging variations, such as change of music and tempo, change of language, imaginary visits to other countries, and change in the thank you leader. As in the beginning, the teacher, or a chosen leader, might call attention to the closing of the class with a clapping or rhythmic call and response, then launch into the thank you and goodbye sequence: Thank you, dancers. Thank you, teachers. Thank you, partners.

Final Dance The constant physical and mental demands of a dance career, coupled with the persistent struggles for identity and acceptance faced by dancers and dance educators, often engenders profound connections to diverse learners. Countless anecdotes chronicle dance educators’ expansion of practice and re-discovery of the essence of dance experience through the process of teaching students with disabilities (see, for example, Anderson & Rastegari, 2016; Mordecai, 2015). Alvin Ailey dancer Jacqueline Harris commented on an Ailey outreach program for children with multiple disabilities: It is just so inspiring to see how dance is in everybody…We work hard at dance, of course, but these kids, they come up on the stage and they find just as much story, just as much love in it as we do. It brings them freedom. It brings that into my heart watching them do it. (Levin, 2015, p. 15) Harris’s emotional response describes the disappearance of perceived limits of the mind and body and the re-discovery of the limitless human potential for connection, with dance as the shared language. The thrill of artistic discovery, insight, innovation, and creativity must lead to further scientific inquiry and rigorous investigation. It is critical that dance educators and researchers involved with dance for students with disabilities assert their places in scholarly journals and academic forums. Just as we create partnerships in curriculum design and delivery, we must also foster relationships in the scientific and social science communities that will further the important work that occurs, or could occur, in the classroom. The ardent revolutionaries who ignite flames of incendiary change arrive in unexpected forms, from a world-renowned artist to a five-year-old dreamer. Collaborators in the fight for dance accessibility include parents, children, teachers, administrators, artists, therapists, paraeducators, scientists, medical professionals, and a growing cadre of enlightened others. Some are well acquainted with the benefits of dance education for students with disabilities. Others are newly discovering the immense, humanitarian, global impact of arts-infused education for all people. The mother of Charlie, a 10-year-old boy with autism who was initially identified as nonverbal, reported, Dance has given him new language. He now has sentences with the word ‘dance’ in them: ‘Do the Popcorn dance. Go to dance class now.’ When I send pictures, his relatives say that Charlie is smiling and happy. They never saw him like that before he started taking dance class. (Personal correspondence, November 12, 2016)

181

Jenny Seham

Emmanuel, a 13-year-old boy with muscular dystrophy and an intellectual disability, attended his first dance class and thrilled his teacher with this review: “It was a dream come true” (personal correspondence, January 10, 2017). Despite the seemingly Sisyphean efforts still needed to systemically provide access to dance education for all students, enduring beliefs, impassioned collaborative efforts, increased i­mplementation of best practices, and emerging actions assure sustained albeit arduous steps ­forward. Social disabilities may handicap this movement, but they are no match for the infinite joy of dancing, discovered over and over again by diverse learners and their teachers.

References Albin, M. C. (2016). The benefit of movement: Dance/movement therapy and Down syndrome. Journal of Dance Education, 16, 58–61. Anderson, B. (2015). Using a principle-based method to support a disability aesthetic. Journal of Dance ­Education, 15, 87–90. Anderson, J., & Rastegari, I. (2016, January 8). Dance that adapts to disabilities, ed. school grad finds dance program offers power of movement. Harvard Gazette. Retrieved from http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/ story/2016/01/dance-that-adapts-to-disabilities/ AXIS Dance Company. (2016). The future of physically integrated dance in the USA [Website]. Retrieved from www.axisdance.org/advocacy/ Bonbright, J. (2007). NDEO works! Making a difference in dance education. National Dance Education ­Organization (NDEO). Retrieved from www.ndeo.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=893257& module_id=94031 Bonbright, J., Bradley, K., & Dooling, S. (2013). Evidence: A report on the impact of dance in the K-12 setting. National Dance Education Organization (NDEO). Art Works.arts.gov. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/ sites/default/files/Research-Art-Works-NDEO.pdf Boston Ballet. (n.d.) Boston Ballet education, adaptive dance [Website]. Retrieved from www.bostonballet.org/ Home/Education/Program/Children-7-Under/Adaptive-Dance.aspx CAST. (2015). Universal design for learning [Website]. Retrieved from www.cast.org/our-work/about-udl. html#.V-u99vkrJaQ Cleveland Women’s Journal. (n.d.). Mary Verdi-Fletcher, creative, courageous, visionary. Cleveland Women’s Journal. Retrieved from www.clevelandwomen.com/resources/cwj-dw.htm DanceAbility. (n.d.). DAI teacher’s guide and curriculum for youth outreach performances. [Website]. Retrieved from www.danceability.com/pdf/DanceAbility_International_Teachers_Guide.pdf Dancing Wheels. (n.d.). A letter from Mary [Website posting]. Retrieved from www.dancingwheels.org/ dancing-wheels-founder/ Dancing Wheels. (2017). Helping the mind and body soar [Website]. Retrieved from https://dancingwheels.org/ dancing-wheels-school/ Hanna, J. (2008). A nonverbal language for imagining and learning: Dance education in K 12. Curriculum Educational Researcher, 37(8), 491–506. Heitin, L. (2014, May 20). Arts program shows promise in special ed. classes. Education Week. Retrieved from www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2014/05/21/32arts_ep.h33.html Kulig, K., Newsam, C., Mulroy, S., Rao, S., Gronley, J., Bontrager, E., & Perry, J. (2001). The effect of level of spinal cord injury on shoulder joint kinetics during manual wheelchair propulsion. Clinical ­Biomechanics, 16(9), 744–751. Lea, M. (2016, August 31). Dancers with disabilities: The case for mainstreaming disabled students in dance education. Dance Teacher Magazine. Retrieved from www.dance-teacher.com/2016/08/ dancers-disabilities-case-mainstreaming-disabled-students-dance-education/ Levin, M. (2015, February 6). Ailey dancers and the kids with disabilities: “If a finger can move they’re a part of it.” Huffington Post. Retrieved from www.huffingtonpost.com/michaellevin/ailey-dancers-andthe-dis_b_6616738.html Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the core arts standards: Guiding principles for teachers. ­Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Mordecai, A. (2015, July 6). A mom wrote a letter to the NYC Ballet about her daughter’s disability. They responded gracefully [Web blog post]. Upworthy. Retrieved from www.upworthy.com/a-mom-wrote-a-letter-tothe-nyc-ballet-about-her-daughters-disability-they-responded-gracefully

182

Dance Education Morris. L. M., Baldeon, M., & Scheuneman, D. (2015). Developing and sustaining an inclusive dance program: Strategic tools and methods, Journal of Dance Education, 15, 122–129. National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014a). National Core Arts Standards [Website]. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover: DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards. org/ National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014b). National Core Arts Standards. Your custom handbook [Website]. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover: DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/customize-handbook?bundle_name%5B3%5D=3 National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014c). Dance at a glance [Website]. State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Dover: DE. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/ default/files/Dance%20at%20a%20Glance %20-%20new%20copyright%20info.pdf National Dance Education Organization (NDEO). (n.d.) National core arts standards (NCAS) in dance [­Website]. Retrieved from www.ndeo.org/content.aspx?page_id=22&club_id=893257&module_id=159040 National Dance Institute. (n.d.). Jacques d’Amboise [Website]. Retrieved from www.nationaldance.org/ about_founder.htm Nelson, J. (2015). Special needs and dance: An insider’s perspective. Journal of Dance Education, 15, 110–115. New York City Department of Education. (2015a). Blueprint for teaching and learning in the arts in dance: Grades PreK-12. Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/offices/teachlearn/arts/files/Blueprints/Dance/­ Blueprint%20for%20Teaching%20and%20Learning%20in%20Dance%20June%202015.pdf New York City Department of Education. (2015b). Dance education for diverse learners: A special education supplement to the blueprint for teaching and learning in the arts in dance. Retrieved from http://schools.nyc.gov/ offices/teachlearn/arts/files/Blueprints/Dance/Dance%20Spec%20Ed%20Supplement.pdf Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10 (NCES 2012–014). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012014.pdf Rasera, A. (2014, January 14). Making dance accessible for students with disabilities [Webinar]. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org/pdf/education/vsa/resources/JanuaryWebinarTranscript.pdf Seham, J. (2012). Dance partners: A model of inclusive arts education for children and teens with different abilities. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). The Intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 81–100). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Seham, J., & Muradwij, N. (2014, March 8). Poetry in motion: A poetry dance play for the middle school special education classroom [Webinar]. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org/pdf/education/vsa/ resources/PoetryinMotionTranscript.pdf Seham, J., & Yeo, A. J. (2015). Extending our vision: Access to inclusive dance education for people with visual impairment. Journal of Dance Education, 15, 1–9. Thiman, A. (2001, October 8) Hilde Holger. Independent, UK. Retrieved January 29, 2016 from www. independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/hilde-holger-9273962.html Tomasic, M. (2014). Developing curricula and assessment tools for the physically integrated dance class. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs approaches (pp. 182–202). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Urban Arts Partnership. (2013–2015). Everyday Arts for Special Education [website]. Retrieved from www. urbanarts.org/program/ease/ Urban Arts Partnership. (2014). Everyday Arts for Special Education: Level I workshop 1. Retrieved from www. urbanarts.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/LI-Wkshp1-EASE5.pdf Wolf berg, P., Bottema-Beutel, K., & DeWitt, M. (2012). Including children with autism in social and ­imaginary play with typical peers: Integrated play group model. American Journal of Play, 5(1), 55–80.

183

12 Including Students with Disabilities in Theater Education Sally Bailey

Drama activities can be incorporated into education as tools for teaching about life, academics, and aesthetics. Whether in the form of creative drama or a formal theater production, presented as a distinct arts discipline or integrated into the curriculum to teach another subject, incorporated into the school day or an extracurricular activity, drama is one of the most accessible, versatile, and useful social-emotional and academic learning tools available to teachers. Drama in the classroom has contributed to a wide range of skills and knowledge in student growth (Anderson, 2015a, 2015b; Berry & Loughlin, 2015; Catterall, 2009; Podlozny, 2000). Educators of all student age groups, academic disciplines, and abilities can benefit from the power of drama as it enhances their ability to reach and teach their students. The first half of this chapter addresses how drama improves engagement in school, enhances social and emotional learning, and adds to critical thinking in other school disciplines by allowing students to embody their learning, with a particular focus on students with special needs. The second half of this chapter introduces drama curricula targeting social, emotional, and academic learning for students with disabilities.

Engagement To learn, students need to be actively engaged in school (Anderson, 2015b; Berry & Loughlin, 2015; Osterman, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Stafford-Brizard, 2016). Osterman (2000) indicated that students will engage—commit to being part of the school community as learners, connect with their peers socially and academically, and pay respectful attention to teachers—if they feel that they are a welcome part of their school. Feeling welcome happens when students sense that they have influence on what occurs in the school and classroom, when their psychological needs are fulfilled, and when they experience a shared emotional connection with peers and teachers. Based on these factors, students with disabilities, who might experience stigmas and lack opportunities for self-determination, might feel less welcome than their peers.

Psychological Needs Related to Engagement Three basic psychological needs—relatedness, autonomy, and competence—have been identified as necessary precursors to engagement (Osterman, 2000; Ryan & Deci, 2000). Often, these needs are not addressed in traditional school communities because teaching priorities are on academic

184

Students with Disabilities in Theater

content. When students fail to experience the precursors to engagement, they become alienated from school, do not connect with others in a positive manner, and lack motivation to complete their academic work. They become stressed and anxious and, in some cases, drop out of school (Osterman, 2000). Time is needed to develop positive relationships among peers and between student and teacher. Students must feel that they have some choices during the school day and some independence in approaches to their learning. Most importantly, students must receive feedback from their teachers that indicates that they have a level of competence as a student or at least the potential to achieve it. Students with disabilities, in particular, are likely to experience fewer opportunities for engagement than their peers (Landmark & Zhang, 2006). Hence, particular attention is needed to incorporate teaching methods and strategies that create conditions for experiencing relatedness, autonomy, and competence. Drama can be a positive way of engaging students in the process of learning because it is hands-on, action-based, and embodied. Through drama, students are able to interact in a ­productive manner with their classmates and teacher. Students look forward to drama class, as well as to arts-integrated curricular subjects, because they know that they will have an influence on learning activities (autonomy) and that their contributions will be incorporated into the overall lesson (relatedness and competence) (Bailey, 2010). Teachers may fear that students will use drama activities for socializing and acting out instead of learning, but this does not have to be the case if a teacher can manage behavior within the freedom inherent in a drama class. While involved in drama, students’ social needs are met through their working together. Imaginations are engaged, which generates excitement. Discussion and negotiation are often part of the artistic process, facilitating problem-solving, choice-making, and critical thinking. Commitment and engagement are the natural outcomes of these activities (Bailey, 2010).

Dimensions of Engagement Anderson (2015a, 2015b) examined engagement across the dimensions of communicative/­ linguistic, cognitive, and affective engagement. By its very nature as an art form, drama involves communicative engagement (Bailey, 2010). Even if students are nonverbal, drama enhances their ability to communicate. Movement, gesture, and facial expression are as much a part of drama as speaking (Bailey, 2010). Writing about drama activities, writing critiques of performances, and writing plays are also aspects of communicative engagement that do not require voice but provide the ability to make a statement about what one thinks or feels (Bailey, 2010). Cognitive engagement in drama involves students in experiencing and thinking in an embodied manner. Piaget identified sensorimotor learning (also termed embodied learning) as the first stage of cognitive development experienced by infants when they use their hands, bodies, and senses to learn about the world around them (Flavell, 1963; Ginsburg & Opper, 1969). Stages that follow are pre-operational learning from ages 2 to 6 or 7 years, concrete operations from ages 7 to 11 years, and formal operations (abstract thinking) from age 12 years and up. Often forgotten is that when we move from one stage to the next, we do not stop using the skills that we developed earlier. Our sensorimotor skills are the bedrock on which our more abstract cognitive structures are based; the body and the senses remain, throughout our lives, a large part of how we understand the world around us (Bailey, 2016). In fact, enlisting the body and senses in education may be a more efficient way to embed new knowledge into memory than abstract cognitive structures (Bailey, 2016). Affective engagement is inherent in drama because drama develops the actions and emotions of human beings (i.e. characters) within an embodied story. In fact, drama and psychology are both the study of human behavior from different perspectives. From the perspective of psychology, ­human behavior is studied abstractly, whereas through drama, human behavior is studied by

185

Sally Bailey

replicating it (Bailey, 2007). Speaking to an audience of drama therapists, psychologist Philip Zimbardo (1986) acknowledged that Drama, psychology, and therapy share a basic goal of trying to find what is essential about human nature and trying to use that knowledge to improve the quality of individual and collective life. When drama is good, it transmits knowledge about what is essential about people and between people. Drama students can experience the lives of other humans as they act out characters. ­Dramatic ­questions for a scene, whether improvised or scripted, quickly move from the basic who (­characters), what (conflict), and where (setting) questions to those of why (idea/theme) and how (plot) (­A ristotle, trans. 1954; Bailey, 2010). Because drama involves the many intricacies of characters’ behaviors and complex problems faced in real-life situations, students’ imaginations are expanded as they begin to empathize with their characters. Before acting out a story, students can be asked to analyze their characters’ motivations and histories. Once the students play a part, they are able to brainstorm other solutions to their characters’ problems or think about the lessons the characters learned and how those lessons relate to the students’ own lives. The arts contextualize learning, which not only engages students but scaffolds their ability to obtain knowledge and develop abstract thinking (Anderson, 2015a). Instead of generalities or theory, a lesson that incorporates drama begins with specifics and concrete situations. For ­example, if students were studying the refugee crisis in the Middle East, they could develop characters that have been displaced from their city or farm to a refugee camp. They would then create the ­refugee camp by hanging sheets in their classroom to partition off a small space or setting up tents in the field by the school and dramatize what it might be like to be in that situation. After the enactment, they would be prepared experientially and emotionally to talk about the problems of exile, displacement, immigration, re-settlement, and other aspects of this type of crisis. Their understanding would be deeper than if they had only read about the situation, and they would be able to make connections from actual situations that exist to possible responses and choices that could be made.

Social and Emotional Learning In 2000, the US Public Health Service identified the need for Social and Emotional Learning (SEL) in schools, indicating that “mental health is a critical component of children’s learning and general health. Fostering social and emotional health in children as part of healthy child d­ evelopment must therefore be a national priority” (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor & Schellinger, 2011, p. 420). Educational psychologist K. Brooke Stafford-Brizard (2016) agreed with this assessment, noting that “successful engagement in the classroom and in life relies on a set of cognitive and social-emotional skills and mindsets, which are not represented in academic standards” (p. 4). She uses a developmental perspective in the curriculum Building Blocks for Learning, advocating for changes that will address the SEL curriculum students need to succeed. Incorporating drama into classrooms through arts integration and/or discipline-based study provides a framework for introducing and developing the skills she recommends, including self-­efficacy, senses of belonging, growth mindsets, social awareness, and relationship skills.

Interpersonal Skills When students sit at desks and listen to a lecture, watch a video, or do individual work, they are not practicing their interpersonal skills. Currently, it seems the majority of time students spend relating

186

Students with Disabilities in Theater

to each other is through social media. For many children, face-to-face interactions have become less frequent than texting or Facebook posts (Schoenberg, 2015). Opportunities to practice reading nonverbal cues and understanding tone of voice are not as common as they were even five years ago. At lunch, on the playground, on the bus, and at home, students can be observed using smartphones and tablets. Although teachers’ roles are to impart knowledge and skills in their particular subject matter, there is also a need—and now a responsibility—for them to teach their students c­ ommunication skills and ways of socializing appropriately in person (Stafford-Brizard, 2016). Preparation for life and work includes being able to show respect verbally and nonverbally, making eye c­ ontact, asking clear questions about assignments, and conversing fluently while respecting appropriate boundaries. This is true for typically developing students as well as for students with special needs. Drama is a perfect medium for practicing social skills within the context of planning, acting out a scene, and discussing it afterwards. Students must be able to listen and be flexible in the development of any drama game or scene. The more these skills are practiced, the easier they become and the quicker they transfer to other school interactions and everyday life (Bailey, 2010; Podlozny, 2000). Bullying, a major symptom of interpersonal skill deficits, remains a big issue in public schools, even after the implementation of anti-bullying programs. Research reveals that children who have been bullied have more symptoms of depression, anxiety, and other psychiatric disorders than children who have not. These disorders continue into adulthood. Victims of bullies are 4.3 times more likely to have an anxiety disorder as an adult, and bullies who were also victims are 14.5 times more likely to develop panic disorder, 4.8 times more likely to be diagnosed with depression, and 18.5 times more likely to have suicidal thoughts as adults (Saint Louis, 2013). Students with disabilities are frequently on the receiving end of bullying (Guli, Wilkinson, & Semrud-Clikeman, 2008; Rose, Simpson, & Preast, 2016). There are instances in which students have left inclusive schools for self-contained special education schools to escape being ostracized and stigmatized (L. Gallo-Lopez, personal communication, August 5, 2016).

Intrapersonal Emotional Skills Drama helps students develop intrapersonal emotional skills, such as recognizing and managing emotions, cognitive and emotional empathy, and decision-making. Because drama focuses on ­analyzing, understanding, and reproducing the emotions, thoughts, motivations, and personalities of fictional characters, students learn to examine their thoughts and feelings and compare them with the roles they are playing. By enacting a role, students develop the ability to see the world from perspectives other than their own, which ultimately allows them to develop cognitive ­empathy: the ability to identify the emotions that others are expressing (Rameson & Lieberman, 2009). Emotional empathy—the felt experience of what another is feeling—is often sensed while acting with a partner or watching a scene performed by others (Bailey, 2009). The characters in a drama model personal growth; students see how the characters overcome obstacles, solve problems, and learn about life. Although, in their own lives, students may need to choose a different way of solving a problem than the one chosen by a character, the experience of taking action to solve a problem can be empowering. Podlozny (2000) completed seven meta-analyses on 80 studies of classroom drama published before 1998, a number of which were of special education classes. She concluded, Drama not only helps children to master the texts they enact, but also often helps them to master new material not enacted. The transfer of skills from one domain to another is not automatic; it needs to be taught. Perhaps if teachers do more to teach explicitly for transfer, even stronger transfer effects will be demonstrated. (p. 268)

187

Sally Bailey

Curricula for Theater Arts and Special Education The previous section provided evidence for why theater is an effective tool for engagement and learning for students, whether in general or special education. This section describes eight drama ­curricula developed specifically for students with special needs. Three curricula require the ­inclusion of additional assistants or typically developing peers as role models (Bailey, 2010; Chasen, 2014; Hunter, 2015). Two involve performance and require memorization abilities (Bailey, 2010; Hunter, 2015). Four are based solely on improvisational methods, which mirror the conditions of real life (Chasen, 2014; Guli et al., 2008; McAfee, 2002; Stefonex, 2016). All of the curricula analyze the social and emotional needs of special education students, and most address these solely through theater games and creative drama. An improvisational base helps students generalize skills learned to other situations. Each curriculum engages students holistically—­emotionally, physically, and cognitively—in the learning process, creating situations in which they feel like independent learners and begin to take more responsibility for their educations. Instead of being passive recipients of information, they are making meaning for themselves through active involvement in challenging, enjoyable activities. The first five curricula described—the Social Competence Intervention Program, the ­Process Reflective Approach, Act It Out, Navigating the Social World, and the Hunter Heartbeat Method—can be integrated into the school day or utilized as after-school programs (Chasen, 2014; Guli et al., 2008; Hunter, 2015; McAfee, 2002; Stefonex, 2016). Each offers a manual with specific session-by-session lesson plans, which can be followed sequentially based on the ­progression of skills needed. All have been tested and found to be effective through either clinical studies or years of in-class experience. There are similarities in approaches to analyzing the social and emotional learning needs of students with disabilities. Most have been developed and tested with students on the autism spectrum and students with nonverbal learning disabilities (Chasen, 2014; Guli et al., 2008; Hunter, 2015; McAfee, 2002; Stefonex, 2016). Students with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and similar SEL needs, benefit from the curricula as well. The sixth method described—Sculpting—is not a full curriculum but a series of related ­techniques that can be added to any SEL or academic lesson to help students understand information in a more concrete manner (Bailey, 2010, 2016). The seventh and eighth methods—Barrier-Free Theatre and Unified Theater respectively—focus on the creation of performances (Bailey, 2010; Unified Theater, 2016). These methods enhance social skills through the process of generating original material with students, providing them with opportunities for the ­generalization of skills. ­ thers, allowing students to The performance methods foster self-discipline and responsibility for o experience problem-solving and meaning-making experiences by creating and sharing a work of performing art. Both methods rely on the inclusion of students with and without disabilities to create an artistic community of respect.

Social Competence Intervention Program The Social Competence Intervention Program (SCIP) is a creative drama curriculum created for students, aged 8–14 years, with autism spectrum disorders (ASD), nonverbal learning disabilities (NVLD), and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (Guli et al., 2008). ­However, it is appropriate for any students who need help developing social and emotional skills. Social competence involves the ability to use verbal and nonverbal communication to interact a­ ppropriately and flexibly with others (Goleman, 1995; Stafford-Brizard, 2016). The authors of SCIP e­ mphasized that appropriate actions in life depend on context and the specific environment in which the interaction is taking place; therefore, rote lessons learned through traditional chalk and talk ­methods are difficult for students to successfully generalize to “real life.” Creative drama, based on theater

188

Students with Disabilities in Theater

games and improvisation, allows students to learn how to assess situations in their environment and practice appropriate behaviors. In addition, creative drama allows for in-process problem-solving and the flexibility of replaying a situation in order to discover a better way to interact with another person. There is no pressure for any kind of performance at the end; all activities are for the enjoyment and benefit of the group (Guli et al., 2008). The first set of 16 sessions is centered on input: learning to read face, voice, and body cues. Skills are integrated in the next set of sessions through dramatic activities that challenge students to analyze and apply problem-solving techniques to environmental and social cues that they ­observe in fictional scenarios. In the last set of sessions, students practice real-life situations, such as beginning and conducting conversations and giving appropriate responses to teasing. After each session, students are given a Home Challenge to complete, and parents are invited to participate (Guli et al., 2008). The creators of SCIP recommend six to eight children per group, with two to three leaders. The small participant-to-leader ratio is recommended so that all students can receive direct feedback and coaching, minimizing distractions. In addition to lesson plans, the manual provides behavior management strategies for a drama classroom, which has less inherent structure than an academic classroom (Guli et al., 2008). Researchers tested the efficacy of SCIP with an intervention and comparison group in 2002–2003. Primary outcomes showed that there were increases in positive social interactions and decreases in solitary play for students in the intervention. Seventy-five percent of parents reported one or more specific positive changes at home, including increased empathy, improved self-­control, and better understanding of nonverbal cues. Eighty-two percent of children reported one or more positive effects and said that they enjoyed going to the class (Guli, Semrud-Clikeman, Lerner, & Britton, 2013).

The Process Reflective Enactment Approach The Process Reflective Enactment Approach, developed by Chasen (2014), incorporates drama games, improvisation, puppets, art, and video feedback to increase self-awareness, self-reflection, and problem-solving abilities in children and teens with ASD. The program emphasizes the practice of appropriate expression of emotions, targeting communication and social skills in informal drama sessions. Chasen (2014) indicated that drama, because it is an embodied teaching method, engages the mirror neuron system and grounded his strategies in neuroscience theories (Iacoboni, 2008; ­R izzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2008). Mirror neurons are located in the motor cortex, sensory processing, and emotional processing areas of the brain. They work in conjunction with the neurons around them, which send movement, sensory, and emotional information to the body and other parts of the brain. When humans interact, mirror neurons provide information about what the other person is experiencing. For example, a mirror neuron working with the neuron that moves your right index finger will respond when you see a man pointing with his right index finger, and you will internally understand what he muscularly feels as he points and his intention for pointing. ­U ltimately, scientists believe that mirror neurons allow imitative learning, interpersonal connection and attunement, and the ability to take the perspective of other people and experience empathy for them (Iacoboni, 2008; Rizzolatti & Sinigaglia, 2008). Mirror neurons are powerful interpersonal connectors (Iacoboni, 2008; Rizzolatti & S­ inigaglia, 2008). Theater games and activities can stimulate direct person-to-person interaction (Chasen, 2014). A teacher who makes a warm, positive, energetic, and expressive connection with a student will motivate a greater change in social and communication abilities than a teacher who remains cool and neutral (Chasen, 2014). Thus, leaders and assistants using this approach are to express

189

Sally Bailey

genuine positive regard for students. Because students with disabilities might experience stigma and frustration, Chasen emphasized giving students respect, choices, and direct feedback to facilitate feelings of acceptance and value. The approach places an emphasis on videotaping students as they practice social interactions so they can constructively evaluate their expressiveness, using a checklist. The evaluation process targets critical thinking skills. Videos are shared with family and friends in culminating sessions, providing another opportunity for students to experience acceptance.

Act It Out Act It Out is a drama curriculum addressing social skills for students with special needs, designed for incorporation into the school day in small chunks throughout the week (Stefonex, 2016). ­Because many general and special education teachers are not trained in drama, the curriculum provides written scripts about everyday social skills issues that students might experience to practice and read aloud in class. Instead of drama games, discussions in a circle are used as warm-ups. After students read scripts and discuss them, they have opportunities to create improvisational scenes about a given topic, such as Apology Do’s and Don’ts, Responding to Teasing, and Self-­ Advocacy. This helps students to focus on issues they are currently experiencing at home and in school in a tangible way. Scenes can be videotaped and reviewed later in discussions and skill reviews. Each week, students interview staff and other teachers outside of the class about real-life situations related to the topic covered in their drama practice, providing the students with opportunities to practice their interaction skills. Interviewees evaluate students on their engagement in conversations and their behaviors during the interviews.

Navigating the Social World McAfee (2002) created a drama curriculum similar to SCIP for students with high functioning autism and related disorders. Navigating the Social World is a progressive series of lesson plans for building social skills and emotional understanding through repetition over time. Role-play ­exercises, art activities, direct discussions, and videotape analyses of students in action are part of the program. McAfee’s method divides skills into specific groups: recognizing and coping with one’s own emotions, communication and social skills, abstract thinking skills, and behavioral issues.

The Hunter Heartbeat Method The Hunter Heartbeat Method (HHM) combines drama games adapted to the works of Shakespeare, which teach focus, eye contact, facial recognition, facial and physical expressiveness, spatial awareness, language skills, and social connection to students on the autism spectrum (Hunter, 2015). A study of HHM’s effects identified significant differences in the growth of students’ pragmatic language, expressive language, daily living skills, socialization, and relationships. Improvement in facial recognition was not significant, which might have been due to participants’ demonstrating high facial recognition scores in the pretest (Mehling, Tasse, & Root, 2016). Critical to the success of this method is the incorporation of one-on-one acting assistants in addition to the group leader. Assistants need to be expressive vocally and physically and willing to play theater games, clown, and improvise. When incorporated into a school setting, it is suggested that students or actors from a local community theater serve as assistants (Hunter, 2015). One feature of the program is the Heartbeat Circle, designed to create a sense of safety, calm, and connection for students. In this circle, students repeatedly chant “hello” to the rhythm of

190

Students with Disabilities in Theater

their heartbeats, which is also the rhythm of iambic pentameter used by Shakespeare in his plays. Students have been known to use this chant outside of class to calm themselves (Hunter, 2015). Each series of classes follows the characters and action of one of Shakespeare’s plays through games and scene improvisations designed to elicit increased eye contact, concentration, and social connections. As a result, students learn the story while practicing acting and social skills (Hunter, 2015). With HHM, students are not only learning about Shakespeare and his plays but have opportunities to develop a variety of skills related to socialization. Hunter has developed a series of lessons based on A Midsummer Night’s Dream, The Tempest, King Lear, Twelfth Night, and Macbeth.

Sculpting Sculpting is a simple theater technique, safely and quickly utilized within an SEL or academic lesson to embody emotions, ideas, metaphors, relationships, and concepts. Actors are shaped into “frozen” positions by their fellow actors, so they look like sculptures or statues. Individual statues can be created to explore simple concepts, like emotions, or a scene can be sculpted to depict a relationship or a complex idea. Unlike a dramatic scene, sculptures do not move, which makes them easier to examine and evaluate. They can be viewed from different angles to allow observers to take in all perspectives. They can be changed or adjusted to improve expressivity or the clarity of the concept (Bailey, 2016). Several sculptures juxtaposed can be used to compare and contrast the essential ingredients of related concepts. In a lesson on bullying, three students can be sculpted to represent a bully, a victim, and a bystander. The power dynamics of the relationship can be discussed, as can the feelings involved and the potential action that could be taken by any one of the statues to change the ­situation. Such an approach can reflect the ambiguous nature of bullying and the variety of ­possible responses (Boggs, Mickel, & Holtom, 2007). To test out hypotheses, statues can be adjusted to change relationships, or the statues can “come to life” to test solutions suggested by ­fellow actors. If the true nature of a concept has emerged, actors will demonstrate bodily, spatial, and ­metaphorical information through their muscles, and visual and proprioceptive points of view. Sculpting can be useful in teaching concepts to visual and kinesthetic learners and to s­ tudents who have impulse control difficulties (Bailey, 2010). Thus, students with autism, intellectual ­d isabilities, and ADHD can benefit when teachers incorporate this strategy. In addition, when students are “frozen” in positions, behavior management issues that can arise from moving bodies are eliminated.

Barrier-Free Theatre The Barrier-Free Theatre method has proven successful with adolescents and adults with disabilities in the creation of original theater productions (Bailey, 2010). Barriers to full participation are removed when theater processes are adapted to the strengths and individual needs of participants. Plays can be created through improvisation, interviewing, editing students’ written work, or adapting a story that holds meaning for a group of students. A key element of the method is offering participants choices, which contributes to their growth in problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking. In addition, when young people are given the opportunity to make choices, they feel respected and valued and will often commit to the work of a theatrical ensemble more than when their options are limited. The director/leader guides choice-making, so all participants have the opportunity to contribute to group decisions in a fair and equal manner (Bailey, 2010; Catterall, 2007). Leaders must understand participants’ strengths and needs, so their abilities can be highlighted and cultivated, with adaptations that do not create impediments to their experience and success (Bailey, 2010). Because the actors create the play, it belongs to them. Changes can be made to the

191

Sally Bailey

script during rehearsals if a line or stage business turns out to be difficult for an actor. Lines can be added if something needs to be clarified. This cannot be done with published plays as it violates the playwright’s and publishing company’s copyrights. Rehearsing a play enhances self-discipline as actors must arrive on time for rehearsals and performances, learn their lines by set deadlines, and remain focused. Team skills are developed as actors support each other in working toward the common goal of the performance. Resolving conflicts, which inevitably emerge, requires flexibility, patience, and willingness to communicate and compromise. Actors quickly learn the difference between coming to rehearsal prepared or unprepared. Some students might not have had opportunities for this level of responsibility and require scaffolding to prepare for rehearsals (Bailey, 2009). Acting in a play is one way to practice presenting in front of others. In the process of r­ eplicating human behavior (Bailey, 2007; Zimbardo, 1986), actors must learn how to make eye contact with each other, listen closely, and speak loudly and clearly. They can physically feel the electricity, focus, and alive-ness generated when they are performing. Emotional connection and rapport develops between the actors on stage and between the actors and the audience. A positive rehearsal process generates respect among cast members, evolving into forming close connections and caring for one another. Casts and crews from all types of theater experiences (professional, e­ ducational, and community theater alike) report that working on a play creates a “family” (­Bailey, 2009). When performing, actors experience positive attention. Some students have received attention only from negative behaviors, which serves to reinforce those behaviors. Performing in a play and receiving positive reactions from an audience might be a student’s first experience with positive attention. Once an actor experiences the feelings generated from performing, he tends to seek positive attention again (Bailey, 2009). As the date of a performance nears, actors begin to feel nervous. Stage fright is the result of the brain sending a message to the adrenal glands to release adrenalin into the bloodstream in response to an impulse sensing danger. The experience of this rush of adrenalin is a physiological sensation, which the person recognizes as a feeling and then translates into an action (Bilodeau, 1992). If an actor learns how to translate this feeling into excitement, he can channel it into concentration and energy that can be used in performance. Coping with stage fright gives actors practice in handling the anxiety and fears of real-life situations, such as school presentations; job interviews; and interactions with teachers, bosses, and peers (Bailey, 2009). When actors with and without disabilities work together, there are opportunities for mutual support. Typically developing actors, who might have fewer difficulties memorizing lines than some actors with disabilities, can scaffold the play, assist with entrances and exits, and provide support. Time is spent in dress rehearsals practicing ways to “save a scene.” If an actor forgets a line during a performance, one of the other actors can ask a question to help him or her remember the line, or the other actors can insert the left out information into the scene another way (Bailey, 2010). Typically developing actors are not just assisting; they, too, are learning from the experience. Some may have had few experiences with peers with disabilities in education and recreation settings and may hold negative beliefs about the abilities of some people with disabilities. The rehearsal and performance of an original play provides a framework for understanding the creativity and unique personalities of actors with disabilities (Bailey, 2010).

Unified Theater Unified Theater (UT) mentors student-led inclusive theater at over 60 schools across the country through extracurricular programs, with mentorship from UT and faculty advisors. The focus of programming is on engaging an inclusive group of students in the creation and performance of an original short play. An overarching goal of the program is to create a unified body of students

192

Students with Disabilities in Theater

who usually do not interact socially, artistically, or academically (S. Fenster, personal communication, March 5, 2015). Training for students and faculty advisors follows three key philosophies: ­Ability over Disability, Creativity over Conformity, and Collaboration over Competition (­Unified ­Theater, 2016). To create a positive inclusion experience, students are introduced to “4 Steps Toward Full Inclusion:” 1 Lose the Labels: Allow everyone to participate equally by not focusing on diagnosis or other labels that separate people; 2 Spotlight on Ability: Learn what each participant is great at, and find a way to highlight these abilities in the performance; 3 Inclusion in Action: Be aware of how words and actions reflect an assumption of ability. Don’t talk down to anyone in a babying or condescending way, and be mindful of how you guide and instruct others when they need assistance; 4 Magic in Modifications: Make modifications to an activity on a case-by-case basis, and try to make the change across the board, so no one is singled out because of something they cannot do. Never make a modification based on an assumption that someone can’t do something. Always assume ability until you know otherwise (Unified Theater, 2016, p. 8). In addition, there are “5 Must Dos” required of every school adopting the UT program: 1 No “buddies,” “partners,” or roles based on ability; 2 All participants must come from similar peer age groups; 3 Each production is an original, student-produced show; 4 The group is open to students of all abilities, interests, and backgrounds; 5 The program is entirely student-led (Unified Theater, 2016, p. 4). UT’s philosophy states that when all students are given a voice, a chance to lead, and the opportunity to connect with others different from them, they can develop independence and confidence, regardless of their abilities (Unified Theater, n.d.).

Conclusion When students have opportunities to stretch their imaginations, curiosity, and analytical abilities through drama, they are actively engaging in learning. Acting out a situation or playing a drama game can fulfill students’ needs for attention and belongingness, teach them social-emotional skills, and generate feelings of achievement and happiness. The drama curricula described in this chapter can facilitate social and emotional growth in students with special needs through methods and strategies developed from research-based practices. Adapting these techniques to discipline-specific courses can alter students’ motivation and achievement in academic areas. One of the wonderful side effects of drama is that students do not realize how much they are learning because they are enjoying themselves so much (Bailey, 2010).

References Anderson, A. (2015a). Arts integration as a contextualized language-learning environment. In A. Anderson (Ed). Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 31–45). New York, NY: Routledge. Anderson, A. (2015b). Understanding how and why arts integration engages learners. In A. Anderson (Ed.). Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 59–73). New York, NY: Routledge.

193

Sally Bailey Aristotle. (1954). Aristotle’s rhetoric and poetics. (W. R. Roberts, Trans.). New York, NY: The Modern Library. Bailey, S. (2007). Drama therapy. In A. Blatner & D. Wiener (Eds.). Interactive and improvisational drama: ­Varieties of applied theatre and performance (pp. 164–173). New York, NY: iUniverse. Bailey, S. (2009). Performance in drama therapy. In R. Emunah & D. R. Johnson (Eds.), Current approaches in drama therapy (2nd ed., pp. 374–392). Springfield, IL: C.C. Thomas Publisher. Bailey, S. (2010). Barrier-free theatre. Eumenclaw, WA: Idyll Arbor, Inc. Bailey, S. (2016). Integrating drama and action techniques into university teaching. In G. H. Mardirosian & Y. P. Lewis (Eds.). Arts integration in education: Teachers and teaching artists as agents of change (pp. 147–162). London, UK: Intellect. Berry, K. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2015). Cognitive and affective engagement, arts integration, and students with disabilities. In A. Anderson (Ed). Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 46–58). New York, NY: Routledge. Bilodeau, L. (1992). The anger workbook. Minneapolis, MN: CompCare Publishers. Boggs, J. G., Mickel, A. E., & Holtom, B. C. (2007). Experiential learning through ­interactive drama: An alternative to student role plays. Journal of Management Education, 31(6), 832–858. doi:10.1177/ 1052562906294952 Catterall, J. S. (2007). Enhancing peer conflict resolution skills through drama: An experimental study. Research in Drama Education, 12(2), 163–178. Catterall, J. S. (2009). Doing well and doing good by doing art. A 12-year national study of education in the visual and performing arts: Effects on the achievement and values of young adults. Los Angeles, CA: I-Group Books. Chasen, L. (2014). Engaging mirror neurons to inspire connection and social emotional development in children and teens on the autism spectrum: Theory into practice through drama therapy. London, UK: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Durlak, J. A., Weissberg, R. P, Dymnicki, A. B., Taylor, R. D., & Schellinger, K. B. (2011). The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: A meta analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child Development, 82(1), 405–432. Flavell, J. H. (1963). The developmental psychology of Jean Piaget. New York, NY: D. Van Nostrand. Ginsburg, H., & Opper, S., (1969). Piaget’s theory of intellectual development: An introduction. Englewood Cliff, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam Books. Guli, L. A., Semrud-Clikeman, M., Lerner, M. D., & Britton, N. (2013). Social Competence Intervention Program (SCIP): A pilot study of a creative drama program for youth with social difficulties. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 40, 37–44. Guli, L. A., Wilkinson, A. D., & Semrud-Clikeman, M. (2008). Social competence intervention program: A ­drama-based intervention for youth on the autism spectrum. Champaign, IL: Research Press. Hunter, K. (2015). Shakespeare’s heartbeat: Drama games for children with autism. London, UK: Routledge. Iacoboni, M., (2008). Mirroring people: The new science of how we connect with others. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. Landmark, L. J., & Zhang, D. (2006). Parent practices in facilitating self-determination skills: The influence of culture, socioeconomic status, and children’s special education status. TASH Connections, 32(5/6), 4. McAfee, J. (2002). Navigating the social world: A curriculum for individuals with Asperger’s syndrome, high functioning autism and related disorders. Arlington, TX: Future Horizons. Mehling, M. H., Tasse, M. J., & Root, R. (2016). Shakespeare and autism: An exploratory evaluation of the Hunter Heartbeat Method. Research and Practice in Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities [Advance Online Publication]. doi:10.1080/23297018.2016.1207202 Osterman, K. R. (2000). Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational ­Research, 70(3), 323–367. Podlozny, A. (2000). Strengthening verbal skills through the use of classroom drama: A clear link. The ­Journal of Aesthetic Education, 34(3/4), 239–275. Rameson, L. T., & Lieberman, M. D. (2009). Empathy: A neuroscience cognitive approach. Social and ­Personality Psychology Compass, 3(1), 94–110. Rizzolatti, G., & Sinigaglia, C. (2008). Mirrors in the brain: How our minds share actions and emotions. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Rose, C. A., Simpson, C. G., & Preast, J. L. (2016). Exploring psychosocial predictors of bullying ­involvement for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 37(5), 308–317. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Saint Louis, C. (2013, February 20). Effects of bullying last into adulthood, study finds. NY Times.com. ­Retrieved from http://well.blog.nytimes.com/2013/02/20/effects-of-bullying-last-into-adulthood

194

Students with Disabilities in Theater Schoenberg, N. (2015, June 6). Beyond texting: Have we forgotten how to converse? Kansas City Star, pp. C1, C2. Stafford-Brizard, K. B. (2016). Building blocks for learning: A framework for comprehensive student development. Turnaround for Children [White Paper]. Retrieved from www.turnaroundusa.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/03/Turnaround-for-Children-Building-Blocks-for-Learningx-2.pdf Stefonex, J. (2016). Act it out: One year of social skills lessons for students grades 7–12. Lenexa, KS: AAPC Publishing. Unified Theater. (n.d.) Our approach. Retrieved from https://unifiedtheater.org/content/our-approach Unified Theater. (2016). Unified Theatre Handbook, Providence, RI: Unified Theatre. Zimbardo, P. (1986, November 9). The psychology and drama interface. Workshop presented at the 1986 North American Drama Therapy Association Conference, San Francisco, CA. [DVD]. Available from www. dramatherapyfund.org/index.php/store

195

13 Arts Integration and Special Education Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

Linking the arts with learning across the curriculum in educational settings has a long tradition (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). In tandem with inclusive directions in curriculum and instruction, arts integration has become increasingly evident in programs aimed to address students’ diverse learning needs, including those of students with disabilities (Anderson, 2015c). Historically, arts approaches have been integral to teaching students with disabilities, with the 21st century marking a trend toward their increasing access, participation, and progress. In this chapter, we address the history, current research findings, and future directions of arts integration and special education across research, practice, and policy. We focus on students in primary through upper elementary grades because arts integration has evolved as an alternative to, and improvement upon, conventional instructional approaches for young students with disabilities. Our discussion is organized into three sections. The first section presents the historical background of arts integration and special education, including operational definitions of arts integration within the framework of arts in education approaches as well as historical context and a description of the evolution of arts integration research. The second section reviews the research findings on arts integration and includes a summary of the current status of the research to date on interventions aimed at elementary-aged students with disabilities. The third section includes a synthesis of the past decade of trends in arts integration and special education, including consideration of the tension between arts integration practice and special education research, along with recommendations for ­research and practice in arts integration and special education based upon our findings. To illustrate the current status of arts integration and special education, we first examine its historical underpinnings.

Historical Background of Arts Integration and Special Education Although the benefits of arts integration are increasingly acknowledged, its parameters have historically been a point of debate, with differential terminology, definitions, and implementation being used over the past two decades (Bresler, 2001; Burnaford, Brown, Doherty, & McLaughlin, 2007; Cornett, 2007). Approaches that are conflated with arts integration include arts infusion and arts inclusion, among others. Dimensions of arts integration and special education (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015), such as who uses arts integration (e.g. teaching artists, arts teachers, classroom teachers), what is being integrated (e.g. content standards, thinking processes, individualized outcomes, fundamental concepts), when arts integration occurs (e.g. within the general education setting, within a therapeutic/individualized setting, after school), where arts integration takes place

196

Arts Integration and Special Education

(e.g. in special education classrooms, therapeutic settings, general education settings), how arts integration instruction is developed (e.g. by co-teachers, artists-in-residence, single teachers), and why one does arts integration in education, remain variable across the literature base of both fields.

Definition of Arts Integration Despite differences in scope and focus, all perspectives on arts integration and education inclusive of special education share the belief that teaching students academic content through the arts is linked to learning—cognitively, linguistically, motivationally, affectively, or socially—and harnessing those linkages enhances both teaching and learning (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). To better identify the types of connections, conceptions, and relationships afforded by arts integration, we define arts integration as the linking of an arts area (e.g. drama, music, dance, visual art) with a content area (e.g. language arts, mathematics) for the purposes of reaching a deeper level of engagement, learning, and reflection than would be possible without inclusion of the art form (Anderson, 2012; Cornett, 2007; Loughlin & Anderson 2015). This definition is consistent with the Kennedy Center’s operational definition of arts integration as an “approach to teaching in which students construct and demonstrate understanding through an art form [e.g. drama]. Students engage in a creative process which connects an art form and another subject area and meets evolving objectives in both” (Silverstein & Layne, 2010, p. 1).

Historical Context Arts integration has been influenced by theories of learning, research agendas, and policies over several decades (Eisner, 1998). Research initiatives and justifications for arts integration have changed dramatically (Aprill, 2010), from exploratory-descriptive (defined as investigations that influence arts learning patterns and practices) to confirmatory investigations (defined as investigations that draw predictions from theoretical frameworks across arts-allied disciplines to examine the extent to which predictions are confirmed in arts contexts), the latter of which necessitate interdisciplinary collaboration between arts and non-arts disciplines to make predictions and test hypotheses around arts integration approaches and observed student outcomes (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). Arts integration has a long and rich history in special education (Smith, 2001), with numerous exploratory investigations (e.g. Clements & Clements, 1984) and policy papers (Anderson, 1975; Andrus, 1994; Keifer-Boyd & Kraft, 2003) focused on the ways in which the arts can enhance inclusive learning opportunities for students at risk for school failure, including students with identified disabilities. Efforts in general and special education over the past several decades have aimed at describing best practices in arts integration (Catterall & Waldorf, 1999; Stake, Bresler, & Mabry, 1991), with debate over the connection to authentic arts learning versus the instrumental role of the arts in education (see Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). Numerous researchers (AEP, 1999, 2002; Bresler, 1997; Burnaford, Aprill, & Weiss, 2001; Collins & Chandler, 1993; Seidel, 1999; Smith, 2001; Smith & Herring, 1996) have identified qualities of authentic arts integration learning contexts that include common themes or broad questions; artistic ways of seeing, analyzing, and creating compositions; and curricula that emphasize connection-making and focus on personal and social relevance to contemporary, past, and world cultures (Bresler, 1997).

The Evolution of Arts Integration Research The last century of arts and special education literature has not frequently used the term arts integration, despite efforts to reach and teach students through the linking of arts and content area

197

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

learning. However, in the past decade, arts integration has been used to describe the practice of integrating art and content learning for students with disabilities in inclusive classroom settings (see Abedin, 2010; Anderson, 2012). Based on the analysis conducted by Loughlin and Anderson (2015), arts integration, as a field, has moved from defining, describing, and legitimizing itself as an educational approach to identifying theoretically and research-grounded relations between arts and non-arts learning through exploratory and confirmatory research. Special education research relies on interdisciplinary theoretical frameworks to design and test interventions aimed at ­addressing individual learning outcomes; thus, the field shares common goals with arts integration research through confirmatory investigation. As a field, the arts may look to special education ­research as a model in this respect. Today, special education is a diverse field that encompasses multidisciplinary perspectives on development and learning from psychology, linguistics, sociology, medicine, and education. Special education perspectives are informed by developmental linguistics and psychology as well as by practical work with students who have diverse learning needs. Thus, past and current arts integration and special education research aims to identify theoretical and empirical relations between arts and non-arts learning through exploratory and confirmatory studies. Although following a different course, both approaches intend to find meaningful connections between arts and non-arts learning that can potentially impact research, policy, and practice. A detailed explanation of exploratory and confirmatory approaches within the context of the history of arts integration is described in the following sections.

The Exploratory Approach The first approach to arts integration research explores arts learning contexts, including high-­ quality arts integration settings, to determine their salient social, affective, and cognitive aspects. This research approach is termed exploratory because it emphasizes careful examination to determine patterns and practices rather than imposing hypotheses or predictive frameworks on the arts learning context. The goal of this research is to identify the patterns or practices inherent in arts learning in an effort to generate hypotheses or predictive frameworks for the future (e.g. Henley, 1992; Hetland, Winner, Veenema, & Sheridan, 2007; McCurrach & Darnley, 1999; Sheridan, 2011; Winner, 1996; Zhbanova, Rule, Montgomery & Nielsen, 2010). The exploratory approach has been critical to the fields of arts integration and special education; however, there is a dissemination obstacle because studies of this nature are focused closely on arts learning and are likely to be published in arts-related outlets and therefore read by, and influential to, those in the arts. As such, communicating these findings to a non-arts audience and making clear the implications for arts integration practice for students with disabilities must be an intentional effort (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). Integral to the exploratory approach are practice-based arts integration studies in special ­education. Special education arts integration has developed through experience-based educational approaches (e.g. Dewey, Bruner) and as an alternative to conventional general education approaches that have failed to meet the developmental (e.g. cognitive, linguistic, social-emotional, motor) needs of students with diverse learning needs (see Malley & Silverstein, 2014 for a review). Individualized goals to meet developmental needs have been identified as one of the primary benefits of arts integration in special education, and high-quality arts integration approaches have been described for students with disabilities (Smith, 1991, 2000, 2001; VSA, 2014). For example, Smith (2001) documents how arts-centered curricula support students with learning- and sensory-based disorders in meeting their individualized language learning, cognitive, social, and emotional goals. Although Smith never explicitly describes her approach as arts integrated, her descriptions meet the standard set out by Bresler (1995) by promoting learning in the arts and higher-order cognition.

198

Arts Integration and Special Education

Beverly Gerber’s (2011) practice-based work draws extensively on the exploratory/descriptive connections between the arts and special education, tracing her own path as an arts educator and special educator over 50 years. Gerber has forged groundbreaking and tangible professional partnerships between arts educators and special educators aimed at guiding professional practice to meet the needs of students with disabilities. Her foundation of practice-based arts education with students with a range of disabilities draws on pioneering practitioners, such as Vicktor Lowenfeld (1957), in recognizing the strength in using arts in education because of the open-endedness and accessibility of learning. Reaching and Teaching Students with Special Needs through Art (Gerber & Guay, 2006) was among the first collaboratively written textbooks by leading art educators and special educators. Understanding Students with Autism through Art (Gerber & Kellman, 2010) provides a practice-based volume intended to address arts educators’ needs for information on autism. Similar to Gerber, Smith’s (2000) practice-based work reveals that students with disabilities often have difficulty with—and are rarely challenged to engage in—higher order thinking. However, through the arts, these challenges are more readily met. The notion of access to higher order reasoning and active engagement in content learning has been a consistent benefit of arts and special education research outcomes (e.g. Malley & Silverstein, 2014; Mason, Steedly, & Thormann, 2008). According to Smith, students with moderate to severe learning difficulties are passive, ­often waiting for adults to take the initiative and “pour knowledge into their brains” (p.  7). In contrast, students’ art-making, as integrated within content area learning, requires their active role in ownership and problem-solving through the use of space, time, materials, and interpersonal relationships. Although these critical competencies tend to emerge implicitly in typical development, students with disabilities may benefit from approaches that foster explicit opportunities to develop these skills within their learning environments. Smith described the development of relationships as the “fourth R” after reading, writing, and arithmetic, suggesting that students’ involvement in the arts provides a relational or affective outlet in which to cultivate their passions, discover their self-worth, and support their social-emotional skills through perspective-taking and team collaboration. The social-emotional support of arts integration for ­students with disabilities has been reported in a number of recent studies (Anderson, 2012; ­A nderson & Berry, 2014; Bosch & Anderson, 2015; Davis & Anderson, 2015; Kempe & Tissot, 2012; Nagy & Anderson, 2015).

The Confirmatory Approach In contrast to the exploratory approach, the confirmatory approach draws predictions from theoretical frameworks across arts-allied disciplines and then examines the extent to which predictions are confirmed in arts contexts. The confirmatory approach starts with what is known about the learning process in non-arts disciplines in an effort to better understand what occurs for students with disabilities, learning in arts integration contexts (Anderson, 2012; Anderson, Berry, & ­Loughlin, 2014; Anderson, Loughlin, & Berry, 2013; Rinne, Gregory, Yarmolinskaya, & ­Hardiman, 2011). These studies and others reflecting the confirmatory approach ­( Loughlin  & ­A lexander, 2012; Loughlin, Anderson, & Berry, 2013; Millis & Larson, 2008; Solso, 1999; ­Tishman & Palmer, 2006; VSA, 2008) have applied theories and constructs in arts-allied fields (cognitive science, linguistics, developmental psychology) to inform understanding of how ­students learn in arts integration settings. There remains a need for confirmatory research, particularly with respect to examining how and why arts integration relates to authentic and deep learning. For example, relations between arts integration and learning may be further illuminated through studies ­examining how arts integration influences students’ executive functioning (Welsh, Pennington, & Groisser, 1991), mind-sets (Dweck, 1999), achievement motivation (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000), and self-­ efficacy and self-regulation (Bandura, 1977; Zimmerman & Schunk, 2001).

199

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

Review of Arts Integration and Special Education Research In this section, we present the current status of arts integration and special education research conducted with elementary-aged students, grades K-8, in school settings. First, we address the definitional and inclusion/exclusion criteria for the terms special education intervention and arts integration, which frame the research described. Next, we explain the sources of evidence and findings from intervention research, with summaries of the quality of the evidence and a description of individualized student outcomes as well as seminal meta-analyses, policy papers, and national reports. However, in an effort to elevate and catalyze further research at the intersection of special education and arts integration, we primarily target confirmatory intervention studies in this review to draw implications of the teaching and learning of students with disabilities through the arts.

Definitions and Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria It is necessary to clarify terminology used in arts and special education research for the purpose of strengthening the allied disciplines and elevating the overall quality of the research in the intersecting fields. Integral to the following review of research is an explanation of the terms educational interventions and arts integration.

Educational Interventions The extant literature base has defined an educational intervention as a specific program or set of steps (in contrast to strategies, which are defined as isolated skill instruction) to help a student to make progress in an identified area, ranging from academic to behavioral skills. The key elements of educational interventions include steps that are (a) intentionally directed at an identified area of need; (b) discrete in length, intensity, scope, and sequence; and (c) monitored throughout the course of the intervention period for the purpose of modifying instruction as needed (Compton, Miller, Elleman, & Steacy, 2014). These elements prove critical to special education under the premise that without intentionally focused, discrete, and carefully monitored instruction, students with disabilities lack access to the instruction occurring in the general education curriculum because of often impressive, individual learning differences.

Arts Integration Over the past two decades, arts integration has been differentially termed, defined, and operationalized (Burnaford et al., 2007; Cornett, 2007; Smith, 2001). For this review, arts integration is defined as the linking of an arts area with a content area for the purpose of reaching deeper levels of engagement, learning, and reflection than would be possible without inclusion of the art form, as previously discussed. These definitions guided our literature search and should be considered when examining the findings of this review. To identify related literature, we used the following strategies.

Sources of Evidence Searches of six electronic databases were conducted to identify relevant theoretical and empirical literature: Academic Search Complete, ArtsEdSearch, Education Source, ERIC (EBSCO), ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Online, and PsychINFO. Key search terms included different combinations of the following: drama, theater, performance, music, song, dance, movement,

200

Arts Integration and Special Education

physical activity, media arts, film, movie, digital art, photography, visual art, art, painting, drawing, intervention, strategy, disability, and students with disabilities. To narrow the scope of the search, we employed four limitations. First, in an effort to reflect the best available research to date on supporting students with disabilities, we focused on how arts integration research supports ­elementary-aged students. Second, we sought articles published in English-language, peer-­ reviewed journals. Third, because the purpose of the review was to describe arts integration interventions (i.e. confirmatory investigations), we selected studies and articles that described the specific implementation of interventions in K-8 academic classroom settings. Thus, we excluded articles describing exploratory research as well as interventions that were conducted after school; as part of summer programs; in residential facilities; in home environments; and exclusively in arts, music, dance, physical education, or drama classes. Lastly, interventions must have been conducted in classrooms in the United States. The resulting review of research included all studies describing arts integration (interventions, programs, and approaches) for the defined population (i.e. students in grades K-8, receiving special education in American schools).

Major Findings Intervention Research The intervention research results for students with disabilities are presented in three broad categories: drama, music, and dance. No intervention studies fitting our inclusion criteria were identified in the area of visual and media arts. In an effort to advance the quality of research at the ­intersection of arts integration and special education, only confirmatory intervention ­studies including single-subject designs, quasi-experimental designs, true experimental designs, and high-quality qualitative research (i.e. data triangulation corroborated across at least three sources of evidence) are presented. Notably, only 11 drama studies, nine music studies, and two dance/­ movement studies were identified. Detailed results are organized across these three areas and are presented in Table 13.1. Several studies did not meet the standards set forth for high-quality research as established by the What Works Clearinghouse (WWC, 2014) (also see Cook, Simpson-Steele,  & Cook, 2018; Horner, Carr, Halle, & McGee, 2005, for explanation of quality indicators for single-case design). Notably, according to the WWC quality indicators, one of the 13 ­quasi-experimental/­experimental research studies provided a low level of evidence, four studies provided a ­moderate-low level of evidence, eight studies provided a moderate level of evidence, and no intervention studies met the criteria for strong evidence. For the single-case designs, four of the eight studies met WWC standards without reservations, and four did not meet evidence standards. Policy papers, meta-analyses, and national reports were also considered in the review, even if arts integration was employed with typically developing students, to highlight the value of the arts for all students and to emphasize the significant need to include students with disabilities in the research. These results are described in the following:

Meta-Analysis Although not addressing outcomes for students with disabilities, one meta-analysis, conducted by Lee, Patall, Cawthon, and Steingut (2015), highlights the importance of high-quality arts integration as it relates to associated learning outcomes. Lee et al. (2015) described the effects of ­d rama-based pedagogy, citing positive effects across psychological and social outcomes for preschool through secondary-aged students. This study examined 47 quasi-experimental ­intervention

201

Table 13.1  Summary of Arts Integration Intervention and Special Education Research in Dance, Drama, and Music

Art Form

Author(s) (Year)

Title

Arts Integration Area

Design

Anderson (2015b)

Dance/Movement Therapy’s Influence on Adolescents’ Mathematics, SocialEmotional, and Dance Skills

Dance-movement therapy

Qualitative

Harbin (2012)

The Effects of Physical Activity on Engagement in Young Children with Autism

Embedded movement intervention

Single-case (ABAB) design

Anderson (2012)

The Influence of Process Drama on Elementary Students’ Written Language

Four-week process drama intervention, including tableau, improvisations, and in-role writing activities

Intervention with pre- and post-tests

Student Population

WWC Evidence Outcomes

Dance

Drama Fourth-grade students with LD and behavioral challenges

Moderate

Linguistic: Students demonstrated increased written language productivity and specificity in contextualized dramatic arts activities as compared to decontextualized language arts activities.

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

202

Cognitive: Students demonstrated improved performance in mathematics. Behavioral: Students demonstrated improved motivation, engagement, attention, and self-regulation. 3 kindergarten Meets evidence Behavioral: Students showed an immediate increase in students with standards set ASD forth by WWC engagement during both a for single-case group circle time activity and, 20–30 minutes later, design during an independent seatwork task. Low-moderate 14 seventhgrade students with LD, EBD, and ADHD

Tableau The Influence of Classroom Drama on Teachers’ Language and Students’ On-Task Behavior

Anderson and Berry (2014)

Tableau The Influence of Drama on Elementary Students’ Written Narratives and On-Task Behavior

Berry (2015)

The Use of Tableau to Increase the On-Task Behavior of Students with Language-Based Learning Disabilities

Tableau

Linguistic: Language arts lessons that integrated classroom drama were associated with significantly higher rates of teachers’ assertive statements and lower rates of regulative statements. Behavioral: Language arts lessons using classroom drama were associated with higher rates of students’ on-task behavior than conventional language arts lessons. Moderate Linguistic: Students Intervention with 1 selfused significantly more pre- and post-tests contained referential and spatial classroom of cohesive discourse markers third-grade in the drama than in the students conventional context. with LD and Behavioral: Students had ADHD higher rates of on-task behavior in the drama context as compared to the conventional context. Single-case design; 3 fourth-grade Meets evidence Linguistic: Students improved their oral story ABAB withdrawal students with standards set language-based forth by WWC retelling skills. for single-case Behavioral: Students LD improved their on-task design behavior. Intervention with pre- and post-tests

2 selfcontained classrooms of third-grade students with LD and ADHD

Moderate

(Continued)

Arts Integration and Special Education

203

Anderson and Berry (2015)

Table 13.1  (Continued)

Art Form

Author(s) (Year)

Title

Arts Integration Area

Design

Corbett et al. (2015)

Improvement in Social Competence Using a Randomized Trial of a Theatre Intervention for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder A Study of the Effects of Readers’ Theater on Second and Third Grade Special Education Students’ Fluency Growth

Peer-mediated, theater-based intervention

Randomized control trial

Reader’s Theatre

Intervention with pre- and post-tests in oral fluency

Student Population

WWC Evidence Outcomes

Drama

204 Guli, SemrudClikeman, Lerner, and Britton (2013)

SCIP creative Social Competence Intervention Program drama-based group (SCIP): A Pilot Study intervention of a Creative Drama Program for Youth with Social Difficulties

Reader’s Theatre Hubbard (2009) Readers Theatre: A Means to Improving the Reading and Fluency Rates of Second and Third Grade Students with LD

Quasiexperimental design

Intervention with pre- and post-tests in fluency

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

Corcoran and Davis (2005)

Behavioral: Students improved social ability, communication symptoms, group play, immediate memory of faces, delayed memory of faces, and theory of mind. Moderate Linguistic: Readers’ Theatre 12 students improved students’ overall with LD in fluency in number of words a combined read correctly per minute. second- and Behavioral: Readers’ Theatre third-grade, improved student interest self-contained and confidence in reading. classroom Moderate Behavioral: The treatment 34 students group showed significant with ASD, LD, improvement in key and ADHD; domains of observed social 18 students behavior in a natural participated setting compared to the in SCIP; 16 clinical control group. controls Parents and children in the SCIP condition reported multiple positive changes in social functioning. 8 second- and Low-moderate Linguistic: After the 7-wk intervention, students third-grade increased their reading students with fluency rates LD 30 8–13-year- Moderate olds with ASD

Lewis and Feng (2014)

Whittaker (2005)

The Effects of Reader’s Six-week Reader’s Theatre intervention Theatre on the Reading Ability of Elementary Special Education Students Reader’s Theatre Readers’ Theatre: Effects on Reading Performance, Attention and Perspectives of Students with Reading Disabilities

Fifth-graders with SLD, OHI, Autism

Low-moderate Linguistic: Students increased oral fluency rates.

Qualitative design: Data collected pertained to student attitudes about reading, reading performance through measures of accuracy, fluency, and comprehension; observations of student attention to task and general observation; and interviews about reading habits and preferences.

24 third- and fourth-grade students receiving language arts instruction in the resource room; LD in reading

Low-moderate Linguistic: Students demonstrated greater reading fluency and attention during Reader’s Theatre. Behavioral: Students indicated that Reader’s Theatre was their preferred narrative genre.

Single-case (ABAC/ACBA) design

4 first- and second-grade students with ASD

Does not meet evidence standards set forth by WWC for single-case design

Music Brownell (2002)

Musically Adapted Social Stories to Modify Behaviors in Students with Autism: Four case studies

Music presented in social stories

Behavioral: Results from all 4 cases indicated that both the reading condition and the singing condition were significantly more effective in reducing the target behavior than the nocontact control condition. (Continued)

Arts Integration and Special Education

205

Intervention with pre- and post-tests in oral fluency

Table 13.1  (Continued)

Art Form

Author(s) (Year)

Title

Arts Integration Area

Design

Carnahan, Basham, and Musti-Rao (2009)

A Low-Technology Strategy for Increasing Engagement of Students with Autism and Significant Learning Needs

Interactive books with music

Single-case (ABCAC) design

Student Population

WWC Evidence Outcomes

Music

Interactive reading Single-case materials paired with design; ABCAC music reversal design

Colwell and Music Activities Murlless (2002) (Singing vs. Chanting) as a Vehicle for Reading Accuracy of Children with Learning Disabilities: A Pilot Study De Mers, Effects of Music Tincani, Therapy on Young Norman, and Children’s Challenging Higgins (2009) Behaviors

Intervention with Intervention with singing and chanting pre- and post-tests for reading

Music therapy intervention

5 elementary students with LD, aged 6–8

Single-case design; 3 children, multiple baseline aged 5–7, with ADHD, ASD, and/ or behavioral problems

Low

Meets evidence standards set forth by WWC for single-case design

Behavioral: The use of interactive books paired with music showed increased levels of engagement during small group instruction. Behavioral: Students with autism and significant learning needs had higher rates of academic engagement during activities that incorporated visual, interactive materials and music. Linguistic: Participants’ reading accuracy improved, regardless of condition. Behavioral: Students were more on-task during the music conditions. Behavioral: Targeted music therapy decreased negative behaviors while increasing more positive replacement behaviors and was at least moderately effective for 2 of the 3 students’ gains.

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

206

Carnahan, Promoting Active Musti-Rao, and Engagement in Small Bailey (2009) Group Learning Experiences for Students with Autism and Significant Learning Needs

Does not meet evidence standards set forth by WWC for single-case design 6 students, 5 Does not with ASD and meet evidence one with OHI, standards set aged 6–11 forth by WWC for single-case design 6 students in grades K-4 with ASD and significant learning needs

Does not meet evidence standards set forth by WWC for single-case design

Linguistic: On average, 5 of the 9 students performed better on writing exercises with music; 2 performed better without music; 2 performed the same with and without music. Linguistic: Both groups, including students with LD, improved significantly in reading from pre- to post-test on all three subtests in word decoding, word knowledge, reading comprehension, and test total. Behavioral: Children with SLI showed significant differences from typical children in identifying the emotion expressed in music excerpts.

Legutko and Trissler (2012)

The Effects of Background Music on Learning Disabled Elementary School Students’ Performance in Writing

Register, Darrow, Standley, and Swedberg (2007)

Music The Use of Music to Enhance Reading Skills of Second Grade Students and Students with Reading Disabilities

Quasiexperimental; pre- and post-tests

Moderate 8 secondgrade students, with LD and 33 typically developing second-grade students

Spackman, Fujiki, Brinton, Nelson, and Allen (2005)

Music The Ability of Children with Language Impairment to Recognize Emotion Conveyed by Facial Expression and Music

Quasiexperimental

43 children with SLI; 43 typically developing matched peers

Moderate

Note: ADHD = Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder; ASD = Autism Spectrum Disorder; EBD = Emotional and Behavioral Disorders; LD = Learning Disability; MD = Multiple Disabilities; OHI = Other Health Impairment; SLI = Speech and Language Impairment; WWC = What Works Clearinghouse. Please see paper for evidence standards of single-case design.

Arts Integration and Special Education

207

Behavioral: 3 of the 4 students displayed reductions in maladaptive behaviors.

Classical music A Qualitative Study was played during of the Effect of Background Music in academic activities the Classroom on the Maladaptive Behaviors of Students with MD

Background music was played during writing exercises

Single-case design; 4 first- and ABAB withdrawal second-grade students with MD, primarily autism, who displayed maladaptive behaviors Single-case (ABA) 9 sixth-grade design students with LD

Meets evidence standards set forth by WWC for single-case design

Ferrell (2012)

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

studies conducted in American schools, dating back to 1985. Although students with ­d isabilities were not included in the review by Lee et al. (2015), we consider these empirically based quality indicators for drama-based pedagogies in education to be important in relation to the state of the current research on arts integration and special education. Specifically, Lee et al. found that arts integration interventions using drama-based pedagogies in educational settings had a positive significant impact on academic achievement when the interventions (a) were led by a classroom teacher or researcher, (b) included more than five lessons, and (c) were integrated into English language arts or science curricula, as compared to other content areas.

Professional Guidance Three papers offering policy and professional guidance emerged from the review at the intersection of arts integration and special education. Munsell and Bryant Davis (2015) described the benefits of arts integration on learning opportunities for students with disabilities. From their perspective, participating in dance activities appears to provide an alternative way to meet diverse learners’ educational needs and can lead to positive student outcomes, including improved physical fitness, social-emotional gains, and academic gains for students with and without exceptionalities. Hourigan (2014) and Malley and Silverstein (2014) provided guidance for improving stakeholders’ access to the arts. Hourigan’s (2014) recommendations emphasized the need to (a) develop partnerships between arts and special education organizations to strengthen advocacy and accessibility efforts and (b) require charter and private schools to utilize voucher programs to offer arts programs for all students, including those with disabilities. Malley and Silverstein (2014) highlighted the benefits of creating a technical assistance center for stakeholders to ensure opportunities for students with disabilities to learn in and through the arts and recommended the establishment of a consortium of personnel across the arts education and special education communities.

National Reports Several national reports of large-scale reform initiatives have been implemented in the arts, but the evaluation of arts integration strategies inclusive of students with disabilities has not been carefully investigated. Reports from North Carolina, Oklahoma, and Arkansas’s networks of A+ schools; the Chicago Arts Partnership in Education (CAPE); Arts Education in Maryland Schools Alliance (AEMS); Arts for Academic Achievement (AAA) in Minneapolis; and Schools, Parents, Educators, Children, Teachers Rediscover the Arts (SPECTRA+) have documented the benefits of arts integration curricula and programs that include drama, music, visual art, and dance for students of all ages (PCAH, 2011). Although seminal to the field of arts integration, these reports rarely included or targeted students with disabilities. The findings from this review of research emphasize the considerable need for more high-­ quality intervention research as well as for the greater inclusion of students with disabilities in arts integration research, meta-analyses, and professional guidance. The following section presents implications and recommendations for research and practice to address these shortcomings.

Trends and Issues in Arts Integration and Special Education Among the implications for practice at the intersection of arts integration and special education is recognition of the current nascent stage of research as most of the studies to date present emerging to promising evidence at best. With the acknowledgement of the current status of research in the field, we are better positioned to design and implement research investigations that address the current limitations in the extant research base.

208

Arts Integration and Special Education

Implications and Recommendations for Future Research Using Conceptual Frameworks Primarily, and essentially to special education research, there is a need to address the underlying conceptual framework used to explain and hypothesize relationships between arts integration and learning outcomes. Such frameworks, or unifying theories of action, are critical for moving research forward, with specific contributions needed to inform such frameworks from the special education and arts integration disciplines. One such example is derived from the field of neuropsychology and arts integration (e.g. Rinne et al., 2011) and involves a cognitive processing model, which is utilized to examine learning outcomes associated with arts integration contexts. As this line of research reflects robust methodological standards in social science research, questions emerge about the primary focus on cognitive behavioral outcomes rather than arts-related interventions or practice. This debate has been a long-standing source of tension in the arts integration field, with arts advocates voicing concern about the arts being “handmaidens” to educational priorities (see Winner & Hetland, 2001, p. 147 for a discussion). More recently, Anderson, Lee, & Brown (2017) attempted to synthesize research findings across dramatic arts integration and special ­education research, recognizing the mismatch between drama-based pedagogies as a holistic process and special education research as a discrete, outcomes-driven process. One possible solution for overcoming this divide is to simultaneously focus on outcomes and intervention/practice. This task may be accomplished through a unifying theory of action/framework(s) that draws on multiple research disciplines to develop and test hypotheses. In examining the past decade of high-quality scholarship aimed at arts integration with special education populations, we consider some unifying frameworks that have emerged as theoretical models and support developmental outcomes for students with disabilities.

Facilitating Language Development One research framework conceptualizes arts integration as a learning context that facilitates language development through simultaneous social, cognitive, and linguistic engagement (­A nderson, 2015c). A related framework supported by arts integration research presents arts integration as a way to contextualize language learning for a variety of vulnerable populations, including students with disabilities and English-learners (ELs). For example, evidence from literature aimed at ELs has demonstrated that arts integration plays a facilitating role in ELs’ language learning across a variety of arts-integrated language learning contexts (Anderson & Loughlin, 2014; Chappell & Faltis, 2013). This theory of action relies heavily on decades of speech-language research, in which contextual factors influence language learning for students with language-based learning disabilities (see Ukrainetz, 2006 and Anderson, 2015a for reviews) and EL students (Perin, 2011). Moreover, literacy researchers have recognized this framework, citing the powerful role of context (see Compton et al., 2014 for a discussion) in facilitating reading interventions and calling for the next generation of intervention research to capitalize on contextual factors, such as arts integration when designing and implementing language and literacy-focused interventions.

Facilitating Social Communication Social-cognitive literature outlines a similar framework, in which arts integration serves as a facilitating mechanism for learning social communication (see Corbett et al., 2011; Kempe & Tissot, 2012 for reviews). Utilizing this theory of action, social-cognition research has demonstrated that theater and dramatic arts integration interventions increase students’ social cognition and emotional engagement (Corbett et al., 2014).

209

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry

Developing Unified Theories of Action The most important recommendation for future research is the development of a unified theory or theories of action and an agreed upon quality standard for arts integration and special education research that bridges multidisciplinary needs. The fields of arts integration and special education in particular are primed for collaboration to elevate the state of related research in their respective disciplines. Although previous studies have been conducted at the intersection of arts integration and special education, our review of the extant research underscores notable methodological and design weaknesses. Many of the studies reported no measurable results, with limited inclusion of students with disabilities.

Strengthening the Rigor An additional recommendation for future research is the utilization of methodologies that meet the standards set forth by the WWC (2014) and other indicators of high-quality educational r­ esearch. Randomized control trials and true experimental designs with randomly assigned control and treatment groups are needed to validate the link between arts integration contexts and improved student outcomes. High-quality single-case designs are also needed to examine the potential of arts integration interventions to improve academic and behavioral outcomes for disability populations (Horner et al., 2005). Single-case designs are frequently used in special e­ ducation research and can provide a beneficial way to implement high-quality research studies when ­resources, sample sizes, and manpower are limited. In addition to designing strong methodological studies, future research should prioritize students with disabilities, who have previously been omitted from arts integration research studies.

Implications and Recommendations for Practice Ongoing Professional Development for Teachers Implications for arts integration and special education practice include a significant need for teacher support, increased access to the general education curriculum through the arts, and ­in-school capacity building through collaboration. Ongoing professional development and training opportunities for general and special education teachers on arts integration practices are essential for ­ensuring that students with disabilities succeed in the classroom. One recommendation is the use of the train-the-trainer model, which enables teachers with experience using arts integration to train teachers who lack knowledge in this area (Suhrheinrich, 2011). A train-the-trainer approach could help teachers collectively determine how arts integration practices can be tailored to different content areas to best support the specific needs of the students in their classrooms. Coaching and mentoring opportunities with arts integration experts are also recommended as valuable ways for teachers to learn and implement new arts integration strategies while receiving direct feedback.

Ensuring Students’ Access to the General Curriculum Students with disabilities often lack access to their general education grade-level curriculum, and arts integration provides a meaningful scaffold for understanding challenging academic content. One recommendation for increasing grade-level curriculum access for students with disabilities is the utilization of arts integration practices within a curricular framework. For example, arts integration strategies can be embedded within the Universal Design for Learning (UDL) framework to provide an opportunity for students with and without disabilities to enhance their ­individual

210

Arts Integration and Special Education

learning through multiple means of representation, action and expression, and engagement (CAST, 2010). Arts integration practices can also be included as a curricular framework through which to teach the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) or science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) content, both of which require students to acquire higher-ordered thinking and interdisciplinary skills. More broadly, arts integration can be viewed as a larger grade-level framework that fosters access and inclusion by supporting students’ understanding of difficult academic concepts.

Communities of Practice Schools need to build capacity for arts integration for students with disabilities by developing arts integration professional learning communities. One way to foster these communities of ­practice is to develop cross-disciplinary working groups made up of diverse stakeholders (e.g. school administrators, parents, special and general education teachers, students) within a school. These working groups could also benefit from using a train-the-trainer approach in promoting a shared ownership of arts integration implementation and a collaboration of efforts across grade-levels, subjects, and students.

Conclusion An improved vision for the future must include the unique and reciprocal contributions of the many stakeholders who value the fields of arts integration and special education, including students, families, teachers and other practitioners, researchers, administrators, and policy makers. As our presentation of the evidence (both past and present) and synthesis of findings on arts ­integration and special education indicate, the long-standing problem of few high-quality studies from disciplinary silos persists. We highlight the imperative for next steps in building multidisciplinary bridges to develop a shared standard of research and practice in arts integration and special education.

References Abedin, G. (2010). Exploring the potential benefits of arts-based education for adolescents with learning disabilities: A case study of engagement in learning through the arts. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations & Theses. (3409864). Anderson, A. (2012). The influence of process drama on elementary students’ written language. Urban ­Education, 47(5), 959–982. Anderson, A. (2015a). Arts integration as a contextualized language-learning environment. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement. New York, NY: Routledge. Anderson, A. (2015b). Dance/movement therapy’s influence on adolescents’ mathematics, social-emotional, and dance skills. The Educational Forum, 79(3), 230-247. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/ 00131725.2015.1037512 Anderson, A. (2015c). Understanding how and why arts integration engages learners. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement. New York, NY: Routledge. Anderson, A., & Berry, K. A. (2014). The influence of drama on elementary students’ written narratives and on-task behavior. Learning Disabilities: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 20(3), 143–157. Anderson, A., & Berry, K. A. (2015). The influence of classroom drama on teachers’ language and students’ on-task behavior. Preventing School Failure, 59(4), 197–206. Anderson, A., Berry, K. A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2014, April). The influence of drama on elementary students’ oral narrative skill and on-task behavior. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PA. Anderson, A., Lee, B.K., & Brown, M. (2017). Promoting literacy and language-learning in special ­education through drama based pedagogies. 2016 VSA Compendium: Examining the Intersection of Arts and Special ­Education. Washington, DC: Kennedy Center.

211

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry Anderson, A., & Loughlin, S. M. (2014). The influence of classroom drama on English learners’ academic language use during English language arts lessons. Bilingual Research Journal, 37(3), 263–286. Anderson, A., Loughlin, S., & Berry, K. A. (2013, April). The influence of dramatic arts integration on teacher and student language in language arts contexts. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA. Anderson, F. E. (1975). Mainstreaming art as well as children. Art Education, 28(8), 26–27. Andrus, L. (1994). Art education: An equalizing force in the inclusion setting. In Inclusion: Buzzword or hope for the future [Monograph]. Albany, NY: New York State Council of Educational Assessment. Aprill, A. (2010). Direct instruction vs. arts integration: A false dichotomy. Teaching Artist Journal, 8(1), 6–15. Arts Education Partnership. (1999). Gaining the arts advantage: Lessons from school districts that value arts ­education. Washington, DC: Author. Arts Education Partnership. (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington, DC: Author. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215. Berry, K. A. (2015). The use of tableau to increase the on-task behavior of students with language-based learning ­disabilities in inclusive language arts settings: An initial study. Available at: pqdtopen.proquest.com/ Bosch, C., & Anderson, A. (2015). Process drama and social studies. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 103–132). New York, NY: Routledge. Bresler, L. (1995). The subservient, co-equal, affective, and social integration styles and their implications for the arts. Arts Education Policy Review, 96(5), 31–37. Bresler, L. (1997). General issues across sites: The role of the arts in unifying high school curriculum. A report for the College Board/Getty Center for the Arts. Bresler, L. (2001). Agenda for arts education research: Emerging issues and directions. In M. McCarthy (Ed.), Enlightened advocacy: Implications for research for arts education policy and practice (pp. 43–71). College Park, MD: University of Maryland. Brownell, M. D. (2002). Musically adapted social stories to modify behaviors in students with autism: Four case studies. Journal of Music Therapy, 39(2), 117–144. Burnaford, G., Aprill, A., Weiss, C., & Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education (Eds.). (2001). Renaissance in the classroom: Arts integration and meaning ful learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Burnaford, G., Brown, S., Doherty, J., & McLaughlin, H. J. (2007). Arts integration frameworks, research, and practice: A literature review. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. Carnahan, C., Basham, J., & Musti-Rao, S. (2009a). A low technology strategy for increasing engagement of students with autism and significant learning needs. Exceptionality, 17(2), 76-87. Carnahan, C., Musti-Rao, S., & Bailey, J. (2009b). Promoting active engagement in small group learning experiences for students with autism and significant learning needs. Education & Treatment of Children, 32(1), 37-61. Catterall, J. S., & Waldorf, L. (1999). Chicago Arts Partnerships in Education: Summary evaluation. In E. B. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning (pp. 47–62). Washington, DC: The Arts Education Partnership. Center for Applied Special Technology. (2010). Research and development in universal design for learning. ­Retrieved from www.cast.org/research/index.htm Chappell, S. V., & Faltis, C. J. (Eds.) (2013). The arts and emergent bilingual youth. New York, NY: Routledge. Clements, C. B., & Clements, R. D. (1984). Art and mainstreaming: Art instruction for exceptional children in regular classes. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas. Collins, E. C., & Chandler, S. (1993). Beyond art as product: Using an artistic perspective to understand classroom life. Theory into Practice, 32(4), 199–203. Colwell, C. M., & Murlless, K. D. (2002). Music activities (singing vs. chanting) as a vehicle for reading accuracy of children with learning disabilities: A pilot study. Music Therapy Perspectives, 20(1), 13–19. Compton, D. L., Miller, A. C., Elleman, A. M., & Steacy, L. M. (2014). Have we forsaken reading theory in the name of “quick fix” interventions for children with reading disability? Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 55–73. Cook, B. G., Simpson-Steele, J., & Cook, L. (2018). Using evidence-based practice in teaching students with and at risk for developing disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 72–90). New York, NY: Routledge. Corbett, B. A., Gunther, J. R., Comins, D., Price, J., Ryan, N., Simon, D., … Rios, T. (2011). Brief report: Theatre as therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 41(4), 505–511.

212

Arts Integration and Special Education Corbett, B. A., Swain, D. M., Coke, C., Simon, D., Newsom, C., Houchins-Juarez, N., … Song, Y. (2014). Improvement in social deficits in autism spectrum disorders using a theatre-based, peer-mediated ­intervention. Autism Research, 7(1), 4–16. Corbett, B. A., Key, A. P., Qualls, L., Fecteau, S., Newsom, C., Coke, C., & Yoder, P. (2015). Improvement in social competence using a randomized trial of a theatre intervention for children with autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(2), 658–672. 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s10803-015-2600-9 Corcoran, C. A. & Davis, A. (2005). A study of the effects of readers’ theater on second and third grade special education students’ fluency growth. Reading Improvement, 42(2), 105–111. Cornett, C. E. (2007). Creating meaning through literature and the arts: An integration resource for classroom teachers (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. Davis, R., & Anderson, A. (2015). Dance/movement arts integration and mathematics. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 133–151. New York, NY: Routledge. De Mers, C, Tincani, M., Van Norman, R., & Higgins, K. (2009). Effects of music therapy on young ­children's challenging behaviors: A case study. Music Therapy Perspectives, 27(2), 88–96. ­ sychology Press. Dweck, C. (1999). Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development. Philadelphia, PA: P Eisner, E. W. (1998). Does experience in the arts boost academic achievement? Art Education, 51(1), 7–15. Ferrell, M. (2012). A qualitative study of the effect of background music in the classroom on the maladaptive behaviors of students with multiple disabilities. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation & Theses. (1522023). Gerber, B. L. (2011). Art education and special education: A promising partnership. NAEA Lowenfeld Lecture. Retrieved from: www.arteducators.org/research/articles/104-lowenfeld-lectures Gerber, B. L., & Guay, D. M. (Eds.). (2006). Reaching and teaching students with special needs through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Gerber, B. L., & Kellman, J. (Eds.). (2010). Understanding students with autism through art. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Guli, L. A., Semrud-Clikeman, M., Lerner, M. D., & Britton, N. (2013). Social Competence Intervention Program (SCIP): A pilot study of a creative drama program for youth with social difficulties. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 40(1), 37-44. doi:10.1016/j.aip.2012.09.002 Harbin, S. G. (2012). The effects of physical activity on engagement in young children with autism. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation & Theses. (1035151523). Henley, D. R. (1992). Exceptional children, exceptional art: Teaching art to special needs. Worcester, MA: Davis. Hetland, L., Winner, E., Veenema, S., & Sheridan, K. (2007). Studio thinking: The real benefits of visual arts education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press. Horner, R. H., Carr, E. G., Halle, J., & McGee, G. (2005). The use of single-subject research to identify evidence-based practice in special education. Exceptional Children, 71, 165–179. Hourigan, R. M. (2014). Intersections between school reform, the arts, and special education: The children left behind. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 35–38. Hubbard, H. J. (2009). Readers theater: A means to improving the reading fluency rates of second and third grade students with learning disabilities. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertation & Theses. (1463423). Keifer-Boyd, K., & Kraft, L. M. (2003). Inclusion policy in practice. Art Education: The Journal of the National Art Education Association, 56(6), 46–53. Kempe, A., & Tissot, C. (2012). The use of drama to teach social skills in a special school setting for students with autism. Support for Learning, 27(3), 97–102. Lee, B. K., Patall, E., Cawthon, S. & Steingut, R. (2015). The effect of drama-based pedagogy on PreK-16 outcomes: A meta-analysis of the research from 1985–2012. Review of Educational Research, 85(1), 3–49. Legutko, R. S., & Trissler, T. T. (2012). The effects of background music on learning disabled elementary school students’ performance in writing. Current Issues In Education, 15(1), 1-10. Lewis, M., & Feng, J. (2014). Online submission: The effect of readers’ theatre on the reading ability of elementary special education students. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED557788.pdf Loughlin, S. M., & Alexander, P. A. (2012). Explicating and exemplifying empiricist and cognitivist paradigms in the study of human learning. In L. L’Abate (Ed.), The role of paradigms in model construction (pp. 273–296). London, UK: Springer-Verlag. Loughlin, S. M., & Anderson, A. (2015). Arts integration research and practice yesterday and today: Lessons learned. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 5–30). New York, NY: Routledge. Loughlin, S., Anderson, A., & Berry, K. A. (2013, April). Reading between the lines: Classroom discourse and academic rigor in traditional and drama-integrated language arts. Paper presented at the American Education Research Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA. Lowenfeld, V. (1957). Creative and mental growth (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Macmillan.

213

Alida Anderson and Katherine A. Berry Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 39–43. Mason, C. Y., Steedly, K. M., & Thormann, M. S. (2008). Impact of arts integration on voice, choice, and access. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(1), 36–46. McCurrach, I., & Darnley, B. (1999). Special talents, special needs: Drama for people with learning disabilities. ­Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Millis, K., & Larson, M. (2008). Applying the construction-integration framework to aesthetic responses to representational artworks. Discourse Processes, 45(3), 263–287. Munsell, S. E., & Bryant Davis, K. E. (2015). Dance and special education. Preventing School Failure: ­Alternative Education for Children and Youth, 59(3), 129–133. Nagy, K., & Anderson, A. (2015). Film arts integration and literature study: Influences on engagement. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 81–102). New York, NY: Routledge. President’s Committee on the Arts and Humanities. (2011). Reinvesting in arts education: Winning America’s future through creative schools. Retrieved from www.pcah.gov Perin, D. (2011). Facilitating student learning through contextualization: A review of the evidence. ­Community College Review, 39(3), 268–295. Register, D., Darrow, A., Standley, J., & Swedberg, O. (2007). The use of music to enhance reading skills of second grade students and students with reading disabilities. Journal of Music Therapy, 44(1), 23–37. Rinne, L., Gregory, E., Yarmolinskaya, J., & Hardiman, M. (2011). Why arts integration improves l­ong-term retention of content. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(2), 89–96. Seidel, S. (1999). “Stand and unfold yourself ”: A monograph on the Shakespeare & Company Research Study. In E. B. Fiske (Ed.), Champions of change: The impact of the arts on learning (pp. 79–90). Washington, DC: The Arts Education Partnership. Sheridan, K. M. (2011). Envision and observe: Using the Studio Thinking Framework for learning and teaching in digital arts. Mind, Brain, and Education, 5(1), 19–26. Silverstein, L. B., & Layne, S. (2010). Defining arts integration. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy ­Center for the Performing Arts. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org//education/partners/ defining_arts_integration.pdf Smith, J., & Herring, J. (1996). Literature alive: Connecting to story through arts. Reading Horizons, 37(2), 102–115. Smith, S. L. (1991). Succeeding against the odds: How the learning disabled can realize their promise. New York, NY: Tarcher. Smith, S. L. (2000). The power of the arts: Teaching academic skills to the non-traditional learner through the arts. Baltimore, MD: Brookes. Smith, S. L. (2001). Power of the arts: Creative strategies for teaching exceptional learners. Baltimore, MD: Brookes. Solso, R. L. (1999). Cognition and the visual arts. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Spackman, M. P., Fujiki, M., Brinton, B., Nelson, D., & Allen, J. (2005). The ability of children with language impairment to recognize emotion conveyed by facial expression and music. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26(3), 131–143. Stake, R., Bresler, L., & Mabry, L. (1991). Custom and cherishing: Arts education in the US. Urbana, IL: Council for Research in Music Education, University of Illinois. Suhrheinrich, J. (2011, March). Examining the effectiveness of a train-the-trainer model: Training teachers to use pivotal response training. Paper presented at the Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness. ­Washington, DC. Tishman, S., & Palmer, P. (2006). Artful thinking: Stronger thinking and learning through the power of art. Final report to Traverse City Public Schools. Cambridge, MA: Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education. Ukrainetz, T. A. (2006). Contextualized language intervention. Eau Claire, WI: Thinking Publications. VSA. (2008). The contours of inclusion: Frameworks and tools for evaluating arts in education. Washington, DC: The Kennedy Center. Retrieved from www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/vsa_research.cfm VSA. (2014). The international organization on arts and disability: VSA research. Washington, DC: The Kennedy Center. Retrieved from www.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/vsa_research.cfm Welsh, M., Pennington, B., & Groisser, D. (1991). A normative-developmental study of executive function: A window on prefrontal function in children. Developmental Neuropsychology, 7(2), 131–149. What Works Clearinghouse. (2014). Procedures and standards handbook, version 3.0. Retrieved from http://ies. ed.gov/ncee/wwc/Docs/referenceresources/wwc_procedures_v3_0_standards_handbook.pdf Whittaker, J. K. (2005). Readers’ Theatre: Effects on reading performance, attention and perspectives of students with reading disabilities. Retrieved from Proquest Dissertations & Theses. (3200190).

214

Arts Integration and Special Education Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81. Winner, E. (1996). Commentary: What drawings by atypical populations can tell us. Visual Arts Research, 22(2), 90–95. Winner, E., & Hetland, L. (2001). Research in arts education: Directions for the future. In E. Winner & L. Hetland (Eds.), Beyond the soundbite: What the research actually shows about arts education and academic outcomes (pp. 143–148). Los Angeles, CA: J. Paul Getty Trust. Zhbanova, K., Rule, A., Montgomery, S., & Nielsen, L. (2010). Defining the difference: Comparing ­integrated and traditional single-subject lessons. Early Childhood Education Journal, 38(4), 251–258. Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. H. (2001). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: Theoretical perspectives (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

215

14 Arts in the Therapeutic Process Art Therapy, Dance/Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy in Schools Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

Worldwide, the arts have been used throughout history as an approach to healing, improved well-being, and as an important aspect of life. In the United States, the creative arts have been used as therapeutic modalities in medical and mental health treatment facilities as well as schools since the early 1900s, and this practice continues today on a much broader basis (Malchiodi, 2005c). This chapter addresses Art Therapy, Dance/Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy in schools to promote positive outcomes for students who have exceptional learning needs.

Art Therapy Students who have difficulty learning due to emotional, physical, social, or intellectual differences may be candidates for Art Therapy in a school setting. In particular, Art Therapy can be beneficial in supporting students who struggle with emotional issues and trauma. Unconscious material can manifest through art-making, giving the Art Therapist a view of the student’s internal struggles, which may affect learning. Art Therapists can provide individualized therapeutic experiences to help students move beyond their learning barriers, become more successful in school, and experience increased self-awareness and personal growth (Albert, 2010; Glassman & Prasad, 2013; Loesl, 2010, Malchiodi, 2005a).

Defining Art Therapy The American Art Therapy Association (AATA) is the professional organization for art therapists in the US. This membership and advocacy organization provides standards for the profession and develops and promotes knowledge about the benefits of Art Therapy. A central belief of AATA is that the creative engagement and process involved in the making of art can enhance well-being. According to AATA (2016), Art Therapy is a mental health profession in which credentialed Art Therapists work with individuals to explore feelings and develop self-awareness through the use of art media and creativity. Examples of art media are paints; clay; drawing utensils, such as pencils or crayons; paper; and objects in the environment. Art Therapists facilitate clients’

216

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

exploration and enhancement of their emotional and physical well-beings through art-making and reflection. This process and the resulting artworks are used to help clients improve functioning and personal well-being by building self-awareness, developing social skills, reducing anxiety, improving reality orientation, managing behaviors, and dealing with emotional conflicts. Art Therapy is practiced with individuals of all ages in varied settings, including medical, mental health, rehabilitation, wellness, educational, and community programs. Art Therapists have knowledge and skills in visual arts, such as drawing, painting, and sculpture; an understanding of the creative process; and a background in human development and counseling theories and techniques. In the US, a master’s degree in Art T ­ herapy from an approved graduate program is required for entry-level practice. Three levels of Art Therapy credentials are currently granted, including Registered (ATR) upon completion of graduate requirements in Art Therapy, Board Certified (ATR-BC) for those ATRs who have passed a national exam and maintain continuing education, and Certified Supervisor C ­ redential (ATCS) for Art Therapists who demonstrate supervisory qualifications. Professional Art ­T herapy associations and educational programs have been developed in over 40 countries worldwide (Stoll, 2005).

Development of Art Therapy in Schools The profession of Art Therapy in the US has roots in the 1960s, when early articles and books were published and the first clinical programs were developed to offer these services (McNiff, 1997). Medicine and psychiatry were the areas of primary focus in the early decades of the ­profession, and children accessed Art Therapy services through therapeutic programs in medical and rehabilitation facilities. In the 1970s, McNiff and Gallas (1976) called for an integration of Art Therapy and education, and envisioned classroom and special education teachers using Art Therapy with children in their classes. Decades later, in the late 1990s, although several schools offered Art Therapy for students, the programs were not integrated closely with special education (McNiff, 1997).

Models of Art Therapy in Schools Art educators and Art Therapists can work collaboratively in schools, each focusing on different goals for their students. The art educator typically works with students to help them understand the elements of art and assist them in utilizing various media to create works of art. Through these artworks, students demonstrate understanding of the artistic elements, express themselves creatively, and produce finished products to be displayed. Art Therapists work with individual students or small groups of students to address identified needs related primarily to social and emotional functioning, among others. The Art Therapist might provide services based on the Individualized Education Program (IEP) goals of the student, or the Art Therapist might be asked to work with students with specific needs, such as those experiencing crisis or trauma (Loesl, 2010). Art Therapists are trained to assess students’ needs, develop goals and treatment interventions to coincide with the educational programs, and interpret students’ art processes and products beyond the aesthetic and creative values of the pieces. Verbal and nonverbal behaviors and intent are ­identified to help the students gain increased self-awareness and insight. Art Therapists may have varied roles in schools, depending on the program needs, certification and licensure issues, and therapist experience. Many Art Therapists in schools work as clinical Art Therapists to address specific student needs. The primary role for these Art Therapists is to use art in psychotherapy to help identify and assist students who manifest various learning challenges and to help them overcome these challenges (Bush, 1997; Glassman & Prasad, 2013).

217

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

Model Program—Miami Dade County Public Schools An exemplary school-based Art Therapy program can be found in the Miami-Dade County ­P ublic Schools (M-DCPS) in Miami, FL. This program was established as a pilot program during the 1979–1980 school year, and it continues today as a strong and effective program, serving the needs of students who have emotional and behavioral disorders throughout the district. ­Originally, this program was established to serve students with special needs who were not successful in the art classroom. Art Therapists provided direct service to students as well as professional development to art teachers and other school personnel and parents, all in an effort to support the students’ educational progress. The program transitioned from an art education program to the current Clinical Art Therapy Program with a treatment team of 11 full-time Art Therapists (personal communication, Craig Siegel, June 27, 2016). The Clinical Art Therapy Program at M-DCPS serves students with severe emotional and behavioral challenges to help them develop coping skills that will enhance their abilities to learn in school. Art Therapy and counseling are listed on the students’ IEPs as related services that are necessary for them to make educational progress. As a related service, Art Therapy can be considered an essential component of the students’ special educational experiences. More information is available about the development of the M-DCPS Art Therapy Program (Bush, 1997; Isis, Bush, Siegel, & Ventura, 2010). Schlosnagle, McBean, Cutlip, Panzironi, and Jarmolowicz (2014) also provide structured information about evaluating a fine arts program utilizing Art Therapy and other arts related experiences.

Art Therapy Research and Evidence-Based Practice Art Therapy research has identified many positive outcomes for people with varied challenges across the age span. Until recently, much of the research consisted of case studies or studies with a very small number of participants. The following review of literature addresses some of the Art Therapy research with children published over the past several decades, including three research reviews published in 2000, 2010, and 2014.

Students with Emotional and Behavioral Issues Art Therapy can provide an active approach for learning, which is especially beneficial for students who have attention deficit disorder and other emotional and behavioral issues (Safran, 2003). Much of the Art Therapy research with children focuses on mental health needs to reduce emotional and behavioral problems, increase self-confidence, build trusting relationships, and improve pro-social behaviors. These are the primary areas of focus for many art therapists working in schools. The following section identifies several research studies that address the social and ­emotional skills necessary for students to benefit from educational services. This body of research utilized a broad range of Art Therapy interventions, such as drawing, clay sculpture, group projects, and mandalas in 1:1, small-group, and large-group settings. Some articles described the specific art media used in the study, while others simply mentioned that Art Therapy interventions were used to address the research questions. Published Art Therapy research consists primarily of clinical research projects with varied ­populations in heterogeneous settings; however, they all focus on the mental health needs of students. Art Therapy research with school-aged children is more prevalent after about 2008, ­a lthough there are some studies published prior to 2000. In one of the earlier studies, Rosal (1993) found Art Therapy to be an effective intervention in aiding students with behavior disorders to

218

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

gain better self-control and possibly help students alter their perceptions of loci of c­ ontrol. ­Mandala exercises were found to help students with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) ­improve behaviors, allowing for improved decision-making, task completion, and ­interest in personal aesthetics (Smitheman-Brown & Church, 1996). Group Art Therapy has been shown to be effective in supporting students’ emotional, behavioral, and learning needs. The Art Room is an Art Therapy group intervention program for students identified as needing emotional and behavioral support. According to teacher reports, students had significant reduction in emotional and behavioral problems and improvement in mood ­following this intervention (Cortina & Fazel, 2015). Group Art Therapy with breath meditation was found to be effective in improving well-being, self-reflection, and self-growth among adolescents who were depressed and anxious in Korea (Kim, Kim, & Ki, 2014). Group Art T ­ herapy also has helped adolescents with personality disorders build relationships and combat isolation (Gatta, Gallo, & Vianello, 2014). In another group intervention, middle school students were involved in an Art Therapy classroom project called Circle Justice. This project provided opportunities for conflict resolution by creating a culture of change through problem-solving, group discussion, and art-based reflection (Gibbons, 2010). In another study with the same age group, Art Therapy was found to be ­beneficial for middle school students as they transitioned to high school. This group project helped students to increase coping behaviors and decrease disruptive behaviors (Spier, 2010). Art Therapy was also found to contribute to the social and emotional skills of students with specific learning disabilities (Freilich & Shechtman, 2010).

Youth At Risk for School Problems Another research area in Art Therapy focuses on the needs of youth at risk for school problems who have low socioeconomic statuses (SES). Projects have been developed to help these students gain resilience and improve school retention. In a pilot study, an Art Therapy program was found to help reduce dropout rates, improve school success, and improve students’ attitudes toward their schools and selves (Rosal, McCulloch-Vislisel, & Neece, 1997). In another study, students’ attitudes and psychological adjustment were positively affected by an arts-based school intervention program, which was developed to empower at-risk students through self-expression and ­community-building (Wallace-DiGarbo & Hill, 2006). In a more recent evaluation, students who were at risk engaged in Art Therapy Connection, a yearlong school program for inner-city youth. This program focused on developing group ­cohesion, identity, and cooperation, and resulted in improvements in school attendance and graduation rates among participants (Sutherland, Waldman, & Collins, 2010). In a different study, p­ articipation in clay-based Art Therapy groups produced positive effects on ego resilience of at-risk students with low SES. Positive outcomes were attributed to the process of working with the clay and the subsequent art product produced by the students ( Jang & Choi, 2012). Other programs attempted to integrate art with specific counseling interventions. For example, elementary-aged students who were at risk for school problems participated in a 14-week program that combined Art Therapy with Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and Dialectical Behavior Therapy. As a result of this program, students’ resilience and social and emotional functioning improved, which assisted with their ­future school success (Sitzer & Stockwell, 2015). Students who are immigrants and refugees may manifest emotional issues that negatively affect school performance. In two studies with students from other countries, Art Therapy was found to be beneficial in increasing self-esteem and a sense of empowerment as well as in decreasing internalizing and externalizing behaviors (Lee, 2013; Rousseau, Drapeau, Lacroix, Bagilishya, & Heusch, 2005).

219

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

Students with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) Art Therapy can be part of a multidisciplinary approach for assisting students with ASD with the development and generalization of skills promoting social and educational learning. Engagement in art experiences can also provide a platform for developing and practicing meaningful social relationships with peers and family members (Gabriels, 2003). Research studies focusing on Art Therapy with students with ASD may increase as the number of students with ASD increases. In a case study of six-year-old boy with ASD, Art Therapy was found to enhance his development and ability to relate to others (Emery, 2004). Similarly, an antecedent art intervention prior to a group activity was shown to decrease off-task behavior in a three-year-old with ASD (Kuo & Plavnick, 2015). Researchers used an Art Therapy intervention called Build a Face (BAF) to assist students with ASD with emotional recognition by viewing and manipulating facial features on a three-dimensional figure. Although not statistically significant, students with ASD in the treatment group had more gains on emotional recognition after one BAF session than those in the control group (Richard, More, & Joy, 2015). Schweizer, Knorth, and Spreen (2014) conducted a systematic review of Art Therapy research with children diagnosed with ASD. Most articles reviewed in this analysis were clinical case ­descriptions and case studies. Results indicated that Art Therapy may assist with social communication problems and restrictive behavior patterns and may contribute to improving the self-images, flexibility, and communication skills of students. Further empirical research was recommended by the authors to better document these outcomes.

Research Reviews Three comprehensive research reviews evaluated the benefits of Art Therapy and identified strengths and weaknesses in the research base. Reynolds, Nabors, and Quinlan (2000) developed the first review of published empirical research to determine the effectiveness of Art Therapy. The authors reviewed 17 studies with three types of research designs (single group with no control group, controlled clinical trial, and randomized controlled clinical trial) and found that Art Therapy produced positive outcomes for the specified behaviors. Although effective, Art Therapy was not shown to be more effective than standard treatments. Participants in the studies included in this review included children and adults in various settings. Heterogeneity of research participants, lack of strong research design, and small sample sizes were noted as problems that prevented generalizability of the findings. Slayton, D’Archer, and Kaplan (2010) conducted a follow-up review of research in 2010. The authors identified 35 studies from 1999 to 2007 that featured Art Therapy as the primary intervention. A variety of treatment settings, participant ages, and symptom outcomes were represented in the research articles. Art Therapy as a treatment modality was shown to significantly improve outcomes in a small body of studies. The authors noted that there continues to be a tendency to use anecdotal clinical reports to document effectiveness, a lack of standardized reporting methods, and a limited use of control groups in the research. Maujean, Pepping, and Kendall (2014) conducted the most recent follow-up research review in 2014. The authors identified eight randomized controlled trials conducted with adults from 2008 to 2013. Populations addressed included mental health, medical/cancer, prison, healthy aging and Alzheimer’s Disease, veterans, and people with developmental disabilities. This review indicated that Art Therapy can be effective in addressing symptoms in many populations, with the exception of individuals with schizophrenia, where no evidence of benefit was noted in the one study reviewed. As with the previous reviews of research, the authors noted that further randomized controlled studies are needed to generalize research findings to specific populations.

220

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

Dance/Movement Therapy Dance/Movement Therapy is based on the idea that body, mind, and spirit need to be working in tandem for an individual to develop healthy relationships with the self and others. This is an action-oriented, creative, and nonverbal approach that can facilitate and encourage new behaviors and insights. Dance/Movement Therapy can help a person express emotions, release anxiety, and integrate mind and body functioning.

Defining Dance/Movement Therapy According to the American Dance Therapy Association (ADTA), “Dance/Movement Therapy is the psychotherapeutic use of movement to promote emotional, social, cognitive, and physical integration of the individual” (ADTA, 2016, p. 1). The focus of Dance/Movement Therapy is on movement behavior and how that behavior emerges in the therapeutic relationship. Individual and group sessions focus on expressive and communicative behaviors as well as adaptive behaviors. Body movement is at the center of the approach and is used for assessment and as the primary intervention. Dance/Movement Therapy is accessible for individuals of all ages with medical, psychological, social, physical, and developmental issues (ADTA, 2016). Individuals interested in becoming a Dance/Movement Therapist should have a background in dance/movement and physiology to help them understand the basics of how the body responds through movement. Dance/Movement Therapists earn credentials at the graduate level, with two levels of certification. The Registered Dance/Movement Therapist (R-DMT) credential is awarded upon completion of the ADTA graduate-level requirements. The R-DMT is the ­entry-level professional credential and represents a basic level of competence as a Dance/­Movement Therapist. The Board Certified Dance/Movement Therapist (BC-DMT) is the next level of credential, attained with additional experience and other requirements. This higher-level credential signifies the individual’s competence at providing training and supervision (ADTA, 2016). Dance/Movement Therapists work with children in schools, both in general education and special education. The purpose of the therapy is to provide support for the acquisition, development, and generalization of skills necessary for educational engagement. In addition to focusing on improved emotional expression, Dance/Movement Therapists use interventions to work on skills important for educational success, such as focus and sustaining attention, impulse control, and awareness of self and others. Techniques used in this approach include mirroring, improvised movement, structured dance, expressive movement, and role-playing experiences. By ­observing the child’s movement and implementing movement interventions, the Dance/­Movement ­Therapist can help the child expand communication skills by moving from nonverbal to verbal modes of dialogue. This approach can support the development of self-awareness, coping skills, relationships, and self-expression (ADTA, 2016).

Development of Dance/Movement Therapy Dance/Movement Therapy has roots in the ancient use of dance in healing rituals. Pioneers in the field built upon the belief that dance is an outlet for emotional expression that extends across cultures. They also recognized that dance could build community while creating opportunities for creativity and spontaneity. Some of the founders of Dance/Movement Therapy realized that individuals gained purpose and meaning from taking dance classes, even if they had no interest in being performers. Students found that after dance class, they had elevated moods and increased feelings of self-worth. In 1942, Marian Chase was invited to bring dance to a psychiatric hospital in Washington, D.C. to help patients improve communication, self-expression, and social skills.

221

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

Over time, she was able to support even the most isolated patients through movement. Chase is one of the pioneers of Dance/Movement Therapy and is credited with developing one of the major theoretical orientations within the field: the Chase Approach. The therapist and client use rhythmic movement and mirroring, or attunement, as a way to establish nonverbal relationships (Loman, 2005). In this approach, mirroring is used to make contact and establish a trusting ­relationship with an individual, then join together in movement. Another concept is called ­empathetic attunement, which involves a collaborative kinesthetic harmony between movers. This experience requires an interchange of felt muscle tension between individuals, which can be experienced through visual engagement or actual touch. The therapist can reflect back the initial amount of tension experienced and can then move the matched tension into a less intense pattern of movement. Chance’s approach is considered fundamental to the practice of Dance/­Movement Therapy, and many current Dance/Movement Therapists continue to study and practice the Chase Approach. This approach and others promote increased self-awareness via various movement ­experiences within a relationship with the Dance/Movement Therapist (Malchiodi, 2005b). Dance/Movement Therapy can be used successfully with children because it uses nonverbal interventions and body movements as the foundation for the therapeutic intervention. Body movement is a natural element in the developing child, and the therapist can use this innate skill to create in vivo interactions, dialogues, and relationships. Children can process traumatic ­experiences through movement, and they can build safe, trusting, and predictable relationships to support their development and functioning (Loman, 2005).

Dance/Movement Therapy Research and Evidence-Based Practice Dance/Movement Therapy is a psychotherapeutic use of various movement techniques and ­theoretical approaches to promote emotional well-being for individuals of all ages. The following research review highlights the use of Dance/Movement Therapy with individuals who experience trauma, depression, or have ASD. All of these issues can affect a child’s educational progress and success in school. Although this research was not done exclusively with children, outcomes from these studies can be used to help describe the effectiveness of Dance/Movement Therapy in practice.

Individuals Suffering from Trauma and Depression Dance/Movement Therapy has been used extensively to support individuals who have ­experienced trauma. The findings from nine qualitative studies were analyzed in a recent meta-synthesis to determine overall themes for use in providing these individuals with future treatment applications (Levine & Land, 2016). Four themes emerged and were explored by the researchers, regarding (a) forming connections between mind and body, (b) increasing mobility/range of motion, (c) creating healthy physical relationships, and (d) creating new relationships with body movement. These four themes may form the basis for future Dance/Movement Therapy treatment of individuals who have experienced trauma (Levine & Land, 2016). Dance/Movement Therapy is used in clinical settings to help individuals who experience ­depression to express emotion and connect with themselves and others. This nonverbal therapeutic approach can be useful for those who find it difficult to express their thoughts and feelings ­verbally, including individuals who are from different cultures or those who have limited cognitive abilities. A Cochrane Review examined the effects of Dance/Movement Therapy for individuals with depression and compared the effectiveness of various Dance/Movement Therapy approaches. This review found no evidence for or against the use of Dance/Movement Therapy with people with depression. Evidence suggested a positive trend for adults with depression, but Dance/Movement

222

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

Therapy was found to be no more effective than standard care for adolescents with depression. A positive effect for improved social functioning was found in one study. Researchers suggested that larger studies with more rigorous methodological quality are needed to thoroughly assess the effectiveness of Dance/Movement Therapy for individuals with depression (Meekums, Karkou, & Nelson, 2015).

Students with ASD The number of students with ASD continues to increase, and professionals look for effective interventions to support the needs of these students. In addition to social and communication deficits, children with ASD frequently have motor and coordination challenges. Martin (2014) created a theoretical framework, focusing on body awareness, motor coordination, rhythm, and timing when working with young children with ASD. This framework addresses the combination of motor functioning and social and communication functioning to build important developmental skills in young children. This theoretical approach is divided into four phases, including (a) ­establishing safety and regulation, (b) building connection and encouraging engagement, (c) body awareness and coordination, and (d) rhythm and timing. Within each phase, the author provides some specific examples of Dance/Movement Therapy interventions to enhance students’ development and educational success. In a feasibility study with young adults with ASD, body awareness, self-other awareness, social skills, and psychological well-being were improved through the Dance/Movement Therapy technique of mirroring in movement. The participants demonstrated more playful interactions with others and noted feeling more relaxed and comfortable at the end of therapy sessions. In the article reporting these findings, the authors included the mirroring taxonomy they used in the study, giving a clear idea of the techniques they employed (Kock, Mehl, Sobanski, Sieber, & Fuchs, 2015). A study that combined Music Therapy interventions with Dance/Movement Therapy interventions for young adults with ASD also showed preliminary positive evidence for improved behaviors. The project consisted of musical activities, such as singing, instrument play, and use of rhythms, along with bodywork through contact and movements. The joint Music Therapy and Dance/Movement Therapy sessions were found to stimulate both physical and psychological well-being, and the participants demonstrated improved self-control, imitation skills, and emotional expression (Mateos-Moreno & Atencia-Doña, 2013).

Music Therapy Music experiences can be challenging, flexible, and enjoyable for students of all ages. ­Participation in music may help students increase focus of attention and can serve as a motivating tool to ­support increased engagement in educational endeavors. Music is ever present in our society, and we can respond to music through making music with others, creating music, listening to music, and moving to music. Music education is present in most schools across the US, with opportunities for learning about music and engaging in music-making experiences. Music Therapy services can be provided to students with special learning needs to enhance their educational progress and improve learning outcomes.

Defining Music Therapy Music Therapy is the use of music to achieve non-music goals. According to the American Music Therapy Association (AMTA), “music therapy is the clinical and evidence-based use of music interventions to accomplish individualized goals within a therapeutic relationship by a credentialed

223

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

professional who has completed an approved music therapy program” (AMTA, 2016, p. 1). Music Therapy interventions may be designed to meet a variety of goals, including decreasing stress, alleviating pain, enhancing memory, improving communication skills, expressing feelings, ­improving social skills, improving academic skills, improving behaviors, and improving physical well-being. Music Therapists work with individuals of all ages who have medical issues, mental illnesses, physical disabilities, and neurological impairments. Music Therapists work in hospitals, mental health programs, schools, community programs, nursing homes, hospices, and other programs that are focused on improving the quality of life for the population served. Music Therapy interventions may involve singing, playing various instruments, listening to music, composing and improvising music, and moving to music. All genres of music can be used, depending on the needs and preferences of the individual receiving services. Individuals interested in becoming a Music Therapist must have a strong background in music performance as well as good understanding of psychology, development, health issues, and aging. National board certification as a Music Therapist is attained through the Certification Board for Music Therapy (CBMT). A Board-Certified Music Therapist (MT-BC) has successfully ­completed an academic and clinical training program approved by the AMTA and has successfully completed a written objective exam, demonstrating current competency as a Music Therapist (CBMT, 2016). Entry level in Music Therapy is currently at the bachelor’s degree, although a large number of MT-BCs hold graduate degrees.

Development of Music Therapy The profession of Music Therapy in the US started in the early 1900s, with volunteer musicians’ seeking to improve patients’ physical and mental health in medical settings. Music programs were instituted in Veteran’s Hospitals to assist soldiers returning from World War I and World War II as they transitioned from the battlefield to the hospital. In 1950, the national organization was formed to focus on education and clinical training for individuals who wanted to become ­professional Music Therapists. Initially, services were provided in hospitals and psychiatric facilities, but as the profession grew and matured, the scope of practice for Music Therapists broadened to also include schools, nursing homes, wellness centers, community programs, and other medical and mental health programs (Davis & Gfeller, 2008). Currently, a large percentage of Music ­Therapists work with children in schools, hospitals, and community settings. Music education and Music Therapy are two distinct professions; however, there is potential for collaboration between the two disciplines to help students improve school outcomes. Music educators focus primarily on music learning goals related to developing music skills and learning about music. The National Association for Music Education (NAfME) developed standards for music education in schools that emphasize conceptual understanding and cultivate students’ ­abilities to perform, create, and respond to music (NAfME, 2016). These standards promote music literacy in all students. Music Therapists also use music, but they do not primarily focus on music learning. In a school setting, Music Therapy can be utilized to address students’ development in cognitive, social, communication, behavioral, emotional, and physical domains. Similarities and differences can be compared by looking at a student in a music education and a Music Therapy setting. A student identified as having a behavior disorder might participate in a music education class as well as Music Therapy each week. In the music education class, she could be using drumming to learn more about music in the African culture. The music lesson might focus on learning the basic drumming patterns, keeping a steady beat, composing rhythms, and fitting the parts of the ensemble together musically. In this music education setting, the primary instructional focus for the lesson is on learning about the music and developing music skills. In a Music Therapy session, this same student could be again involved in a percussion group

224

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

with peers; however, the goals of the session may be very different. Perhaps the student has difficulty interacting positively with peers and following directions. The Music Therapist might create ­interventions, using percussion experiences to promote positive peer interaction, leadership opportunities, sharing with and listening to others, following directions, and controlling impulses. On the surface, the music education and Music Therapy interventions may appear similar; however, the Music Therapist is focused on the non-music outcomes, and the music educator is ­focused on the music outcomes and music learning.

Models of Music Therapy in Schools Students with disabilities can access Music Therapy services in schools via two different service delivery models: Music Therapy as a related service and Music Therapy as a district-wide model (Adamek & Darrow 2010; Jellison, 2015). These two models differ in terms of how students access services, which students are eligible for services, and if services are mandated or provided as an educational enhancement by the school district.

Related Services Model In many school districts, Music Therapy is provided as a related service to students who receive special education. In order to have Music Therapy as a related service on the IEP, a student must have a Music Therapy eligibility assessment to determine if Music Therapy is educationally necessary for the student to make significant progress on IEP goals. The IEP team will ­request this assessment, which must be completed by a qualified Music Therapist (MT-BC). The Music Therapist will document and evaluate the student’s responses on IEP goal areas when Music Therapy strategies are used, compared to the student’s responses with non-music based interventions (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Brunk & Coleman, 2002, Ritter-Cantesanu, 2014). There are several possible recommendations, following a Music Therapy eligibility assessment. If Music Therapy is shown to provide considerable assistance for the student to make progress on IEP goals, direct Music Therapy services may be recommended. Other recommendations could be the provision of consultation services to support the student, combined direct services and consultation services, or no music therapy services, depending on the outcome of the assessment.

District-Wide Model Some districts provide Music Therapy services to students with disabilities as a comprehensive special education service to promote students’ educational gains. In this district-wide model, students from early childhood through high school might have Music Therapy services on a regular basis to enhance their learning needs. Music Therapists usually work with students in many different schools across the district, and services are usually structured in small group classroom settings. The Music Therapist develops goals and objectives based on students’ similar IEP goals, and then develops Music Therapy interventions to promote educational gains. Typical goals might be improving behavioral skills for students with challenging behaviors, improving readiness and academic skills for students at risk for school problems, and improving social and communication skills for students with ASD (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). The Music Therapist assesses ­students’ current levels of functioning related to the IEP goals and uses this information to plan and ­facilitate effective services. Students’ progress on IEP goals in Music Therapy can be ­documented in informal reports as well as for the annual IEP report, depending on the district guidelines for evaluation.

225

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

A Music Therapist working in a district-wide setting might have additional roles in the schools, such as consultant and collaborator to special educators or consultant to music educators. The Music Therapist might be called upon to assist the special education teacher in implementing m ­ usic in the classroom, especially for those students who respond exceptionally well to music. Music educators might need assistance in developing appropriate accommodations to promote a more successful, inclusive experience for students in the music classroom. The Music Therapist might also provide support for students with disabilities to help them access school or community performing music programs. The role of a Music Therapist working in this model may vary year to year, depending on the needs of the students and school milieu.

Music Therapy Research and Evidence-Based Practice Support Research studies investigating the effects of Music Therapy with students with disabilities date back several decades, with an increased focus on students with ASD over the past several years. Recommendations based on current research and clinical evidence are emerging to provide a solid foundation for the use of Music Therapy in school settings. The following research review supports the use of Music Therapy to promote social behaviors, communication, memory for ­academic materials, and attention to task. Because music is inherently motivating, it can be used to reinforce positive behaviors and encourage learning and practicing new skills.

Multiple Outcomes for Students In an early meta-analysis (Standley, 1996), music as reinforcement was found to be an effective tool for supporting the educational needs of students with disabilities. Music Therapy has been found to be a useful tool in enhancing literacy skills, word recognition, print concepts, and prewriting skills (Colwell, 1994; Register, 2001; Standley & Hughes, 1997). Verbal language and speech skills can also be enhanced through the use of Music Therapy interventions with students with disabilities. Music can be used as a prompt and a reinforcer to increase verbal responses in young children with communication deficits (Braithwaite & Sigafoos, 1998; Buday, 1995). Music Therapy is often used with students with emotional or behavioral disorders to help them express themselves and develop social skills. Group Music Therapy has been found to facilitate self-expression, encourage creativity, and improve mood in individuals with emotional, learning, behavior, and movement disorders (Krakouer, Houghton, Douglas, & West, 2001; Montello & Coons, 1998).

Students with ASD Many Music Therapists in schools work with students with ASD, either as a related service ­provider or through a district-wide program model. Music Therapy can be an effective treatment approach to promote social, behavioral, and communication skills with students with ASD and to assist with a variety of educational needs (Schwartzenberg, 2016; Simpson, Keen, & Lamb, 2013). Current research and clinical evidence are emerging to provide a strong foundation for the use of Music Therapy for students with ASD. A Cochrane Review (Geretsegger, Elefant, Mossler, & Gold, 2014) concluded that Music Therapy can be effective in increasing verbal and gestural communication skills with this population. In a meta-analysis, the therapeutic and educational outcomes of using Music Therapy for students with ASD trended in a positive direction (Whipple, 2004). Results suggest variations of effect size within the broad category of ASD, possibly reflecting the variability of the population; however, the overall outcomes were positive. The research literature demonstrates some of the areas where Music Therapy can help students achieve educational goals. Typical goals addressed in Music Therapy with students with ASD were

226

Arts in the Therapeutic Process

found to be in the areas of language/communication, behavioral/psychosocial, cognitive, musical, and motor skill development (Schwartzenberg, 2016). Respondents from a survey noted that skills attained in Music Therapy were generalized to different environments, and attainment of goals was typical within a year (Kaplan & Steele, 2005). Music-based interventions and songs have been shown to promote positive social behaviors in students with ASD. In a pilot study of three preschool-aged children with ASD, songs used for directives were found to be useful in engaging children and increasing social responsiveness and social behaviors. The researchers noted that these findings suggest that songs may provide a means for communication and scaffolding for the development of social skills (Paul et al., 2015). In other studies, music has been used to promote success in labeling tasks (Simpson et al., 2013) and joint attention tasks (Vaiouli, Grimmet & Ruich, 2015). Additionally, songs have been found to assist young students with ASD with language and social skills in the classroom and on the playground (Kern & Aldridge, 2006; Kern, Wolery, & Aldridge, 2007; Schwartzberg & Silverman, 2016). More Music Therapy research is needed to provide a strong foundation for evidence-based ­practice in schools.

Neurological Research and Creative Arts Therapies Neurological innovations, such as imaging techniques, are expanding our understanding of the complexity of how the brain functions during creative activities. Neuroscience research is beginning to reveal some of the mechanisms involved as the brain responds to creative or artistic experiences. A focus on neuroscience related to the arts is deepening our understanding of the relationship between arts experiences and neurological functioning. Neurological functioning can be stimulated through creative activities. There is some preliminary research in this area, and, with increased access to technology, this could be an area of burgeoning research in the future. Research indicates that artistic endeavors involve several regions of the brain as well as inter-region connections rather than just one area (Belkofer, Van Hecke, & Konopka, 2014; Kruk, Aravich, Deaver, & deBeus, 2014). Sensory experiences through the arts can be associated with the primary somatosensory c­ ortex, which is associated with touch and movement. The varied sensory, emotional, and cognitive aspects of the arts can encourage neurological integration for the individual. When a person is engaged in artistic experiences, they are required to integrate skills, such as planning and mindful problem-solving, with an emotional and social awareness, using verbal and nonverbal expression. These higher order cortical tasks support the possibility of emotional expression through physiological arousal, sensory engagement, and subjective experience, leading to intentional thoughts and actions (Benz, Sellaro, Hommel, & Colzato, 2016; Croom, 2011; Hass-Cohen, 2008; Jantzen, Large, & Magne, 2016; McGarry & Russo, 2011). Much more research in this area is needed to continue to identify the links between neurological functioning and creative activities that ­involve music, art, and dance/movement.

Future Needs for Creative Arts Therapies in Schools Advocacy for Art Therapy, Dance/Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy in the schools continues to be needed in order to make sure that students receive services that will benefit their educational progress. Administrators, teachers, and parents must be educated to understand the differences between art class, dance or physical education class, music class, and their related creative arts therapies. These creative arts therapies may look similar in the tools that they use, but they are very different in terms of focus and outcomes. Arts teachers and special educators should also be aware of the processes of referral to the various creative arts therapies that are available to

227

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow

their students. Through education, understanding, and advocacy, each student’s individual needs can be met (Salvador & Pasiali, 2016). Funding in special education is a difficult issue for most school districts. When the additional cost of adding a related service to the IEP for a student arises, some administrators will hesitate, saying that Art, Dance/Movement, and Music Therapy are not listed in the regulations for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). This issue has been addressed by the US ­Department of Education (2010) through a series of questions and answers related to implementing the IDEA. When asked if cultural or artistic services, such as Music Therapy, could be considered related services, the Department of Education defined related services as: transportation and such developmental, corrective, and other supportive services as are required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education. Related services can include artistic and cultural services that are therapeutic in nature, regardless of whether the IDEA or the Part B regulations identify the particular therapeutic service as a related service. The Department’s long-standing interpretation is that the list of related services in the IDEA and the Part B regulations is not exhaustive and may include other developmental, corrective, or supportive services (such as artistic and cultural programs, art, music, and dance therapy), if they are required to assist a child with a disability to benefit from special education in order for the child to receive FAPE [free appropriate public education]. As is true regarding consideration of any related service for a child with a disability under Part B of the IDEA, the members of the child’s IEP Team (which include the parents, school officials, and whenever appropriate, the child with a disability) must make individual determinations in light of each child’s unique abilities and needs about whether an artistic or cultural service such as music therapy is required to assist the child to benefit from special education. (US Department of Education, 2010, p. 25) Although the creative arts therapies are not specifically listed in the law as related services, this response reiterates that the list is not exhaustive, and other services, such as Art Therapy, Dance/ Movement Therapy, and Music Therapy, can be considered as related services if required by the student. Education and advocacy will continue to be needed to address this issue in the future. Additional research in all of the creative arts therapies is needed to systematically validate the benefits for students with special needs. Many of the current studies are case reports and small sample size studies with very few randomized controlled studies. Clinical research can be difficult to facilitate in schools; however, more research will provide a solid foundation for evidence-based practice, potentially increased access, and therapeutic opportunities for students.

References Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Albert, R. (2010). Being both: An integrated model of art therapy and alternative art education. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 90–95. American Art Therapy Association. (2016). What is art therapy? Retrieved from www.arttherapy.org/upload/ whatisarttherapy.pdf American Dance Therapy Association (ADTA). (2016). What is dance/movement therapy? Retrieved from https://adta.org/faqs/ American Music Therapy Association (AMTA). (2016). What is music therapy? Retrieved from www.­ musictherapy.org/ Belkofer, C., Van Hecke, A., & Konopka, L. (2014). Effects of drawing on alpha activity: A quantitative EEG study with implications for art therapy. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art T ­ herapy Association, 31(2), 61–68. doi:10.1080/07421656.2014.903821

228

Arts in the Therapeutic Process Benz, S., Sellaro, R., Hommel, B., & Colzato, L. (2016). Music makes the world go round: The impact of musical training on non-musical cognitive functions—A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 2023. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.02023 Braithwaite, M., & Sigafoos, J. (1998). Effects of social versus musical antecedents on communication responsiveness in five children with developmental delays. Journal of Music Therapy, 35, 88–104. Brunk, B., & Coleman, K. (2002). A special education music therapy assessment process. In B. Wilson (Ed.), Models of music therapy interventions in school settings (2nd ed.) (pp. 69–82). Siler Spring, MD: American Music Therapy Association. Buday, E. M. (1995). The effects of signed and spoken words taught with music on sign and speech imitation by children with autism. Journal of Music Therapy, 32, 189–202. Bush, J. (1997). Handbook of art therapy in schools. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Certification Board for Music Therapists (CBMT). (2016). CBMT definition fact sheet. Retrieved from http:// cbmt.org/fact-sheets/cbmt-definition-fact-sheet/ Colwell, C. (1994). Therapeutic applications of music in the whole language kindergarten. Journal of Music Therapy, 31, 238–247. Cortina, M., & Fazel, M. (2015). The art room: An evaluation of a targeted school-based group intervention for students with emotional and behavioral difficulties. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 42, 35–40. Croom, A. M. (2011). Music, neuroscience, and the psychology of well-being: A précis. Frontiers in ­Psychology, 2, 1–15. Davis, W., & Gfeller, K. (2008). Music therapy: Historical perspective. In W. Davis, K. Gfeller, & M. Thaut (Eds.), An introduction to music therapy: Theory and practice (3rd ed.) (pp. 17–39). Silver Spring, MD: ­A merican Music Therapy Association. Emery, M. (2004). Art therapy as an intervention for autism. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 21(3), 143–147. Freilich, R., & Shechtman, Z. (2010). The contribution of art therapy to the social, emotional, and academic adjustment of children with learning disabilities. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 37, 97–105. Gabriels, R. (2003). Art therapy with children who have autism and their families. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Handbook of art therapy (pp. 193–206). New York, NY: Guilford. Gatta, M., Gallo, C., & Vianello, M. (2014). Art therapy groups for adolescents with personality disorders. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 41, 1–6. Geretsegger, M., Elefant, C., Mossler, K. A., & Gold, C. (2014). Music therapy for people with autism spectrum disorder. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 6, Article No. CD004381. doi:10.1002/14651858. CD004381.pub3 Gibbons, K. (2010). Circle justice: A creative arts approach to conflict resolution in the classroom. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 84–89. Glassman, E. L., & Prasad, S. (2013). Art therapy in schools: Its variety and benefits. In P. Howie, S. Prasad, & J. Kristel (Eds.), Using art therapy with diverse populations: Crossing cultures and abilities (pp. 90–94). ­Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Hass-Cohen, N. (2008). Partnering of art therapy with clinical neuroscience. In N. Hass-Cohen and R. Carr (Eds.), Art therapy and clinical neuroscience (pp. 21–42). Philadelphia, PA: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Isis, P., Bush, J., Siegel, C., & Ventura, Y. (2010). Empowering students through creativity: Art therapy in Miami-Dade County Public Schools. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 56–61. doi:10.1080/07421656.2010.10129712 Jang, H., & Choi, S. (2012). Increasing ego-resilience using clay with low SES (Social Economic Status) adolescents in group art therapy. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 39, 245–250. Jantzen, M., Large, E., & Magne, C. (2016). Overlap of neural systems for processing language and music. Lausanne, Switzerland: Frontiers Media. doi:10.3389/978-2-88919-911-2 Jellison, J. A. (2015). Including everyone: Creating music classrooms where all children learn. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Kaplan, R. S., & Steele, A. L. (2005). An analysis of music therapy program goals and outcomes for clients with diagnoses on the autism spectrum. Journal of Music Therapy, 42, 2–19. Kern, P., & Aldridge, D. (2006). Using embedded music therapy interventions to support outdoor play of young children with autism in an inclusive community-based child care program. Journal of Music Therapy, 43, 270–294. doi:10.1093/jmt/43.4.270 Kern, P., Wolery, M., & Aldridge, D. (2007). Use of songs to promote independence in morning greeting routines for young children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 37, 1264–1271. Kim, S, Kim, G., & Ki, J. (2014). Effects of group art therapy combined with breath meditation on the subjective well-being of depressed and anxious adolescents. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 41, 519–526. doi:10.1016/j.aip.2014.10.002

229

Mary Adamek and Alice-Ann Darrow Kock, S., Mehl, L., Sobanski, E., Sieber, M., & Fuchs, T. (2015). Fixing the mirrors: A feasibility study of the effects of dance movement therapy on young adults with autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 19(3), 338–350. doi:10.1177/1362361314522353 Kuo, N., & Plavnick, J. (2015). Using an antecedent art intervention to improve the behavior of a child with autism. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 32(2), 54–59. doi:10.1080/07421656. 2015.1028312 Krakouer, L., Houghton, S., Douglas, G., & West, J. (2001). The efficacy of music therapy in effecting ­behavior change in persons with Cerebral Palsy. International Journal of Psychosocial Rehabilitation, 6, 29–37. Kruk, K., Aravich, P., Deaver, S., & deBeus, R. (2014). Comparison of brain activity during drawing and clay sculpting: A preliminary qEEG study. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 31(2), 52–60. Lee, S. Y. (2013). “Flow” in art therapy: Empowering immigrant children with adjustment difficulties. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 30(2), 56–63. Levine, B., & Land, H. (2016). A meta-synthesis of qualitative findings about dance/movement therapy for individuals with trauma. Qualitative Health Research, 26(3), 330–344. Loesl, S. (2010). Introduction to the special issue on art therapy in the schools: Art therapy + schools + ­students =? Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 54–55. Loman, S. (2005). Dance/movement therapy. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Expressive therapies (pp. 68–89). New York, NY: Guilford. Malchiodi, C. (2005a). Art therapy. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Expressive therapies (pp. 16–45). New York, NY: Guilford. Malchiodi, C. (2005b). Dance/Movement therapy. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Expressive therapies (pp. 68–89). New York, NY: Guilford. Malchiodi, C. (2005c). Expressive therapies. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Expressive therapies (pp. 1–15). New York, NY: Guilford. Martin, M. (2014). Moving on the spectrum: Dance/movement therapy as a potential early intervention tool for children with autism spectrum disorders. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 41, 545–553. doi:10.1016/j. aip.2014.10.003 Mateos-Moreno, D., & Atencia-Doña, L. (2013). Effect of a combined dance/movement and music therapy on young adults diagnosed with severe autism. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 40, 465–472. doi:10.1016/j. aip.2013.09.004 Maujean, A., Pepping, C., & Kendall, E. (2014). A systematic review of randomized controlled studies of art therapy. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 31(1), 37–44. McGarry, L., & Russo, F. (2011). Mirroring in dance/movement therapy: Potential mechanisms behind empathy enhancement. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 38, 178–184. McNiff, S. (1997). Art therapy: A spectrum of partnerships. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 24(1), 37–44. McNiff. S., & Gallas, K. (1976). Art therapy in the classroom. Art Teacher, 6, 10–12. Meekums, B., Karkou, V., & Nelson, E. A. (2015). Dance movement therapy for depression. Cochrane ­Database of Systematic Reviews, Issue 2. Art. No. CD009895. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009895.pub2 Montello, L., & Coons, E. (1998). Effect of active versus passive group music therapy on preadolescents with emotional, learning, and behavioral disorders. Journal of Music Therapy, 35, 49–67. National Association for Music Education (NAfME). (2016). National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. Retrieved from www.nafme.org/my-classroom/standards/ Paul, A., Sharda, M., Menon, S., Arora, I., Kansal, N., Arora, K., & Singh, N. C. (2015). The effect of sung speech on socio-communicative responsiveness in children with autism spectrum disorders, Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 9, 555. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2015.00555 Register, D. (2001). The effects of an early intervention music curriculum on pre-reading/writing. Journal of Music Therapy, 38, 239–248. Reynolds, M., Nabors, L., & Quinlan, A. (2000). The effectiveness of art therapy: Does it work? Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 17(3), 207–213. Richard, D., More, W., & Joy, S. (2015). Recognizing emotions: Testing an intervention for children with autism spectrum disorders. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 32(1), 13–19. Ritter-Cantesanu, G. (2014). Music therapy and the IEP process. Music Therapy Perspectives, 32, 142–152. doi:10.1093/mtp/miu018 Rosal, M. (1993). Comparative group art therapy research to evaluate changes in locus of control in behavior disordered children. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 20, 231–241. Rosal, M., McCulloch-Vislisel, S., & Neece, S. (1997). Keeping students in school: An art therapy program to benefit ninth-grade students. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 14(1), 30–36.

230

Arts in the Therapeutic Process Rousseau, C., Drapeau, A., Lacroix, L., Bagilishya, D., & Heusch, N. (2005). Evaluation of a classroom program of creative expression workshops for refugee and immigrant children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(2), 180–185. Safran, D. (2003). An art therapy approach to attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. In C. Malchiodi (Ed.), Handbook of art therapy (pp. 181–192). New York, NY: Guilford. Salvador, K., & Pasiali, V. (2016). Intersections between music education and music therapy: Education ­reform, arts education, exceptionality, and policy at the local level. Arts Education Policy Review. doi:10.1080/10632913.2015.1060553 Schlosnagle, L., McBean, A., Cutlip, M., Panzironi, H., & Jarmolowicz, D. (2014). Evaluating the fine arts program at the center for excellence in disabilities. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy ­A ssociation, 37(3), 110–117. Schwartzenberg, E. T. (2016). Music therapy for children with autism spectrum disorder: Developing and sustaining professional relationships with pediatricians. Imagine, 7(1), 93–95. Schwartzberg, E. T., & Silverman, M. (2016). Effects of a music-based short story on short- and long-term reading comprehension of individuals with autism spectrum disorder: A cluster randomized study. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 48, 54–61. doi:10.1016/j.aip.2016.01.001 Schweizer, C., Knorth, E., & Spreen, M. (2014). Art therapy with children with autism spectrum ­d isorders: A review of clinical case descriptions on ‘what works’. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 41, 577–593. doi:10.1016/j. aip.2014.10.009 Simpson, K., Keen, D., & Lamb, J. (2013). The use of music to engage children with autism in a receptive labeling task. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 7, 1489–1496. doi:10.1016/j.rasd.2013.08.013 Sitzer, D., & Stockwell, A. (2015). The art of wellness: A 14-week art therapy program for at-risk youth. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 45, 69–81. Slayton, S., D’Archer, J., & Kaplan, F. (2010). Outcome studies on the efficacy of art therapy: A review of findings. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(3), 108–118. Smitheman-Brown, V., & Church, R. (1996). Mandala drawing: Facilitating creative growth in children with ADD or ADHD. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 13(4), 252–263. Spier, E. (2010). Group art therapy with eighth-grade students transitioning to high school. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 75–83. Standley, J. M. (1996). A meta-analysis on the effects of music as reinforcement for education/therapy ­­objectives. Journal of Research in Music Education, 44, 105–133. Standley, J., & Hughes, J. (1997). Evaluation of an early intervention music curriculum for enhancing pre-reading/writing skills. Music Therapy Perspectives, 15, 79–86. Stoll, B. (2005). Growing pains: The international development of art therapy. The Arts in Psychotherapy, 32, 171–191. Sutherland, J., Waldman, G., & Collins, C. (2010). Art therapy connection: Encouraging troubled youth to stay in school and succeed. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(2), 69–74. US Department of Education. (2010). Q and A: Questions and answers on Individualized Education ­Programs (IEP’s), Evaluations and Reevaluations. Retrieved from www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/ idea/iep-qa-2010.pdf Vaiouli, P., Grimmet, K., & Ruich, L. J. (2015). “Bill is now singing”: Joint engagement with the emergence of social communication of three young children with autism. Autism, 19, 73–83. doi:10.1177/1362361313511709 Wallace-DiGarbo, A., & Hill, D. (2006). Arts as agency: Exploring empowerment of at-risk youth. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 23(3), 119–125. Whipple, J. (2004). Music interventions for children and adolescents with autism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Music Therapy, 41, 90–106.

231

Section IV Arts Education and Community Living

Arts education receives varying amounts of attention and resources within pre-K-12 school ­systems, depending on state and local priorities. However, federal law considers arts education part of a “well-rounded education,” and every state except Iowa maintains arts education ­standards for public schools. Less formalized are the arts opportunities for students offered outside of the school curriculum, some of which are intentionally inclusive of students with disabilities or d­ esigned specifically for such students and, along with arts education in schools, can lead to careers in the arts for people with disabilities. These opportunities exist within the broader experiences of ­community life and provide a different perspective for understanding the arts engagement of ­students with disabilities from that of school-based arts curricula. Additional lenses are needed to fully appreciate the scope and value of community-based arts education for students with disabilities. Young artists with disabilities, families of students with disabilities, and practitioners engaged in international partnerships offer rich accounts of their experiences, attesting to the power of the arts and arts education to create meaning in the lives of many. Community arts experiences are integral to the arts education of all students with and without disabilities, and Donalyn Heise (Chapter 15) synthesizes the philosophical foundations inherent in the arts participation of students with disabilities. She describes programmatic commonalities from the perspectives of various stakeholders, with particular attention to practices based on a strengths paradigm designed to foster resilience. A collaborative process of shared leadership across participants, services, and supports sustains inclusive community arts programming and creates an inclusive arts community. Heise offers guidance for future directions in community arts for students with disabilities within practice, research, and professional development. Erin Hoppe (Chapter 16) shares and analyzes the first-person accounts of young artists with disabilities, obtained through online responses and in-person interviews, revealing how both arts experiences and disability influence identity formation and negotiation. The voices of artists with disabilities provide a powerful case for emphasizing the role of educators in supporting young ­artists, particularly as they transition to adulthood. Hoppe points to the importance of recognizing the arts as legitimate career paths and offers recommendations for further research and practice by and with artists with disabilities. Families of children with disabilities provide a crucial contribution and perspective to their education. Ryan Hourigan and Alice Hammel (Chapter 17) examine the emotional and logistical challenges of families of children with disabilities, with an emphasis on factors that influence access

233

Arts Education and Community Living 

to arts education, both in schools and in communities. In addition, they address the p­ articular needs of children with disabilities who are gifted in the arts. Case studies offer parents’ accounts of both issues and successes associated with arts engagement and education for children and youth with disabilities. People with disabilities are underrepresented in arts-related fields, such as design, media, and the visual and performing arts. In Chapter 18, Michael Harvey and John Kemp provide insights into public policy, post-school employment and outcomes, career and workforce development, and disability culture as they pertain to careers in the arts for students with disabilities. Each ­author presents his unique perspective on career opportunities in the arts: Kemp’s through his work as an arts and disabilities advocate and leader, employer of persons with disabilities, and member of the disability community, and Harvey’s through the study of policies and practices related to youth transitioning to the workforce. The chapter concludes with recommendations for supporting young artists with disabilities and enhancing the practice of K-12 professionals in addressing transition, career awareness, and workforce development. Donald DeVito (Chapter 19) offers an example of the power of international partnerships in supporting arts education for students with disabilities. A recipient of the Council for Exceptional Children’s Clarissa Hug Outstanding Teacher of the Year Award, he holds a doctorate in music education and writes from the perspective of a licensed teacher with dual certification as a music educator and a special education teacher. He describes the evolution of a program that brings together his music students at a school in Florida with students at Notre Maison, an orphanage in Port au Prince, Haiti, all of whom have significant disabilities. Using video conferencing tools and assistive technology, students are able to share their music-making across cultures, facilitating relationships, building understanding of differences, and enhancing music experiences among all participants. DeVito reflects on how his sense of identity as both a music director and a special education teacher continues to be fulfilled through multiple collaborations, with members of professional organizations, university and P-12 educators, and community practitioners, mutually engaged for the benefit of children with disabilities in the most challenging global settings.

234

15 Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities Donalyn Heise

We do a lot to help the needy. We have a service learning component that requires my students to share their talents by teaching art to the disabled at a local community center. (Art teacher, personal communication, April 18, 2013)

This comment is not unlike the many I have heard over the years from well-meaning artists and teachers, motivated to make a difference by volunteering and giving to the community. I often use this statement in professional development for art teachers, using discourse analysis to help unpack embedded perspectives and potential attitudinal barriers to full participation in the arts. We discuss the implications of words and phrases, such as “help the needy” and “service learning.” We also note the lack of reference to the person first and the potential negative impact of labeling youth experiencing disabilities as “the disabled.” A shift is suggested, away from the emphasis on the expertise and goodwill of those “sharing their talents” toward a collaborative community arts approach that recognizes and values the strengths and talents of participating youth of varying abilities. In this chapter, community arts are viewed as an integral part of the learning environment that can complement school-based learning and provide benefits for youth with and without disabilities. The philosophical foundations supporting this discussion of full and active participation in the arts are based on a review of professional literature and communication with leaders in the field. Four themes emerged from this analysis, addressing community arts for youth with disabilities: (a) benefiting from inclusive, participatory community art initiatives; (b) fostering resilience through a strengths approach, (c) making meaning through community arts, and (d) emphasizing the collaborative process. An inclusive resilience approach, recognizing the strengths of all collaborators, provided an overarching theme. The chapter concludes with suggestions for future research and practice in community arts initiatives.

The Arts and Community Arts Operationally Defined Art is a term commonly associated with visual art. The phrase the arts is a broader term, which can include many forms of creative expression, such as visual art, dance, theater, music, media arts, or literary arts. It can include fine and folk art and community-based creative activities. This chapter focuses on visual and performing arts in community settings. The term community arts is

235

Donalyn Heise

used throughout to refer to creative activity that connects youth with local artists and/or community organizations incorporating the visual and/or performing arts as a means of expression and development. The literature describes two kinds of participation in the arts (Barraket, 2005; Burdick, 2011; Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011). The first is passive participation as audience or recipients of the end product of arts activities, which includes attending plays, performances, and art exhibitions or participation in the arts through media. The second is active participation in the processes of developing or producing these activities. This includes but is not limited to creating visual art, designing media arts, dancing, singing, playing musical instruments, writing or performing plays, and creative writing. Although access to the arts as audience or recipient is vitally important to artistic and social development, as well as community development, the focus of this chapter is on community art as an active expression of creativity, using exploration and skill development to create and produce artifacts, such as visual arts, media arts, or performances. Community-based arts education refers to informal arts initiatives that occur outside of the school environment, such as those involved with community centers, inter-generational settings, museum outreach, recreational centers, libraries, universities, and correctional institutions ­(Congdon, Blandy, & Bolin, 2001; Ulbricht, 2005). Arts education in informal contexts is often more flexible and can provide access and opportunities for artistic exploration, discovery, and skill development. Community arts involve people coming together to do art in a community setting, and the work is often publicly shared. It typically involves academically trained artists teaching in a community setting. Unlike mandatory school environments, participation in community-based arts is voluntary; people choose to participate because it is fun, playful, or rewarding in some way.

Philosophical Foundations Access to the Arts for All Community arts for youth with disabilities are centered on the belief that all persons should have an equal right to full participation in high-quality arts experiences (Bailey, 2014; Catterall, Dumais, & Hampden-Thompson, 2012; Malley, 2012; Tomasic, 2014). Arts are considered a birthright (Bailey, 2013) and essential for the learning and development of all students of various abilities. Engagement in the arts can give youth with disabilities opportunities to convey sophisticated ideas, develop their unique voices, and experience validation and success (Malley, 2014). Community arts provide opportunities for all youth to be successful and recognized for their strengths instead of the stigma often associated with their deficits. For youth with disabilities, community arts programs provide opportunities to avoid the stigma they sometimes encounter in the regular school day (Howells & Zilnik, 2009; Pence & Dymond, 2015). There is a shared belief in the power of arts to promote human potential and understanding, and a shared conviction that engagement in the arts can have a positive impact for youth with disabilities (Alper, 2014; Bailey, 2014; Macpherson, Hart, & Heaver, 2015; Malley, 2012; Peppler & Warschauer, 2012; Tomasic, 2014). We know that active participation in the arts can lead to improved self-concept, happiness, and a sense of control over one’s life (Burdick, 2011). In addition, there is a link between early arts involvement and positive academic and social outcomes later in life (Catterall et al., 2012; Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011). However, according to the 2012 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts (SPPA), adults with disabilities are less likely to participate in arts (Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011). The greatest factor influencing arts participation in adults is having arts experiences in childhood. If arts education is the most powerful predictor of arts participation in adults, then it is important that all youth have access to quality arts education. Youth with disabilities are less

236

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities

likely to participate in the arts in schools than their nondisabled peers (Pence & Dymond, 2015). Exacerbating this issue is the decline of arts education in schools in the past 50 years, likely due to school reform efforts and fiscal restraints (Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011). Inclusive community arts initiatives can complement school-based instruction and provide additional opportunities for engagement in the arts. Inclusive community arts build on Disability Studies theory (see Keifer-Boyd, 2018) and ­recognize that all persons have the ability to learn, regardless of their differences. Every individual has the right to reach his or her potential, which requires the freedom to choose, belong, and participate, and the opportunity to achieve. Students with disabilities also have a right to be included in activities and to associate with nondisabled peers (Pence & Dymond, 2015; Rogers & Swadener, 2001; Siperstein, Glick, & Parker, 2009). Inclusion is a way of thinking: a belief that all children, regardless of ability, are valued members of the school and community (Causton-Theoharis, 2009; Causton-Theoharis & Theoharis, 2008). Inclusion can be seen as a continuum that includes three levels of acceptance: physical, functional, and social (Wilson, 2006), and community art can ­embrace all three. Physical inclusion is specific to equitable and physical access to community arts. Functional inclusion relates to one’s ability to function successfully in the community. Social ­inclusion means social acceptance, participation, and positive interaction with others. Community inclusion can occur when people with disabilities have access to and participate in communities of people without disabilities. Creating welcoming spaces that allow all persons to achieve their potential regardless of difference requires a sense of connectedness to the community beyond tolerance. Tolerance is a word often used when advocating for the rights of minority populations. Yet tolerance of difference does not necessarily lead to mutual respect. Tolerance is defined as the act of allowing something; a sympathy for; or willingness to tolerate feelings, habits, or beliefs that are different from one’s own (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tolerance). Synonyms include acceptance, patience, and charity. Teaching Tolerance, a project of the Southern Poverty Law Center (n.d.), and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO, n.d.) Declaration on the Principles of Tolerance define tolerance as respect, acceptance, and appreciation of the rich diversity of cultures, forms of expression, and ways of being human. Tolerance is harmony in difference—a way of thinking, feeling, and acting that is centered on respect and appreciation for individual differences and strengths. Inclusive community arts require not only acceptance of difference but an appreciation of differences. Full inclusion in community arts goes beyond physical access or modifications toward active participation that provides youth with and without disabilities with opportunities for meaningful engagement (Tomasic, 2014). As Bailey (2014) stated, “in a true inclusion setting students with disabilities are accepted as equals rather than as second-class mascots who have been allowed to tag along” (p. 25). Bailey called for respectful engagement that reduces attitudinal as well as physical barriers to inclusion. According to Howells and Zelnick (2009), active participation in mutually meaningful art activities can develop a sense of community, while stigma and discrimination dissipate. In their study of an inclusive art studio, they determined that if the right conditions exist, dialogue emerges that shifts the focus away from disability toward people connected through a shared interest in doing art. As relationships develop in situations like this, a culture of trust and acceptance evolves, and attention is placed on the act of making art (Shand, 2014).

The Social Model of Disability Community arts value diversity, embracing disability as a social construct rather than a deficit that needs to “be fixed” (Bailey, 2014; Band, Lindsay, Neelands, & Freakley, 2011; Burdick, 2011; Kraft, 2006; Linker, 2013). In a social model of disability, impairment is not the issue; rather, it

237

Donalyn Heise

is society’s failure to remove barriers to full participation (Bailey, 2014; Burdick, 2011). Alper, Hourcade, and Gilutz (2012) challenged the limitations of a deficit model of disability, calling for a broader sociocultural orientation that centers on providing youth with disabilities with opportunities to play, learn, and live as valued and participating members of society. Looking through a sociocultural lens, community arts can be seen as a conduit for collective art-making, with participants working independently alongside others or working collaboratively (Heise, 2013a; Heise & Bobick, 2012; Vick & Sexton-Radek, 2008). This philosophical perspective considers persons with disabilities as individuals who have artistic capabilities beyond the use of the arts to heal or rehabilitate. A social model offers an alternative way of framing disability, rejecting sympathetic, deficit-based responses and labels that focus on what a person lacks or cannot do and emphasizing ways of experiencing the world that can be celebrated, embraced, and revered (Burdick, 2011). Instead of enjoying equal opportunities in society, youth with disabilities have historically been devalued (Vick & Sexton-Radek, 2008). Contributing to this devaluation is terminology that ­suggests a hierarchy in the duality of ability vs. disability, with ability being the dominant, preferred level to be attained or emulated. In this binary system, disability appears subordinate relative to the desired ableist norm. Enabling all persons to achieve and maintain valued roles in society requires changing public attitudes about disability and reframing the narrative to emphasize individual strengths and competencies (Bailey, 2014; Band et al., 2011; Burdick, 2011; Linker, 2013). To this end, Reindal (2009) offered a refined version of the social model of disability that focuses  on capability theory. In this approach, emphasis is on personal capabilities rather than disabilities. This perspective lends itself to a strengths paradigm often employed in community programs that focus on the arts for fostering resilience in youth with disabilities (Heise & ­MacGillivray, 2011, 2014; Jessup, Cornell, & Bundy, 2010; Shand, 2014; Macpherson et al., 2015).

Strengths Paradigm Differing from an art therapy paradigm indicative of clinical practice, community arts reflect an inclusive community of practice, emphasizing the strengths and assets of all young people with diverse abilities (Heise, 2012, 2013b; Heise & MacGillivray, 2014; Macpherson et al., 2015). R ­ esilience theory, which focuses on strengths instead of deficits and posits that all persons have the capacity to thrive despite adversity (Brendtro & Larson, 2012; Heise, 2014), provides a theoretical foundation for community arts. Through the use of a strengths-based paradigm, engagement in arts becomes a conduit for personal growth and creative expression in a safe and supportive ­environment. Arts experiences also become a means of strengthening protective factors that ­foster resilience, such as creativity, perseverance, problem-solving, mastery of something, sense of b­ elonging, vision for the future, and resourcefulness (Heise, 2012, 2013a, Heise & MacGillivray, 2014; Macpherson et al., 2015). The processes and content of arts education may be therapeutic, but art therapy is not always the intent of all community arts collaborations (Heise, 2013a). Some focus on access and opportunity to quality arts education (Heise, 2013a), while others specifically use the processes and content of arts education for elevating the voices of the disenfranchised to disrupt stereotypes (Purcell, 2007). The processes and content of arts education can focus on individual assets and use personal strengths as a source of ideation for art-making (Heise, 2012, 2013a, 2013b). Through community arts, youth with a variety of abilities are offered opportunities to collaborate, reflect, and create.

Commonalities in Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities A review of literature in the fields of arts education, Disability Studies, resilience research, and community arts revealed commonalities across community arts for youth with disabilities. Several themes emerged, addressing the benefits of (a) inclusive, participatory community arts initiatives

238

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities

for all youth; (b) a strengths approach to foster resilience; (c) community arts as a meaning-making endeavor; and (d) the collaborative process.

Mutually Beneficial Community Arts In the United States, there is a strong trend of artists and participants with varying abilities working together in community settings (Burdick, 2011; Tomasic, 2014; Vick & Sexton-Radnek, 2008). Instead of elevating artists and teachers as experts who fill voids in others, all participants work side by side and learn from each other, thereby valuing reciprocal learning (Heise & Bobick, 2012). Inclusive community arts environments are mutually beneficial for youth with disabilities, typically developing youth, parents/caregivers, teachers, researchers, and the community at large.

Youth with Disabilities Artistic development, access to artistic resources, and engagement in quality arts education are beneficial to youth with disabilities, and community arts can build upon and reinforce ­artistic concepts covered in schools. Community experiences can increase interest in the arts and ­generate mutual respect while enhancing potential to accomplish goals through work and cooperation. Participation in community arts can foster meaningful and authentic belonging (Center for ­Mental Health in Schools at UCLA, 2007; Heise & MacGillivray, 2011; Macpherson et al., 2015) and validate multiple perspectives (Heise & MacGillivray, 2011). Participation can also disrupt ­stereotypes (Eisenhaur, 2007; Peppler & Warschauer, 2012; Purcell, 2007) and allow individuals to be seen as capable and artistic, with valuable strengths (Alper et al., 2012; Burdick, 2011; P ­ eppler & Warschauer, 2012).

Typically Developing Youth Working artistically side by side in the community with young people with disabilities also benefits typically developing youth by fostering positive interactions and relationships, and promoting social acceptance (Alper et al., 2012; Siperstein et al., 2009). These artistic interactions can change children’s attitudes and understanding (Kalyva & Agaliotis, 2009) and potentially lead to generations with a greater appreciation for the value of diversity.

Parents and Caregivers Parents and caregivers also benefit from community arts initiatives (Center for Mental Health in Schools at UCLA, 2007). Robinson and Notara (2015), using co-design principles (participatory research) to involve children and families in a series of capacity-building initiatives that addressed barriers to connection, found that community arts strengthened a sense of belonging for youth with disabilities and their families. Gallagher et al. (2000), examining perspectives of parents and siblings of youth with moderate or severe disabilities in community settings, found that parents value community programs because they feel that their children benefit and strive to emulate typically developing youth and that regular education settings often fail to accommodate children with disabilities in optimal ways.

Teachers Community arts programs for youth with disabilities can inform teacher preparation by helping teacher educators understand diverse contexts and the power of the arts for meeting the various abilities of students (Dorff, 2012; Heise, 2017; Heise & MacGillivray, 2011). Participation

239

Donalyn Heise

in community arts education can change teachers’ perceptions of youth with disabilities, reduce anxiety, and enhance leadership development and relationship-building (Dorff, 2012; Heise, 2017). Participation can also equip arts teachers with skills and attitudes necessary to designing, implementing, and evaluating appropriate art instruction for youth with diverse needs, abilities, interests, and learning styles.

Researchers Researchers can benefit from collaboration in inclusive community arts engagement and can serve as a bridge between academia and local communities. Benefits include the expansion of discourse in the arts, education, and special education. A collaborative approach across disciplines to research how arts in the community and students with disabilities are addressed is likely to provide much needed insight to both the disability and education communities (Burnaford, Gabriel, & Glass, 2017).

Community Ultimately, the community benefits from collaborative arts initiatives. For example, research suggests that engagement in arts supports economic growth (Sparks, Waits, & Fulton, 2012); ­improves health and well-being (Attree et al., 2011); and offers opportunities for children and youth to “learn new skills, expand their horizons and develop a sense of self, well-being and belonging” (Weitz, 1996, p. 6). Arts created for and by communities can teach about the unique qualities of the community and serve as a narrative account for the values and histories that make it up (­Burdick, 2011). Community arts serve as a bridge to the larger community (Howells & ­Zelnik, 2009). The arts are seen as means by which youth engage in the community and with each other (King et  al., 2016). Specifically, community arts practice within the context of diversity has the ­potential to inspire social regeneration and for meeting the needs of community development (Purcell, 2007). When organizations form partnerships with other cultural and educational institutions, it can enrich and expand the art experience for persons with disabilities who might otherwise remain on the margins of society.

Fostering Resilience Community arts programs that use a strengths paradigm to foster resilience in youth with disabilities offer a promising direction. This approach has good potential, given the theoretical considerations of disability as a source of culture and identity rather than deficit. Resilience is the ability to cope or succeed despite adversity (Brendtro & Larson, 2012; Heise, 2013b; Heise & MacGillivray, 2011; Masten, 2009) and is considered important for youth with disabilities (Hart, Blincow, & Thomas, 2007; Heise, 2013a; Macpherson et al., 2015). Resilience is a dynamic construct that is cumulative, meaning that it can be developed and strengthened over time (Heise, 2014b, Rutter, 2012). At its most basic level, resilience is the ability to do well, despite the stress of life’s challenges. Youth with disabilities may face numerous challenges: not just physical or mental impairments but prejudice and discrimination. Community arts that utilize a lens of resilience (strengths perspective) encourage youth with disabilities to focus on their strengths and assets, allowing them to see themselves as change agents in their lives rather than victims of circumstance (Heise, 2013a, 2014b; Heise & MacGillivray, 2011). Equipping individuals with the ability to cope can empower them to transform negatives and create a new narrative with a positive sense of self (Heise, 2013b). Community arts programs can foster resilience by providing opportunities for young people to be seen as capable and artistic individuals with valuable strengths (Burdick, 2011; Heise &

240

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities

MacGillivray, 2014). One such program used resilience as a framework for the design and implementation of a shelter-based, inter-generational art and literacy program for mothers in recovery and their children (Heise, 2014a; Heise & MacGillivray, 2014). Weekly lessons included a variety of visual arts media and processes, such as independent art-making and collaborative creations, providing families with opportunities to interact in healthy ways in a safe environment. Instead of expressing past trauma, art helped them articulate individual and family strengths. Inquiry prompts stimulated talk and reflection. Sample prompts included: What is beauty and where can we find it? How can we share with others? How can we create balance? What makes us strong? The benefits of this community arts program were reflected in the comments of participants as they articulated pride in their creative abilities and the realization of strength, which helped them overcome obstacles. Compassion and empathy are key elements of community arts collaborations, and various programs have used strength-based approaches (Campana, 2011). Performance art was used in one program to challenge the discrimination, stigmatization, marginalization, and medicalization of people with disabilities (Eisenhauer 2007). In this case, an affirmative model was established that focused on the cultural contributions of youth with disabilities rather than on their limitations. Another program found that leisure activities strengthened resilience for youth with visual impairments by providing supportive relationships, opportunities for positive identity formation, and opportunities to feel empowered, with some control over their lives ( Jessup et al. 2010). Macpherson et al. (2015), investigating community arts for youth experiencing mental health complexities and learning disabilities, found evidence linking visual arts practice to individual and community resilience. Even short-term interventions were found to have positive impacts on young people’s resilience, specifically their senses of belonging and abilities to cope with difficult feelings. Examining resilience from a socio-ecological perspective, Shand (2014) determined that participation in visual arts contributed to four aspects of individual resilience: (a) physical health and well-being, (b) mental health competence, (c) spirituality and religion, and (d) emotional well-­ being. Art served as a tool for self-exploration; building strengths, confidence, and problem-solving skills; and the expression and processing of difficult emotions. In addition, healthy relationships were nurtured. Participation in art classes contributed to building friendships, social supports, and social networks; members of the classes became like family. Community art resulted in a welcoming environment that provided consistency and a place to which participants could return. There is substantial evidence linking visual arts practice to individual and community resilience (Macpherson et al., 2015). Research reveals that art can contribute to personal well-­being (Cameron, Crane, Ings, & Taylor, 2013; Clift, 2012) and promote a sense of belonging and ability to cope (Heise & MacGillivray, 2014; Macpherson et al., 2015) Making choices within the context of art-making gives individuals a chance to exercise a degree of empowerment and independence (Heise, 2012, 2013a, 2013b; Lige, 2011). In a comprehensive study of programs in the United States designed to utilize art as a means of increasing social capital and self-efficacy, art activities designed specifically for establishing and maintaining relationships among participants and across communities were found to have the greatest impact (Molitor, Rossi, Branton, & Field, 2011). The evidence suggests that inclusive art programs with a resilience approach can transform ­challenges into opportunities for meaningful engagement.

Meaningful Engagement Community arts can constitute meaningful engagement. The multimodal, multisensory nature of community arts provides opportunities to construct meaning with high levels of engagement, personalization of the learning experience by linking the arts to real life, and empowerment through recognizing and building on the strengths of individuals and communities (Heise, 2017; Heise, 2013b).

241

Donalyn Heise

Multimodal learning provides multiple ways to engage, including engagement through ­student choices in the artistic process, multiple ways to demonstrate proficiency, and choices in media and processes. Multimodal creative production emphasizes meaning-making and identity development (Heise, 2017; Narey, 2017; Peppler & Warschauer, 2012). It acknowledges literacy beyond text and includes visual and embodied action, sound, and video as modes of communication. Peppler and Warschauer (2012), investigating the use of new media technologies for youth with cognitive disabilities, found that multimodal creative production increased interest and active participation as well as inspired transformation from someone formally marginalized to a “skilled and esteemed multimedia artist and mentor” (p. 15). In addition to potential positive impact on youth with disabilities, media arts in community settings can have a positive impact on their typically developing peers (Alper et al., 2012) in communication, identity development, and independent and collaborative play. In addition, it can foster positive interactions and relationships between peers with and without disabilities (Gallagher et al., 2000; Peppler & Warschauer, 2012). Active participation in meaning-making and creative activity in a community setting outside of school and home creates a third space for youth with disabilities to safely engage and provides opportunities for them to reposition themselves as experts. In his work with integrated dance for dancers with and without physical disabilities, Tomasic (2014) advocated for interdependent learning that couples high expectations with appropriate instruction to facilitate meaningful integrated learning for all participants. Alper et al. (2012) suggested that collaborators use the principles of deep engagement, interdisciplinarity, individuality, and practicality when designing for and with youth with special needs. Community arts are essentially self-selective, so programs need to be engaging for all youth to ensure active participation. Many community arts initiatives focus on social impact and higher participation (Putland, 2008; Shand, 2014; Stacey & Stickley, 2010). However, although community arts can be engaging and effective in increasing participation, the arts are more than just tools to achieve other ends. They can function as significant meaning-making endeavors and can serve as a means of identity formation and social emotional development. In community arts, the creative process is as important as the art product.

Collaborative Process Community arts programs are moving beyond passive participation and access to arts performances and exhibitions toward community arts collaborations that promote active engagement in creative activity that values the contributions of all participants. A collaborative process is emerging that is not simply a top-down approach, with design and implementation dictated from a person of authority, but a shared approach, with leadership distributed among all participants. This shared leadership approach allows for those most affected by a change effort to lead the effort. It is not service to youth with disabilities but truly interdependent, allowing all voices to be heard and valued (Lou R., personal communication, January 24, 2012). The collaborative process involves all stakeholders (Alper et al., 2012). Teacher/facilitators/artists need to consult with parents or specialists to learn about strengths and abilities as well as the physical, emotional, and intellectual challenges young people may have. Ongoing communication is essential for the creation of shared vision, goals, and responsibility for creating a positive learning environment inclusive of all students. Mutually meaningful participation and design (Alper et al., 2012) can enhance learning and motivation for all. Specifically, collaborative community arts programs use co-design principles to involve children, families, and community partners in design and research, including the collection of information and decisions regarding project resources. In this way, participatory methods can be used in research and project management with groups not often included in community development.

242

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities

Inclusive community arts programs that employ shared leadership models recognize the strengths of each participant. Instead of programs done to or for participants, programs are designed, implemented, and evaluated with them, guided by a shared vision (Gallagher et al., 2000). Students become co-contributors and collaborators rather than passive recipients. In one ­shelter-based visual arts and literacy program for children age 5–12, university faculty, students, and community volunteers sat among participating youth to read and create art in an effort to learn from one another (Heise & MacGillivray, 2011). All participants contributed to planning and implementing this community arts initiative. Consideration of nomenclature was suggested to reflect the collaborative nature and validation of all participants as valued members of the creative activity (Heise & MacGillivray, 2011). For example, the titles of teacher and student can denote a hierarchy of power, so the term facilitator or group leader was used, allowing both adults and children to alternately serve as facilitators in the learning process. Tomasic (2014) echoed the importance of developing appropriate terminology that de-emphasizes disability in his work in a physically integrated dance setting. Instead of designing a dance for typically developing youth, then making modifications for youth with disabilities, co-design principles were employed, using appropriate terminology. Translation was used as a tool to share movement vocabulary among all dancers, foster collaborative decision-making, and enhance improvisation skills. Dancers (with or without disabilities) who were using a wheelchair or seated were referred to as “sit down dancers” (Tomasic, 2014, p. 185). A person with or without disabilities who was standing or used a crutch was considered a “stand-up dancer.” This language disrupts the hierarchy of abled over disabled and instead allows all participants to create and develop artistically. When community arts instructors design equitable spaces, all youth have opportunities to become contributors and collaborators in creative activity. Full inclusion in community arts ­activities fosters equal, respectful, and barrier-free participation (Bailey, 2014) that focuses on the strengths and abilities of all.

Future Directions Community arts collaborations can be a catalyst for change in individuals and communities. By using a resilience approach, collaborators can empower individuals by focusing on assets while strengthening schools, families, and neighborhoods. This requires the expansion of comprehensive, mutually beneficial systems; successful partnerships; research that informs practice; and ­ongoing professional development. Striving for inclusive models of community arts that value diversity requires a shift from isolated programs solely for youth with disabilities toward the expansion of comprehensive, c­ ollaborative community art opportunities that address individual and community development and capacitybuilding. This necessitates shared resources, vision, and leadership. Partnerships are essential to creating supportive environments that maximize learning and well-being for all community members, and stakeholders, including youth, parents, educators, artists, community organizations, and policy makers, must work together to consider changes in policy and practice. The concept of community also needs to be expanded to include the assets of persons with and without disabilities. To help future generations realize their potential, sustainable partnerships should be in place that advocate for the rights of all youth, with equitable access to resources and ongoing commitment. A collaborative approach to supporting engagement in the arts within communities can enhance the potential for social change and local, national, and international community development. A body of research and practice continues to grow and show the benefits of community arts for students with and without disabilities, but more research is needed to document innovative and productive practices. For example, although there is research that supports educating children

243

Donalyn Heise

with disabilities alongside their nondisabled peers in community arts and recreational programs (Becker & Dusing, 2010; Siperstein et al., 2009), more research is needed to explore how students with and without disabilities benefit from their experiences. Community arts programs must also be well designed and implemented, with ongoing evaluation and dissemination for continuous improvement and sustainability. Program evaluation methods that engage the participation of stakeholders to determine appropriate goals and performance indicators, and strategies for the dissemination of best practices (see Horowitz, 2018), should be employed. Most importantly, ongoing research that informs policy and practice is needed. Research should also inform pre-­ service education for future teachers, and in-service learning for educators, community workers, and public policy representatives, to inform collaborative practice and communicate the power of community arts for enhancing social capital.

Concluding Thoughts All children deserve opportunities to learn and thrive, yet youth with disabilities may face challenges in school environments and in their transitions to adult lives. Community arts programs can provide access and opportunities often not found in formal school settings. These programs are well positioned to address barriers in unique ways and to support the academic, social, and emotional development of youth with disabilities. This chapter emphasized community arts as a dynamic environment that provides individuals with and without disabilities with a safe place to explore and develop their potential while fostering active participation in meaningful ways. Community arts was presented as being truly inclusive, beyond doing for and learning and working with youth with disabilities. Using the arts to bolster individual and collective strengths and assets, and engaging all stakeholders in the collaborative process, can mobilize communities in working toward systemic change and partnerships that are mutually beneficial. The importance of fostering resilience was also featured in this chapter as a means of transforming the thinking of youth with disabilities from seeing themselves as individuals with deficits to individuals with strengths, talents, and capabilities. Community arts can engage young people in meaningful creative activity that reveals individual and collective strengths. By focusing on strengths and the use of the arts to articulate all voices, youth with disabilities can be seen as ­resources and assets rather than at-risk youth who need to be managed. Expanding the possibilities of community arts for youth with disabilities can push the boundaries of what community arts are and can be while developing personal and community ­resilience. Community arts have the potential to enhance quality of life by creating an environment that is democratic and fully inclusive. They can allow persons with disabilities to live as valued, ­participating members of the community and contributing members of society. The future of community arts may be collaborations that represent new kinds of arts experiences, which blur the lines between active and passive participation and allow all to become contributors in the creative process. Then all persons, with and without disabilities, can live, learn, play, and function as valued and participating members of society.

References Alper, M. (2014). Digital youth with disabilities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Alper, M., Hourcade, J. P., & Gilutz, S. (2012, June). Interactive technologies for children with special needs. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children, ACM, pp. 363–366. Attree, P., French, B., Milton, B., Povall, S., Whitehead, M., & Popay, J. (2011). The experience of community engagement for individuals: A rapid review of evidence. Health & Social Care in the Community, 19(3), 250–260.

244

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities Bailey, S. (2014). Exemplary theatre practices: Creating barrier-free theatre. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 25–45). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Band, S., Lindsay, G., Neelands, J., & Freakley, V. (2011). Disabled students in the performing arts: Are we setting them up to succeed? International Journal of Inclusive Education, 15(9), 891–908. Barraket, J. (2005, February). Putting people in the picture? The role of the arts in social inclusion (Social Policy Working Paper No. 4). The Centre for Public Policy, Melbourne. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle. ned/11343/34370 Becker, E., & Dusing, S. (2010). Participation is possible: A case report of integration into a community performing arts program. Physiotherapy Theory and Practice, 26(4), 275–280. Brendtro, L., & Larson, S. J. (2012). The resilience revolution: Discovering strengths in challenging kids. ­Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Burdick, C. (2011). Old broken crayons: Adolescent artists with autism in art education. (Teaching and Leadership – Dissertations), Paper 234. Burnaford, G., Gabriel, J., & Glass, D. (2017). The arts and special education: A map for research. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Office of VSA and Accessibility. Cameron, M., Crane, N., Ings, R., & Taylor, K. (2013). Promoting well-being through creativity: How arts and public health can learn from each other. Perspectives in Public Health, 133(1), 52–59. Campana, A. (2011). Agents of possibility: Examining the intersections of art, education, and activism in communities. Studies in Art Education, 52(4), 278–291. Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal databases. (Research Report No. 55). Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. Causton-Theoharis, J. N. (2009). The golden rule of providing support in inclusive classrooms: Support others as you would wish to be supported. Teaching Exceptional Children, 42(2), 36. Causton-Theoharis, J., & Theoharis, G. (2008). Creating inclusive schools for all students. School Administrator, 65(8), 24–25. Center for Mental Health in Schools at UCLA. (2007 Revision). After-school programs and addressing barriers to learning. Los Angeles, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://smhp.psych.ucla.edu Clift, S. (2012). Creative arts as a public health resource: Moving from practice-based research to evidence-based practice. Perspectives in Public Health, 132(3), 120–127. Congdon, K. G., Blandy, D., & Bolin, P. E. (2001). Histories of community-based art education. Reston, VA. National Art Education Association. Dorff, J. B. (2012). The importance of collaboration in art classrooms for success of students with special needs. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 10–18). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just looking and staring back: Challenging ableism through disability performance art. Studies in Art Education, 49(1), 7–22. Gallagher, P. A., Floyd, J. H., Stafford, A. M., Taber, T. A., Brozovic, S. A., & Alberto, P. A. (2000). Inclusion of students with moderate or severe disabilities in educational and community settings: Perspectives from parents and siblings. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(2), 135–147. Hart, A., Blincow, D., & Thomas, H. (2007). Resilient therapy with children and families. London: Brunner Routledge. Heise, D. (2012). Overcoming odds: Harnessing the power of art to foster resilience. Number: 73- Art Education. Heise, D. (2013a, March). Fostering resilience through art for underserved populations. Paper presentation at the National Art Education Association Convention, Ft. Worth, TX. Heise, D. (2013b). Fostering resilience through art. In K. Tavin & C. B. Ballengee-Morris (Eds.), Stand up for a change: Voices of arts educators (pp. 112–120). Reston, VA: National Art Education Association. Heise, D. (2014a). Using a strengths approach to empower children living in crisis. A paper presentation at the ­National Art Education Association Convention, San Diego, CA. Heise, D. (2014b). Steeling and resilience in art education. Art Education. NAEA, Reston VA. Heise, D. (2017). Children in crisis: Transforming fear into hope through multimodal literacy. In M. J. ­Narey (Ed.), Multimodal perspectives of language, literacy and learning in early childhood: The creative and critical art of making meaning (Series 12). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-44297-6 Heise, D., & Bobick, B. (2012). Preparing competent art teachers for urban schools. In K. Hutzel, F. M. C. Bastos, & K. J. Cosier (Eds.), Transforming city schools through art: Approaches to meaning ful K-12 learning. Columbia, NY: Teachers College Press.

245

Donalyn Heise Heise, D., & MacGillivray, L. (2011). Implementing an art program for children in a homeless shelter. Studies in Art Education, 52(4), 323–336. Heise, D., & MacGillivray, L. (2014). Fostering resilience in an intergenerational art and literacy program for homeless families: An analysis of curriculum. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 103–126). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Howells, V., & Zelnik, T. (2009). Making art: A qualitative study of personal and group transformation in a community arts studio. Psychiatric Rehabilitation Journal, 32(3), 215–222. doi:10.2975/32.3.2009.215.222 Horowitz, R. (2018). Educating students in and through the arts: The need for research and evaluation. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 332–341). New York: Routledge. Jessup, G. M., Cornell, E., & Bundy, A. C. (2010). The treasure in leisure activities: Fostering resilience in young people who are blind. Journal of Visual Impairment & Blindness, 104(7), 419. Kalyva, E., & Agaliotis, I. (2009). Can contact affect Greek children’s understanding of and attitudes towards peers with physical disabilities? European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(2), 213–220. Keifer-Boyd, K. (2018). Creativity, disability, diversity, and inclusion. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 45–55). New York: Routledge. King, G., Kingsnorth, S., Sheffe, S., Vine, R., Crossman, S., Pinto, M., Curan, C. J., & Savage, D. (2016). An inclusive arts-mediated program for children with and without disabilities: Establishing community and an environment for child development through the arts. Children’s Health Care, 45(2), 204–226. Kraft, M. (2006). Art education and disability: Re-envisioning educational efficiency. The Journal of Social Theory in Art Education, 26, 302–324. Lige, S. (2011). Adults with intellectual disabilities and the visual arts: “It’s not art therapy!” (Doctoral dissertation), University of British Columbia, Vancouver. Linker. B. (2013). On the borderland of medical and disability history: A survey of the fields. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 87(4), 499–535. Macpherson, H., Hart, A., & Heaver, B. (2015). Building resilience through group visual arts activities: Findings from a scoping study with young people who experience mental health complexities and/or learning difficulties. Journal of Social Work. doi:10.1177/1468017315581772 Malley, S. M. (2012). Introduction. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 5–9). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Malley, S. M. (2014). Introduction. In S. M. Malley (Ed.). 2013 VSA intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 5–9). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the ­Performing Arts. Masten, A. S. (2009). Ordinary magic: Lessons from research on resilience in human development. Education Canada, 49(3), 28–32. Molitor, F., Rossi, M., Branton, L., & Field, J. (2011). Increasing social capital and personal efficacy through small-scale community events. Journal of Community Psychology, 39(6), 749–754. Narey, M. (Ed.). (2017). Multimodal perspectives of language, literacy, and learning in early childhood: The creative and critical “art” of making meaning. Series: Educating the young child (vol. 12). Cham, Switzerland; Springer International. Pence, A. R., & Dymond, S. K. (2015). Extracurricular school clubs: A time for fun and learning. Teaching Exceptional Children, 47(5), 281–288. Peppler, K. A., & Warschauer, M. (2012). Uncovering literacies, disrupting stereotypes: Examining the (dis)abilities of a child learning to computer program and read. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(30), 15–41. Purcell, T. (2007). Images for change: Community development, community arts and photography. ­Community Development Journal, 44(1), 111–122. Putland, C. (2008). Lost in translation. The question of evidence linking community-based arts and health promotion. Journal of Health Psychology, 13(2), 265–276. Rabkin, N., & Hedberg, E. C. (2011). Arts education in America: What the declines mean for arts participation. Based on the 2008 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts. (Research Report No. 52). Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. Reindal, S. M. (2009). Disability, capability, and special education: Towards a capability-based theory. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 24(2), 155–168. Robinson, S., & Notara, D. (2015). Building belonging and connection for children with disability and their families: A co-designed research and community development project in a regional community. Oxford University Press and Community Development Journal. doi:10.1093/cdj/bsv001

246

Community Arts for Youth with Disabilities Rogers, L. J., & Swadener, B. B. (2001). Semiotics and dis/ability: Interrogating categories of difference. Albany NY: SUNY Press. Rutter, M. (2012). Resilience as a dynamic concept. Development and Psychopathology, 24(02), 335–344. Shand, M. (2014). Understanding and building resilience with art: A socio-ecological approach (Master’s thesis). ­Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/theses/1402 Siperstein, G. N., Glick, G. C., & Parker, R. C. (2009). Social inclusion of children with intellectual disabilities in a recreational setting. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 47(2), 97–107. Sparks, E., Waits, M. J., & Fulton, B. (2012). New engines of growth: Five roles for arts, culture and design. Washington DC: National Governors Association. Stacey, G., & Stickley, T. (2010). The meaning of art to people who use mental health services. Perspectives in Public Health, 130(2), 70–77. Southern Poverty Law Center. (n.d.). Teaching tolerance [Website]. Retrieved from www.tolerance.org/ about Tomasic, M. (2014). Developing curricula and assessment tools for the physically integrated dance class. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), 2013 VSA Intersections: Arts and special education exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 182–202). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Ulbricht, J. (2005). What is community-based art education? Art Education, 58(2), 6–12. UNESCO. (n.d.). United Nations educational, scientific and cultural organization declaration of principles of tolerance. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/webworld/peace_library/UNESCO/HRIGHTS/124-129.HTM Vick, R. M., & Sexton-Radek, K. (2008). Community-based art studios in Europe and the United States: A comparative study. Art Therapy, 25(1), 4–10. Weitz, J. (1996). Coming up taller: Arts and humanities programs for children and youth at risk. Washington, DC: President’s Committee for the Arts and Humanities. Wilson, E. (2006, January). Defining and measuring the outcomes of inclusive community for people with disability, their families and the communities with whom they engage. In From ideology to reality: Current issues in implementation of intellectual disability policy: Proceedings of the Roundtable on Intellectual Disability Policy, School of Social Work and Social Policy, La Trobe University, pp. 24–33.

247

16 Perspectives of Young Artists with Disabilities Negotiating Identity Erin J. Hoppe1 Arts and disability play important roles in identity formation and negotiation. The arts provide a path conducive to exploration, with a clear component of identity (Nelson, 2011). Disability is part of one’s identity but can serve as a barrier to positive identity development unless the individual resists ­negative stereotypes (Reeve, 2002). Understanding these constructs is important for educators because of their significant roles in the lives of young people with disabilities: during pivotal periods of identity ­development, confidence-building, and future-planning (Back, Keys, McMahon, & O’Neill, 2016). Educators serve as one part of the greater community influencing development, but they are in unique positions to guide, inspire, and nurture positive identities in young people. A central goal of educators is to support a student’s life achievement, contributing to a productive society. Self-identity develops in the formative schooling years, and the capacity to affirm a positive belief in self will contribute to a student’s success (Catterall, Dumais, & H ­ ampden-Thompson, 2012). How do educators acknowledge, accept, and promote outsider identities (disability, artistic, queer)? Where do young people with disabilities find support if an education system’s policies and people neglect inclusion (Ford, 2013)? Can young people inform educator attitudes and practice, so their individual identities are honored? The voices of young people with disabilities could offer insight into questions such as these. With several exceptions, there are few first-person accounts, in scholarly literature or popular culture, about the experiences of young artists with disabilities as art producers and consumers who actively engage in the arts community (Muzikar, 2015; Sulewski, Boeltzig, & Hasnain, 2012). The purpose of this chapter is to gain understanding from the perspectives of young artists with disabilities, themselves, about their identity development. First-person perspectives were gathered from interviews and a brief survey conducted with young artists to illustrate some ways in which the arts are used to explore self-narratives, understand identity dilemmas, and negotiate development with positive outcomes. Professional literature related to the intersection of youth, disability, arts, culture, education, and identity, as well as access to the arts, is examined first as a basis for understanding the views of young artists with disabilities about their early arts opportunities, adolescent experiences, and transitions to adulthood.

The Intersection of Youth, Disability, Arts, Culture, Education, and Identity Identity is a sense of who one is and how one contributes to society. Identity formation begins when children see themselves as separate from their parents, lose interest in adopting the adults’ identities, and seek to shape their own worlds (Sokol, 2009). Childhood experiences influence the 248

Young Artists with Disabilities

primary ages of identity development (ages 12-24 years) when young people find more independence, connect with new communities, determine careers, and ask questions, such as “Who am I?” Some individuals are not successful in negotiating this stage of development and role confusion. The inability to identify personal ideologies and perspectives can lead to self-questioning and doubt (Sokol, 2009). Because the framework for personal identity is nearing completion by the end of adolescence, students often struggle with the passage to adulthood. Educators and other school support personnel are in a position to support identity exploration, addressing issues when students experience personal dissonance.

Disability Identity For centuries, people with disabilities had little self-determination and were ignored, excluded, spoken for and about, and sidelined (Karten, 2008). American social change movements in the late 20th century began to recognize first-person dis/abled voices. In the 1980s, members of Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT) fought for access to public transportation. The passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (1990) and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (2006) followed in subsequent decades. The United States has yet to sign the United Nations (UN)’s treaty, although advocates rely on it across the globe (US International Council on Disabilities, 2017). Like other social justice activists, disability advocates in the 21st century challenge outdated attitudes and work to increase inclusion, improve policies, and realize self-determination. Social discourse and policy making around disability continue to fluctuate between medical and social models. The medical model understands disability as a medical problem and sometimes a personal tragedy; the handicapped must be fixed or cured to participate in society (Shakespeare, 2013). The social model of disability posits that a person’s (dis)ability is dependent on whether or not the social and physical environment, including teachers and classrooms, adapts to difference (Gallagher, Connor, & Ferri, 2013). Navigation and development of identity follow a parallel course to the socially charged construct of language. Passé attitudes refer to disability as a descriptor: He is handicapped; she is autistic. Language can serve as an avenue to advocacy or a barrier in which people with disabilities are marginalized and denied a positive identity (Back et al., 2016).

Identity Formation People with disabilities have different perspectives on how disability influences their lives and identity formation. Dunn and Burcaw (2013) distinguished between disability as an identity context (associated with marginalization and prejudice) and disability identity (a positive sense of self and connection to the disability community). They defined six primary themes associated with disability identity, including community, affirmation, self-worth, pride, discrimination, and personal meaning. These themes are evident in essential questions, such as: Do young people with disabilities have access to positive, first-person narratives associated with disability? Is their community ready and willing to embrace progressive and inclusive ideals and administration? If disability identity is suppressed, a person with a disability might seek to align with another identity to avoid negative connotations ( Johnstone, 2004). They may overcompensate (e.g. try to be the top student in their class) or seek to shift the focus away from disability to another identity (e.g. describing themselves as impaired, not disabled) that might lead to their acquiring more social capital.

Social Capital The concept of social capital is an important aspect of disability identity, personal satisfaction, and opportunity. Gotto, Calkins, Jackson, Walker, and Beckmann (2010) defined social capital as “a 249

Erin J. Hoppe

set of relationships and social ties, with organizations and to individuals, that can expand one’s choice-making opportunities, increase one’s options, and lead to a more enriched quality of life” (p. 1). Gotto and colleagues identified three elements of fostering social capital on an individual level: family/parent advocacy, developing peripheral social ties, and connecting with important social structures. Growing social capital (e.g. friends) is one method people with disabilities can use to improve quality of life and decrease marginalization. Strong social connections are important for students with disabilities as they pursue self-determination; access to appropriate curricula; and transition services, linking them to adult services (Trainer, 2008). The arts are natural incubators of benefits linked to social capital, such as social development and positive behavior (Lobo & Winsler, 2006). Thus, teachers need to be aware of the importance of social capital when preparing young people with disabilities for life, work, and postsecondary education, and can implement strategies to build social connections through the arts.

Queer Identity Scholarly literature and implications around queer identity are aligned with disability identity, in which queer is broadly defined as outside the mainstream. As Chappell (2015) noted, “Besides a history of ongoing activism, sexual minorities and disabled people share a history of social injustice, oppression and isolation … youth and adults with disabilities are typically constructed as de-gendered and asexual” (p. 1). Advocates work to dispel these old frameworks in scholarly literature (McRuer, 2006; Whitney, 2006) and through gatherings, such as the 2002 Queerness and Disability Conference in San Francisco and the 2017 Breaking Silences, Demanding Crip Justice: Sex, Sexuality, and Disability Conference in Ohio. The Breaking Silences conference seeks to dispel negative stereotypes and provide a safe space for discussion. To engage members of the arts community in conference planning, artists over age 18 were asked to use the arts as a medium to explore the intersecting identities of disability and sexuality (D. Douglas, personal communication, September 7, 2016). Even if educators do not wish to, or cannot officially, discuss sexuality, awareness and acknowledgement of students’ identities outside of the mainstream is important.

Artistic Identity Today’s adolescents negotiate identity and autonomy with influences from nature, nurture, society, and digital technology (Shifflet-Chila, Harold, Fitton, & Ahmedani, 2016). The arts facilitate the exploration of different identities and promote personal growth. The transformative process of creation and connection between artist and beholder enhances, nurtures, and sustains an understanding of self (Malin, 2012; Nelson, 2011). Different centuries, geographies, and cultures reflect diverse views on the values of arts and art-makers: bohemian, innovator, entertainer, and crafter. Current subcategories within an artistic identity include architects, fine artists, musicians, photographers, designers, and entertainers (NEA, 2011). People with disabilities who create art are often aligned with Outsider Art or Disability Art. Outsider Artists are not professionally trained or influenced by classical conventions, but their creations are revered for unique insights (Greaves, 2015). Judith Scott was a Deaf artist with Down syndrome who attended Creative Growth, one of the first community career centers for artists with disabilities. Scott acquired global fame as an Outsider Artist when her fiber and textile sculptures went on exhibition, conveying tactile stories about her childhood and isolation in a state institution. Scott is one example of someone who made art and happened to have a disability, lacking self-awareness about her disability (Rich, 2015). In contrast, Disability Art is intentional, using the facets and perspectives of dis/abled people to comment on, and actively represent, disability (see Crockett & Malley, 2018). The Disability Art movement asserts that difference is an

250

Young Artists with Disabilities

advantage and should be used to challenge perceptions (Brown, 2002; Eisenhauer, 2007). Rather than accepting society’s negative views, artists, like Petra Kuppers with The Olimpias in Michigan, use art to engage audiences, explore social change, and build inclusive futures (The Olimpias/Petra Kuppers, n.d.)

Identity in Popular Culture Young people with disabilities lack opportunities to view themselves positively reflected in popular culture. Through analyzing inequality in 800 recent, popular films, Smith, Choueiti, and Pieper (2016) found that although people with disabilities represent 20 percent of the population, only 2.4 percent of speaking or named characters in films had disabilities. Other studies have shown that television exposure predicts decreases in self-esteem for white and black girls, and black boys, with the opposite for white boys (Martins & Harrison, 2012). If television reinforces gender and racial stereotypes, it also likely reinforces disability stereotypes, and those representations have an impact on self-esteem and expectations. Considine (2015) noted that popular culture representation lacks first-person disability narratives. Scripts including disability are generally written by people without disabilities, hindering authentic storytelling. In some cases, performers with disabilities have been able to showcase their talents. On the hit television show Glee, actress Lauren Elizabeth Potter, a woman with Down syndrome, was cast to play a leading character with that disability. In contrast, the show also cast Kevin McHale, who does not use a wheelchair, to play the role of a teenager who does. Disability advocates are frustrated when people without disabilities assume their identities, often winning accolades for their depictions. An advocate’s blog post (Amelia, 2010) outlined some of the production’s reasons for not casting people with disabilities, including fear of slowing down production, fear of litigation, fear of making viewers uncomfortable, and added production expenses. The post cited Glee producer Brad Falchuk, who wanted to balance depictions of America with strong casting: “We brought in anyone: white, black, Asian, in a wheelchair… It was very hard to find people who could really sing, really act, and have that charisma you need on TV” (Amelia, 2010, para. 9). This points to two issues in the identity development of young people with disabilities: self-reflection and barriers to access. Educators can use popular culture to help all students explore identity, noting inequitable representation. People with disabilities face many barriers in moving from an initial interest in the arts to skill development to a creative career. There are many opportunities for adults (parents, educators, mentors) and institutions (school systems, governments, creative sectors) to support or deny exploration of the arts and arts education between early childhood and transition ages. This is acutely true for young people with disabilities, whose access to the world is heavily influenced by guardians in their life, who do, do not, or cannot facilitate connections (Grose, 2004). Pathways to the arts for people with disabilities are fraught with barriers, including lack of encouragement by teachers, arts schools and community groups’ not recruiting people with disabilities, physical barriers to casting calls, and the idea that artistic product will need negotiating when an actor needs accommodations (Considine, 2015). Educators must recognize such barriers and work to create avenues to access for their students.

Identity in the Classroom Identity development begins in childhood and magnifies in adolescence. In the United States, students in elementary school spent an average of 943 hours in school during the year; middle school students averaged 1,016 hours (Chalabi, 2014). Taking into consideration homework and extracurricular activities, teachers have a significant impact on student development, in many cases,

251

Erin J. Hoppe

volunteering beyond their classroom duties (Fried, 2013). Educators promote future generations of inclusive adults when they support the self-determination of young people with disabilities, facilitating opportunities to explore, learn, and engage in the same ways as their peers without disabilities. Educator engagement, respect, and advocacy for students with disabilities influence student outcomes. Involving students in instruction is a key feature in developing student capacity. Educators can encourage students with instructional practices (self-direction) and focus on future goals (self-determination). More student autonomy will positively affect classroom dynamics, student behavior, postsecondary outcomes, and identity development. Seidler (2011) made specific instructional strategy recommendations to educators supporting disability awareness: (a) use popular culture examples to discuss stereotypes, (b) talk to students about their personal connections to disability, (c) make adaptations for specific needs, and (d) seek advice from other (special) educators. Adamek and Darrow (2012) addressed the concern music educators should have about their students’ qualities of life, advocating for lifelong music creation and consumption. They drew a connection between music participation motivation and reduced stress during the transition to adulthood. In addition, they noted that music participation, as a source of leisure activities and motivation, promotes higher social capital for people with disabilities. Therefore, “helping students plan for a musical future is one of the most important investments music educators can make in their students’ lifelong well-being” (p. 11). Educators can have an impact on community engagement and contributions to society by investing in students with disabilities and nurturing their interests.

Accessing the Arts Arts Education in Schools Ruppert (2006) identified positive interpersonal and emotional outcomes of arts education and participation, considered essential for success in school, work, and life, categorized as thinking (perception, imagination, problem-solving), social (self-confidence, empathy), and motivational (persistence, risk-taking) skills. Including the arts in a well-rounded education has been the message of advocates for years. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (2004) provides eligible students with a free and appropriate education, with high expectations for educators to include and support students with disabilities, who must be given the opportunity to learn in the least restrictive environment. The visual arts classroom was one of the first settings in which students with disabilities were mainstreamed before their later inclusion in other classrooms (­Causton-Theoharis & Burdick, 2008). Special and other educators observed the growth obtained by students with disabilities through arts education, and such professionals continue to advocate for arts education inclusion. Schools develop educational philosophies within the framework of a larger system, influenced by the state, district, administrators, and resources available. However, there remains a separation in some schools between education policy and implementation, resulting in unequal access to the arts for students with disabilities and other underserved populations (Americans for the Arts, 2015; Finley, 2013). Some schools and districts lack arts educators, leaving fewer opportunities for students with disabilities to connect with the arts (Rabkin & Hedberg, 2011). Arts educators, arts therapists, and community-based teaching artists work in schools as professionals with different philosophies, skills, goals, and strategies. Regardless of approach, students achieve when there is a flexible curriculum, and teachers maintain high expectations for all students (Malley, 2014). An educator’s ability to provide inclusive, unrestrictive environments

252

Young Artists with Disabilities

depends on their personal perspective on disability and capacity to differentiate instruction. Educator training and inherent beliefs are barriers or openings to inclusive learning opportunities. Passage of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015 replaced the No Child Left Behind Act (2002), representing major policy changes for testing, teacher evaluation, standards, and school reform, with implications for arts education and special education. With the passage of the new law, Platz (2016) identified opportunities for arts education as (a) the arts are now part of a well-rounded education, (b) accountability includes the number of arts educators in a school and the use of authentic arts assessments, and (c) early childhood standards and plans are to incorporate the arts. ESSA holds the potential to improve outcomes aligned with arts education for students with disabilities in a meaningful way. All but a fraction of students with disabilities will be held to the same general assessment standards, and states will be required to develop plans to reduce bullying, seclusion, and suspensions (Samuels, 2015). With more accountability and upcoming stakeholder discussions, advocates will be needed to ensure that students with disabilities can access the arts as part of a well-rounded education. New education policies may also provide an opportunity to connect two sources of in/formal access to the arts, where different resources and knowledge bases can build on one another. President Obama’s Promise Neighborhood Initiative is included in section 4624 of ESSA (2015), and this initiative addresses education and community transformation through collaborations between schools and community organizations. This may be a new way to link students with disabilities with an essential outlet of arts creation and consumption: informal, community access to the arts.

Informal Community Access to the Arts Spaces outside of the classroom are equally important in the support of young people with disabilities. In this chapter, informal learning opportunities refer to activities outside of schools, such as community arts classes, arts therapies, and private arts instruction. Parents often facilitate opportunities for their children in these settings when they recognize an interest or gift. However, the arts as a field of interest can be a mysterious pursuit for parents to understand and support. Finding a theater class for a child with Down syndrome may seem ominous compared to signing up for the local Special Olympics soccer team. Still, parents regularly report the value in nourishing artistic interests outside of school (Furniss, 2010; Harshaw & Harshaw, 2016). Sulewski et al. (2012) analyzed 47 entries to a call for visual art for young artists with disabilities, providing some of the most pertinent descriptive profiles in the literature to date. Their findings pointed to the importance of early exposure to visual art and art-making as an impetus for young people with disabilities to become artists. The authors noted the influence of family (as artists, teachers, and sources of encouragement), educators (who used the arts to overcome barriers to academic achievement), other (art) professionals (mentors who helped students to overcome fears), and environmental influences (such as watching cartoons and their own immigrant experiences). Just as classroom educators are gatekeepers of experience and opportunity, so, too, are community spaces. Cultural institutions are driven by missions to educate and bring their resources to the community. Arts administrators may lack training in special education instruction and face barriers of geography, cost, and perception; however, they are likely to offer flexible curricula, open to setting high expectations for success by all types of learners. An increasing number of arts organizations and programs are taking steps to be inclusive and accessible for young people with disabilities (see, for example, Dancing Wheels Company and School, n.d.; LEAD, 2016; Upstream Arts, n.d.). To fully include young people with disabilities, informal educators will need to learn strategies from experts and document impact as they make the case for support to their stakeholders.

253

Erin J. Hoppe

Technology and the Arts Technology is an intrinsic part of our development and lives, creating access to new adaptations and infinite pieces of information, entertainment, and inspiration. Speech-to-text machines have opened the doors of communication for people with autism. Three-dimensional printing can bring an artist’s vision to life and build a new hand (Brooks, 2014). Anyone can access 120,000 works of art digitized by the National Gallery of Art. Students are learning programming skills and computer science concepts, as part of the school curriculum, now also part of a “well-rounded education” (Smith, 2015). As technical capacities expand, some of the most basic aspects of access are still essential: Are websites accessible to people with visual impairments using screen readers? Can a brush be adapted for the limited grip of someone with cerebral palsy? Society now regularly convenes and shares information through online platforms, connecting with other like-minded (not necessarily like-bodied) people. Disability Arts Online’s YouTube channel is one example of a space dedicated to bringing the creative work of disabled artists to a wider audience. The 2012 Brighton Digital Festival hosted a live online chat about “what digital offers disabled creatives in terms of aesthetics, engagement and representation; what tools and methods disabled artists are using to make their voice heard in the digital world; and how their work can change and inform that space” (Caines, 2012, para. 3). Today’s students are a technology generation. The Internet serves myriad purposes for young people with disabilities, e.g. allowing them to connect with people who look like them, create and view new art, find mentors, and learn about adaptive learning strategies. Huang and Guo (2005) studied the social impact of the Internet on the disability community, and they found it to be a source of building social capital, including “general trust, reciprocal supports, social participation, and friendships.” Disability Art is also transforming through digital technology. The D2ART project is focused on developing more holistic, assistive tools around artistic practice and creative careers, including everyday tasks related to managing and promoting one’s art (see, for example, Creed, 2015). Educators have increasing access to technology for curriculum, extracurricular, and workforce preparedness. For effective use of technology, they must offer students different avenues to access, depending on the students’ needs. Ideally, young people with disabilities will be part of the conversations around access, preparing them with 21st-century skills, fostered by the arts and demanded by the workforce.

A Legitimate Career Path A primary role for educators is to prepare students for transition to postsecondary education and employment. Many of the positive outcomes around art participation and integration connect to skills needed in the 21st century: teamwork, creativity, problem-solving. Employment of people with disabilities remains low: Only 17.5 percent of people with disabilities were employed in 2015 (Bureau of Labor and Statistics, 2016). However, workers with a disability were more likely to be self-employed than those without, and they were heavily concentrated in service occupations. As a potential area for employment, the creative career sector might be more frequently considered a viable option for young people with disabilities (see Harvey & Kemp, 2018). Boeltzig-Brown, Hasnain, and Sullian-Sulewski (2008) outlined reasons to support young people with disabilities pursuing a creative career, including growth of the creative sector, flexible employment options, opportunities for self-expression, and the chance to participate in vibrant communities. If employment is a key indicator of independence and social inclusion, how do educators combine support for academic goals and career options? To begin, options and attention afforded to students with disabilities should be the same as those afforded to students without disabilities. In the same way an educator might nurture the math or engineering passion of a student, so, too,

254

Young Artists with Disabilities

should the creative dreams of a student with a disability be supported. The creative career sector may be a new arena for educators—a portfolio is different from a resume. However, that should not deter support. Boeltzig-Brown et al. (2008) offered multiple recommendations for arts educators, counselors, and others supporting young people with disabilities interested in pursuing a creative career: Educators can universally design lessons, include assistive technology options, educate themselves about creative career options, integrate opportunities for professional networking and mentorship, and promote entrepreneurial skill sets. A number of national organizations, such as the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA), National Arts and Disability Center, and The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, have led initiatives and programs to support people with disabilities and other organizations in preparing them for careers in the arts. For example, major themes emerged from an NEA online dialogue with artists with disabilities, including the need for (a) mentorship to determine personal goals, (b) inclusion of people with disabilities in access efforts, (c) increased recruitment of students with disabilities by universities and conservatories, (d) navigation of a complicated disability benefits system, (e) more online resources to reach geographically or physically isolated people, and (f ) more education for vocational rehabilitation staff (NEA, 2017). As educators consider strategies to support students with disabilities preparing for careers, they can also look to these informal education sources to provide resources and ideas. This review drew on sources from scholarly literature and reports, popular culture, and community organizations in examining disability and artistic identity, roles the arts can play in identity formation, and how the arts provide support in in/formal education settings. To bring this literature to life, the following section draws on the first-person perspectives of young people with disabilities, regarding the intersection of arts, education, and identity.

Exploring the Perspectives of Young Artists with Disabilities In the summer of 2016, the perspectives of young people with disabilities about the arts and their identities were gathered through an online survey and two interviews. List serves through VSA Ohio and other VSA organizations notified possible participants, and 13 people under the age of 30 with a disability and an interest in the arts responded to the survey. Eleven of the survey respondents were from Ohio, and the others were from New York and Texas; they ranged from 11 to 29 years of age and reported a mix of developmental, physical, and multiple disabilities. A guardian answered the survey on behalf of one respondent, and four others had assistance from an adult. To gain more in-depth knowledge about disability and identity, telephone and in person conversations were held with two practicing artists who were not a part of the online survey group. The online survey, Young People with Disabilities and the Arts (Hoppe, 2016), included 22  ­questions designed to detect trends revealed in the literature or discover new ones from the perspectives of the respondents. Questions gathered information about demographics, how the arts are a part of the respondents’ lives (as producers and consumers), conduits and barriers to access, motivations, technologies, identities, and personal impacts derived from the arts. Questions for the two participants interviewed by telephone and in person mirrored the online survey in content but allowed for greater exploration and discussion. Both interviews lasted approximately one hour and, with permission, were recorded for accuracy. As advocates for young artists with disabilities who had already public, creative careers, both gave permission to use their real first names. Careful notes were taken after listening numerous times to each participant’s recorded perspectives, then they were reviewed with the survey results to check for trends and comments relating to themes discussed in the literature review. To portray the personal perspectives of the participants,

255

Erin J. Hoppe

short vignettes were created to capture their participation in arts experiences, and names were assigned to the survey respondents to maintain confidentiality.

Findings Short narratives based on the findings of this exploration point to young people with disabilities making and consuming art on a regular basis, undeterred by barriers to access. Each person discussed support systems and revealed tenacious, positive attitudes, reflecting what Heise (2018) referred to as the strength of resilience. Their perspectives on what they wanted people to know about having a disability and participating in the arts can be described as “we can, too.” Family and friends were more frequently cited than teachers as sources of support for arts experiences. Experiences with educators were mixed, with some individuals supported and others directly discouraged. Early exposure to the arts correlated with lifelong participation and perspectives that a creative career is possible. Technology was cited as a source of inspiration (videos) and of art-making tools (animation). However, no one referred to specific assistive technology that helped them access the arts nor to the peripheral uses of technology, such as for communication or when applying for jobs. The findings are considered in relation to topics in the literature and address views on identity, access to the arts, parental support, social capital, use of technology, and creative careers. The following selected short narratives, developed from the interviews and responses of several artists who participated in the survey, are presented first before a fuller discussion of the findings.

Profiles of the Artists Jessie is a 24-year-old dancer with hearing loss, who lives in Ohio and took the survey alone. Her first memory of the arts was described as “inspiring and I was encouraged to create art of my own… As a dancer I can use music, text, and pictures for inspiration in creating a dance piece.” Jessie attends all types of arts experiences on a weekly basis with friends and family; the only noted barrier is cost. Jessie participates because “it is a way to be creative and explore outside of your comfort zone without being judged.” People should know that “having a disability does not stop you from creating and finding ways to invent new works. Art is a way to express yourself in a way you’re inspired whether it is movement or putting it onto paper.” Technology provides Jessie with inspiration for new ideas. The arts also bring her closer to other people: “you meet other artists; you join a new community of people who enjoy what you do.” The arts help her find a “passion and inspiration for teaching.” Jessie studied dance in college and will continue to “create art through dance and participate in art activities with friends/other artists.” Alex is an 18-year-old Ohioan with autism and ADHD, who took the survey alone. She makes visual art and writes daily without assistance. Alex also enjoys consuming visual arts, books, and digital media, and she likes festivals but finds them hard to attend (her parents do not have the money or time). Alex’s recollection of her first experiences in the arts was “how unique and creative it can be when you first start.” She took visual arts classes when younger and is now supported by family, friends, and teachers. Technology helps “me seek inspiration and knowledge of how I need to make it look, move, and function.” Art helps Alex “express what I am and how I see things in the real world.” Art makes a difference because it helps “create a legacy, a story of a future that I dreamed of and worlds with heroes and villains with unimaginable powers – where I can see the reality as something I like to see.” Jamie is an 11-year-old with autism, living in Ohio, who took the survey with help from an adult. Jamie makes music and visual/digital art. He also enjoys consuming visual arts, theater, music, books, and digital art with his family. His first experience in the arts was on a computer

256

Young Artists with Disabilities

as he tried to be a graphic designer. He makes art alone, “inventing my own music” and making cartoon animations on the computer. Jaime did not note any barriers to consuming art. He talked about arts when describing himself, and his goal is to be an animator. Jaime wanted people to “think my creations are incredibly amazing.” Emerson is a 20-year-old from Ohio with developmental delays, who took the survey with help from an adult. “I participate [monthly] in a music and theater group. I love to go to concerts and festivals. Anything with music… I loved music since I was little. It is one of my favorite things in the world.” Barriers to participation for Emerson are a lack of time and inability to attend activities alone. Emerson’s parents accompany him and are the only ones noted who support his arts experiences, but “I would like to be able to go with friends more.” Emerson uses an iPad to watch videos and “tell people how I enjoy participating in the arts: sometimes I sing for them.” Robin is a 24-year-old with cerebral palsy, living in New York, who described participating in the arts as “my passion … what I was put on earth to do.” She attends all types of arts experiences weekly and is pursuing a career in theater, film, and television, which she described as “a legitimate career choice.” However, she noted that not all seating options at arts events are accessible because “I walk with a walker.” Theater has been part of Robin’s life from a young age: “When I was younger, my family used to put on plays with me in the backyard. They recognized my desire for a career and helped me take the first steps.” Robin has also “met most of my best friends through theater.” Her first memory is seeing “The Red Shoes at Cleveland Play House.” She recounted taking an acting class at age seven: “The teacher said I’d never be cast if I kept using my walker. She was wrong.” Supported by friends, family, and teachers, and ignoring inaccessible stairs, she set a bold goal: “I’m going to be a star.” Robin noted that technology does not help her make, see, or hear the arts. Connor is a 16-year-old with autism who loves and wants to continue participating in the arts. A caretaker took the survey for Connor, indicating that he participates in weekly music therapy sessions. Although Connor attends events with his theater group, it is difficult for him because of transportation, cost, and “people.” Connor watches music websites online, socializes with others when engaged in the arts, and had a memorable experience performing at a “big theater.” Morgan is a 21-year-old with cognitive and neuromuscular disabilities, who took the survey with assistance from a guardian. Morgan “loved the first teacher I ever had, Todd, he performed at my school.” She is a musician and dancer, participating at multiple community arts centers and consuming the arts every day. Transportation and fear can make it difficult to attend art performances or exhibits but do not dissuade her from wanting to “keep exploring things, to improve and enjoy and have fun.” Morgan stated, “you can do it if you want to,” and, with support from family, friends, and teachers, Morgan wants to “perform on bigger stages as a Celtic woman choir member and a dancer.” Ludi was interviewed by telephone. She is a 20-year-old, Russian-born female with Poland syndrome, who has lived near Tampa, Florida since her adoption at age two. Ludi identifies as both an artist who has in/formally explored the arts throughout her life and as a “nature girl” who wants to be healthy. She is a singer, visual artist, advocate for equality, and mentor to younger artists. Ludi attended an aerospace high school, majored in a visual arts program in college, and knows that the arts will always be part of her life. Her parents did not participate in the phone call. Zayne was interviewed in person. He is a 19-year-old male with autism, living in central Ohio. Zayne wants to be a star; he is a guitarist, who performs solo and with a band. He had the opportunity to play guitar in school and has since pursued a creative career. Music is a way for Zayne to connect with people and express his emotions. Zayne’s mother and father were present during the interview, encouraging his communication and sharing their own perspectives. All three of their perspectives are described in the results.

257

Erin J. Hoppe

The information gathered through personal conversations with Ludi and Zayne was very descriptive. Their profiles are only briefly described here, but their narratives are expanded more fully throughout the following discussion of the findings.

Views on Identity The outsider identities of artist and disability were linked to personal perceptions for these young people. When telling others about themselves, survey participants responded that they frequently included the arts by indicating “Yes, I identify as a performer” and “I talk a lot about dance.” Both Ludi and Zayne strongly identified as artists. Zayne, the guitarist, stated, “I see myself as a star. The hat, the sunglasses I wear, that’s how I look on stage. I walk into the crowd and try to connect with them. It’s made me more confident… In the future, I can see people holding up signs. They say, ‘We Love You, Zayne.’” He frequently carries his guitar with him and uses it to help communicate. Zayne has difficulty making eye contact and uses sunglasses for a dual purpose: to avoid awkward situations and to build his artistic persona. Although he most often plays cover songs, he occasionally writes blues songs. He remarked, “if I have a hard time fitting in, I use music to express my feelings.” He is writing a song that includes the lyrics, “see me as a man, not as a condition.” Music writing and performing is a process that allows Zayne to develop his identity and express a positive sense of self to others. Ludi described a lifetime of in/formal arts engagement with support from her parents; she spent many years honing voice skills and is soon returning to college to study visual arts. She views the arts as a way “to help anyone through anything” and loves the feeling of being on stage. She openly detailed the effects of Poland syndrome: a rare birth defect affecting the development of the upper left side of her body. Ludi calls herself a “nature girl” focused on being a healthy woman with a positive body image. She also described an unexpected identity: that of role model and mentor to younger artists and people with disabilities: The moment I realized how much my music touched other people was when this girl who has dyslexia … contacted me through Instagram. She told me how much she loved my music and how much she learned from me. It’s hard for her to learn through reading music, so she watches my YouTube channel and is able to recreate what I produce in her own way… She and I are great friends now… There are people from all over the world who have contacted me to say they learned more from watching my channel, and learned a piece of music. (Ludi, personal communication, July 9, 2016) Ludi and Zayne’s descriptions suggest that identity development does not follow a singular path but is a combination of personality traits (Dunn & Burcaw, 2013; Sulewski et al., 2012). Although Ludi was adopted from Russia when she was a baby, and Zayne is AfricanAmerican, neither discussed those identities at length nor as part of their artistic identities. Rather, access (parent involvement) or interest (musical taste) seemed to play a stronger role in identity formation. Both interviewees were unabashed about their disabilities. They openly discussed the impacts of disability on their lives, but said that it will not stop them from pursuing passions. If anything, disability has provided them with keener insight into life and a stronger disposition as they overcame physical obstacles and intolerant attitudes. The identification as other was a prevalent theme among survey participants. Responses such as “We like it, too” and “I can enjoy art and make art just like them” acknowledge an us-them dichotomy linked to attitude and physical barriers. Alex described using the arts to make a difference in her life by providing an imaginary escape to “a future that I dreamed of.” The need to create a more pleasing reality suggests dissatisfaction with one’s current world, where one is likely identified as

258

Young Artists with Disabilities

other. Still, many participants expressed encouragement for their peers: “If you try, you’ll find a way to do it!” This support within the other identity, from encouragement to mentorship, is promising for the institutional structures supporting future generations of artists with disabilities.

Access to the Arts In K-12 Education Only one survey participant cited teachers as sources of help to create in the arts. One other indicated the early influence of school engagement but from a guest artist: “I loved the first [arts] teacher I ever had, his name was Todd [and he] performed at my elementary school.” In her interview, Ludi expressed disappointment with and discrimination by classroom educators: “It was tough through middle and high school because I wasn’t necessarily supported.” Instead, she found support from mentors and teachers outside of formal education: “my parents and voice teachers were there for me.” These mentors reinforced a positive personal identity: “One of my great friends and mentor always told me, it’s not a disability I have; it’s a different ability.” Ludi attended an aerospace academy for high school, intending to be an engineer with “music on the side.” In contrast to attending art schools, where she was “not looked at, not appreciated, never a favorite seen as great,” in science classrooms, she received individual attention and respect from teachers. Zayne’s first directed music education was a 10-week music class in a school for children with autism. His parents were focused on academics, but Zayne was adamant about participating in the band. Eventually, he started playing the guitar and found a passion for string instruments. Zayne’s parents expressed disappointment with his music teacher, who had not observed or shared his talents. He described a self-directed, arts integration learning experience, drawing upon connections between music, science, philosophy, and the way music elicits emotions: When I was a senior, I did a science fair project on music. I used my guitar as my experiment. I had people close their eyes and (imagine) pictures and waited to see where the music took them. I came in third place. I tried to see where it takes you when you play a harmony and chords. It will affect your mood. I can make you cry or happy. That’s what I’ve been doing studies on. What do you see when you hear music, which picture is it? Angry music will make you mad. (Zayne, personal communication, July 13, 2016)

In Postsecondary Education All of the participants envisioned arts in their futures as pathways to happiness, social connections, and careers. Survey respondents plan to continue engaging in the arts by creating, performing, joining community groups with other artists, and going to see plays and concerts with friends. Their plans suggest these individuals have developed identities as arts producers and consumers who will actively engage in the arts community. Alex drew a direct connection between the arts, her future, and identity: “[I want] to show people my legacy and what I believe and what I can imagine.” Only one survey participant, Jessie, directly cited postsecondary education’s role in her creativity: “I studied dance in college, participated in dance art performances, and teaching students how to express themselves through dance.” Ludi described the negative outcome that daily voice lessons in her college’s music program had on her body: severe vocal cord injuries, resulting in surgery and a forced break from school. While her voice recovered, scars remain, and the high expectations of the college music program

259

Erin J. Hoppe

were no longer worth the risk of permanent injury. She has since withdrawn from the program and is likely to return to college next year to study special effects makeup. Notably, her injury was caused by the creative process and was not a direct outcome of her disability. Ludi’s plans to study visual arts and special effects will still allow her to continue in a creative career.

In the Community Participants cited community arts organizations as incubators and outlets for the creative process. Nearly everyone reported that they attend arts events in the community frequently (daily and weekly), and peers and collaborators were cited as partners in art-making. Informal educators were cited as important role models who reinforce positive artistic identities and link them to personal outcomes. Ludi explained, My voice has grown so much since being with (this teacher) … my self-confidence, my selfworth, being accepted. She’s a voice teacher but also a friend, and a mom, a voice mom. She’ll always be there for me, even if I’m off painting somewhere… She was the one to tell me, if [voice] is too much for you and your health, don’t do it – you’ll always have music… It’s always going to be part of me. (Ludi, personal communication, July 9, 2016) Zayne cited a one-week community music camp as the turning point in his creative path. The opportunity to focus on performance, not practice, “opened the doors to blues jams across the city.” The experience influenced his parents’ understanding of his musical abilities and connected him to other musicians, some of whom are now mentors and collaborators.

Parental Support Parents and guardians provide support for extracurricular activities, identifying the benefits of arts engagement and reinforcing opportunities to continue developing creative careers. Zayne described his parents as his “managers,” who have supported his many performance experiences, connections to other artists in his community, and presentation at a conference. His parents invest in his talent through school and extracurricular activities. Ludi’s adoptive mother noticed her tapping rhythms at age two. Ludi indicated that “She (her mother) immediately saw it as a musical attribute and wanted to make something of that, or at least explore that. She saw this as a point to follow and put me in some music programs.” Ludi was quick to credit her parents with supporting her artistry and goals as sponsors and managers. She pointed out that “a lot of kids with disabilities don’t have that (support).” Many young people with disabilities face an inequity of access, making it difficult to accomplish goals. Although two survey participants credited parents with helping them make art, two others stated that “no one” helps them make art. One who had no help accessing the arts described the arts as an “escape,” and the other expressed the desire to “go with friends more” to cultural events. Both indicated a lack of time and funding, and parents who did not support their interests. This suggests the capacity of young people with disabilities to explore the arts and how their identities can be limited by inequities in socioeconomic status, connectivity or isolation, and familial supports.

Social Capital All participants reported positive personal and social benefits to engaging with the arts. Through the arts, they express themselves, learn new skills (“dance moves”), exercise, have fun, meet best

260

Young Artists with Disabilities

friends, follow passions, and “socialize better.” They express feelings of inclusion and being part of a community of shared identity not connected with disability: “When you meet other artists you join a new community of people who enjoy what you do.” The arts foster self-confidence: “It is a way to … explore outside of your comfort zone without being judged.” When describing how the arts make a difference in their lives, survey participants shared feelings of pride, happiness, and inspiration. Ludi discussed making friends through the arts and the nature of their deep relationships: I’ve made a lot of lifelong friends through music. I’ve had the chance to work with so many different people, all around the world. Music creates this relationship that is different than any other … you have to be vulnerable when you’re singing in front of people, which is really hard for some people … Having those people who are able to be there for you when you’re singing in front of a whole lot of people and being critiqued… It’s not in a way to tear you down, but build you up… It’s not a clique; it’s a music family… We all support each other. (Ludi, personal communication, July 9, 2016) Zayne was open about the connections he makes through music, as his primary social outlet is through practicing and performance. His mother noted that music “is a big help for him, his happiness. It’s a big issue for people with autism, for everyone.” Zayne always wanted to play with a group and loves his band, Blue Spectrum, which includes two other musicians with autism and two community members. He described how he walks into audiences with his guitar, shaking hands, and his desire to connect with people through the music.

Using Technology The study supported the notion that technology is a resource and affirming medium for identity development. Young people with disabilities use computers and tablets to discover interests, make art, find inspiration, and consume art for enjoyment. Ludi described the connections technology creates in her life: Technology definitely [plays a role] – emails, this phone call, you finding me… All throughout high school and college I looked up all different YouTube videos. I think this is the number one channel I’ve been able to express myself through to people all over the world. I’ve been able to record all my music, put it up [on my YouTube Channel], and get so much following through that… Technology allows us to share music, especially for students who are learning. (Ludi, personal communication, July 9, 2016) Zayne addressed the impact of technology in his life. He started playing the video game Guitar Hero ® when he was 13 years old and told his parents he wanted to play a real guitar. Zayne does not read music but uses YouTube to learn songs and Loop Station® to record tracks. He credits his parents with booking gigs through Facebook and other connections, and they are developing a professional website. No one specifically mentioned using adaptive technology to access the arts. It may be that basic assistive technology to access the arts is not as important as initially hypothesized for this particular group of young people with disabilities or that this study did not ask participants enough about engaging with technology. However, given that the Internet serves as a significant source of inspiration and affirmation for young people, it matters that many types of disability are reflected in popular websites and which electronic resources educators use to facilitate positive connections with others.

261

Erin J. Hoppe

Creative Careers The data showed a strong belief that the arts are a “legitimate career choice.” Participants expressed interest in vocations as actors, writers, animators, dancers, and choir members. This is somewhat surprising, given society’s tendency to undervalue the arts as a viable career option, the support system needed to pursue a creative career, and the tenacity required to “make it” (Boelzig-Brown et al., 2008). As survey participation was skewed toward those already connected to the arts, there may be a bias toward an arts-centric audience inherently supportive of the vocation. More than one participant connected the impact of the arts with specific plans for the future. Jessie stated, “The arts helped me find my passion and inspiration for teaching.” Her decision to become a teacher might speak to an educator’s positive influence and the probability that this young person with a disability can have an impact on future generations of artists with disabilities. Zayne sees only a creative career in his future, one that includes “playing gigs” and tuning ­pianos. His parents made a conscious decision not to sign him up for a job program for people with disabilities. They cited a need for him to “be available for gigs” and believe it would be “spiritually irresponsible to not give attention to his gift.” This embrace of unknown territory means that Zayne can focus on his passion. He noted that although the hardest part about being an artist was eye contact, which can make him uncomfortable, he has adapted by wearing sunglasses. However, Zayne indicated that the best part about being an artist is “feeling the energy of the crowd.” Though he was shy at first, now he wants people to watch him play: “For some reason it gives me power. Because I like when people are smiling at me or want to take a picture with me.” The artistic process is now a source of confidence and connection to community.

Conclusion We’re all humans with a few differences… You’re not disabled. You’re doing things differently. Like everyone. Ludi In this chapter, the perspectives of young artists with disabilities, regarding their identity development related to arts and disability, were explored. First-person narratives reinforced connections in the literature among the arts, disability, and identity. Participants were generally optimistic about their capacities and opportunities. They acknowledged barriers to access (cost, travel, physical) but were not deterred from participation and spoke to its positive impact. Most participants credited informal educators and parents with their creative development.

Limitations This modest inquiry offers only a small sample of first-person perspectives and is skewed toward those who have an existing interest in arts creation and participation. Several factors likely influenced low response rates, including a lack of precedent for collecting the voices of young people with disabilities, access to technology, and awareness of the survey. Nonetheless, these voices point to the need for further research.

Recommendations Arts, special, and general educators can create pathways to access the arts or can impede inclusion and development of interests. Educators need to embrace the arts as a universal tool for expression, learning, and connection (Fiske, 1999). Many educators will provide a child’s first opportunities to interact with

262

Young Artists with Disabilities

the arts. Educators must be equipped with training in the arts, knowledge of potential partners, and the expectation that students with disabilities can and should be included. A commitment to high-quality arts education will make a difference for all students, and decisions by stakeholders at all levels of the education system will impact positive outcomes (Arts Education Collaborative, 2009). All educators can promote positive environments for all students to explore their identities. When teaching diversity and other social justice issues, educators can welcome different viewpoints, include positive popular culture examples and personal experiences, and use examples of different identities in instructional content (Adams, 2016). Young people with disabilities will be successful if educators coordinate strategies with them, their families, their guardians, informal educators at community centers, and other artists. Educators have the opportunity and responsibility to recognize interests and talents, and share that information with students, education team members, and parents. Knowledge of arts interests and talents is an important component of transition-planning and community inclusion for adults with disabilities. Educators should consider the arts as viable career options, with flexible environments, where students with different abilities might thrive. All educators can support identity development in an evolving 21st century. Comte (2009) indicated that the moral implications of access and inclusion are the responsibility of every adult in a young person’s sphere of influence. First-person narratives can inform in/formal educators, mentors, and professional artists, enabling them to envision possibilities for all young people. They need to communicate and forge partnerships with other adults responsible for a young person’s success (parents, friends, therapists) and make use of best practices for inclusion, such as universal design for learning. They must engage students with difference, giving them opportunities to share their voices equitably with other students.

Future Directions There is a need for a greater collection of first-person narratives of young artists with disabilities. Researchers might consider collaborating with an existing affinity group, such as a classroom of students with diverse backgrounds and interests. Direct links between young people with disabilities and their support systems need further exploration. Other studies should ask direct questions about the specific roles of educators, parents, family, and other outside sources in connecting young people with disabilities to the arts. Future research might ask: What platforms exist for young people with disabilities to share first-person narratives? How and why do they synthesize and share personal arts experiences in and out of the classroom? How do young people talk about their personal and professional journeys? What are the practical and political implications of empowering young people to develop and share their voices as members of disability, arts, and other communities? There is much to be learned from inquiries at the intersection of arts education and special education, and young people with disabilities are an important source of valuable information.

Note 1 I would like to express appreciation to Jessie Glover for contributing to the conception of driving questions and data collection, including the interview process.

References Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. (2012). Music participation as a means to facilitate self-determination and transition to community life for students with disabilities. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 101–112). Retrieved from http://education. kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/FinalprofessionalpapersbookArticle6.pdf

263

Erin J. Hoppe Adams, M. (2016). Pedagogical frameworks for social justice education. In M. Adams & L. Bell (Eds.), Teaching for diversity and social justice (3rd ed., pp. 27–54). New York, NY: Routledge. Amelia. (2010, November 18). ‘Glee’ actor Kevin McHale angers disability advocates [AMS Vans Blog]. Retrieved from www.amsvans.com/blog/glee-wheelchair-actor-kevin-mchale-angers-disability-advocates/ Americans for the Arts. (2015). Decline of arts education in underserved populations. Retrieved from http:// www.americansforthearts.org/sites/default/files/pdf/2015/by_program/reports_and_data/research_ studies_and_publications/ArtsEd_UnderservedPops_2015.pdf Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101–336, 104 Stat. 328. (1990). Arts Education Collaborative. (2009). Qualities of quality: Understanding excellence in arts education. Translations: An arts education collaborative initiative, 1. Retrieved from www.artsedcollaborative.org/ wp-content/uploads/2015/06/Translations-1-for-web_pages-2.pdf Back, L. T., Keys, C. B, McMahon, S. D., & O’Neill, K. (2016). How we label students with disabilities: A framework of language use in an urban school district in the United States. Disabilities Studies Quarterly, 36(4). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/4387/4481 Boeltzig-Brown, H., Hasnian, R., & Sullian-Sulewski, J. (2008, June). Effective career development strategies for young artists with disabilities. The Institute Brief, 24. Retrieved from the Institute for Community Inclusion, University of Massachusetts, Boston. www.communityinclusion.org/pdf/IB24_F.pdf Brooks, K. (2014, June 30). 14 ways 3D printing has changed the art world. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/30/3d-printing-art_n_5534459.html Brown, S. E. (2002). What is disability culture? Disability Studies Quarterly, 22(2), 34–50. Bureau of Labor and Statistics. (2016). Persons with a disability: Labor force characteristics summary (Economic News Release). Washington, DC: United States Department of Labor. Retrieved from www.bls.gov/ news.release/disabl.nr0.htm Caines, M. (2012, August 29). Disability arts, digital spaces, and technology – live chat [Web log post]. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/culture-professionals-network/culture-professionals-blog/2012/aug/29/ disability-arts-digital-technology-access Causton-Theoharis, J., & Burdick, C. (2008). Paraprofessionals: Gatekeepers of authentic art production. Studies in Art Education, A Journal of Issues and Research, 49(3), 167–182. Catterall, J. S., Dumais, S. A., & Hampden-Thompson, G. (2012). The arts and achievement in at-risk youth: Findings from four longitudinal studies. Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts. Chalabi, M. (2014, September 4). American kids will spend an average of 943 hours in elementary school this year. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/american-kids-will-spendan-average-of-943-hours-in-elementary-school-this-year/ Chappell, P. (2015). Queering the social emergence of disabled sexual identities: Linking queer theory with disability studies in the South African context. Agenda: Empowering Women for Gender Equality, 29(1), 54–62. Comte, M. (2009). Don’t hang your dreams in a closet: Sing them, paint them, dance them, act them… Australian Journal of Music Education, 2, 58–66. Considine, A. (2015, November). Theatre artists with disabilities are ready, willing, and, yes, able. American Theatre. Retrieved from www.americantheatre.org/2015/10/20/theatre-artists-with-disabilitiesare-ready-willing-and-yes-able/ Crockett, J. B., & Malley, S. M. (2018). Trends and issues influencing arts education and special education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 342–358). New York: Routledge. Creed, C. (2015, November 19). Disabled artist experiences in using eye/head tracking and mid-air gesturing for creative work [Web log post]. Retrieved from www.d2art.org/disabled-artist-experiencesin-using-eyehead-tracking-and-mid-air-gesturing-for-creative-work/ Dancing Wheels Company and School. (n.d.). The celebration of the spirit of dance [Website]. Retrieved from www.dancingwheels.org/ Dunn, D. S., & Burcaw, S. (2013, November). Thinking about disability identity. Spotlight on Disability Newsletter. Retrieved from www.apa.org/pi/disability/resources/publications/newsletter/2013/11/ disability-identity.aspx Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just looking and staring back: Challenging ableism through disability performance art. Studies in Art Education, 49(1), 7–22. Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), PL 114-95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. (2015). Finley, C. (2013). Access to the visual arts: History and programming for people with disabilities. Vanderbilt University, Kennedy Center for Excellence in Developmental Disabilities. Retrieved from www. vanderbilt.edu/curbcenter/cms-wp/wp-content/uploads/access-to-the-visual-arts.pdf

264

Young Artists with Disabilities Fiske, E. B. (1999). Champions of change: The impact of arts on learning. Washington, DC: The Arts Education Partnership. Ford, J. (2013). Educating students with learning disabilities in inclusive classrooms. Electronic Journal for Inclusive Education, 3(1). Retrieved from http://corescholar.libraries.wright.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1154&context=ejie Fried, K. (2013, October 16). 21 reasons to quit your job and become a teacher. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from www.huffingtonpost.com/katrina-fried/teacher-job_b_4101468.html Furniss, G. J. (2010). Viewpoint: Reflections on the historical narrative of Jessica Park, an artist with autism. Art Therapy: Journal of the American Art Therapy Association, 27(4), 190–194. Gallagher, D. J., Connor, D. J., & Ferri, B. A. (2013). Beyond the far too incessant schism: Special education and the social model of disability. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 18(11), 1120–1142. Gotto, G. S., Calkins, C. F., Jackson, L., Walker, H., & Beckmann, C. (2010). Assessing social capital: ­I mplications for persons with disabilities. A National Gateway to Self-Determination Project. Retrieved from http://ngsd.org/sites/default/files/accessing_social_capital_implications_for_persons_with_­d isabilities. pdf Greaves, B. (2015, October). The error of margins. Artnews, 114(9), 62–71. Retrieved from www.artnews. com/2015/10/07/the-error-of-margins-vernacular-artists-and-the-mainstream-art-world/ Grose, N. E. (2004). Adolescents and youth with disabilities: Issues and challenges. Asia Pacific Disability Rehabilitation Journal, 15(2), 13–32. Harshaw, G., & Harshaw, Z. (2016, September 22). The unexpected gift: Autism and music. TEDxHilliard, Ohio. Retrieved from www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYoc7BoWCbo&feature=youtube Harvey, M. W., & Kemp, J. D. (2018). Career and workforce development in the arts for youth with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 278–297). New York: Routledge. Heise, D. (2018). Community arts for youth with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 235–247). New York: Routledge. Hoppe, E. J. (2016). Young people with disabilities and the arts. Unpublished manuscript. Huang, J., & Guo, B. (2005). Building social capital: A study of the online disability community. Disability Studies Quarterly, 25(2). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/554/731 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, 20 USC §1400 et seq. (2004). Johnstone, C. J. (2004). Disability and identity: Personal constructions and formalized supports. Disability Studies Quarterly, 24(4). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/view/880/1055 Karten, T. (2008). Embracing disabilities in the classroom: Strategies to maximize students’ assets. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. LEAD. (2016). Leadership exchange in arts and disability. National conference sponsored by VSA and the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, July 31–August 6, Pittsburgh, PA. Lobo, Y. B., & Winsler, A. (2006). The effects of a creative dance and movement program on the social competence of head start preschoolers. Social Development, 15, 501–519. Malin, H. (2012). Creating a children’s art world: Negotiating participation, identity, and meaning in the elementary school art room. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 13(6). Retrieved from www. ijea.org/v13n6/v13n6.pdf Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding principles for teachers. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Martins, N., & Harrison, K. (2012). Racial and gender differences in the relationship between children’s television use and self-esteem: A longitudinal study. Journal of Communication Research, 39(3), 338–357. McRuer, R. (2006). Crip theory: Cultural signs of queerness and disability. New York, NY: New York University Press. Muzikar, D. (2015). New research relies on first-person accounts from autistic children about ­sensory issues. The Art of Autism. Retrieved from http://the-art-of-autism.com/new-research-relies-onfirst-person-accounts-from-autistic-children-about-sensory-issues/ National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). (2011). Artists and arts workers in the United States: Findings from the American Community Survey (2005–2009) and the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (2010). Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/105.pdf National Endowment for the Arts (NEA). (2017). Careers in the arts for people with disabilities: National Online Dialogue Brief. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/careers-in-the-arts-briefrev3_0.pdf Nelson, B. (2011). “I made myself ”: Playmaking as a pedagogy of change with urban youth. Research in Drama Education Journal, 16(20), 1–17.

265

Erin J. Hoppe No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, Pub. L. No. 107–110, § 115, Stat. 1425. (2002). Platz, J. (2016). Every Student Succeeds Act: A summary of the law as it pertains to arts education. Ohio Alliance for Arts Education. Retrieved from http://oaae.net/en/resources/advocacy/legislation-review/88resources-oaae/196-essa-a-summary-of-the-law-as-it-pertains-to-arts-education Rabkin, N., & Hedberg, E. C. (2011). Arts education in America: What the declines mean for arts participation. National Endowment for the Arts Research Report #52. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/ files/2008-SPPA-ArtsLearning.pdf Reeve, D. (2002). Negotiating psycho-emotional dimensions of disability and their influence on identity constructions. Disability & Society, 17(5), 493–508. Rich, N. (2015, December 16). A training ground for untrained artists. The New York Times Magazine. ­Retrieved from http://nyti.ms/1QpqMOK Ruppert, S. S. (2006). Critical evidence: How the arts benefit student achievement. National Assembly of State Arts Agencies. Retrieved from www.nasaa-arts.org/Publications/critical-evidence.pdf Samuels, C. (2015, December 10). What does ESSA mean for special education? [Web log post]. Retrieved from blogs.edweek.org/edweek/speced/2015/12/essa_special_education.html Seidler, C. O. (2011, November). Fighting disability stereotypes with comics: “I cannot see you, but I know you are staring at me.” Art Education, 64(6), 20–23. Shakespeare, T. (2013). The social model of disability. In L. J. Davis (Ed.), The disability studies reader (4th ed., pp. 214–221). New York, NY: Routledge. Shifflet-Chila, E. D., Harold, R. D., Fitton, V. A., & Ahmedani, B. K. (2016, November). Adolescent and family development: Autonomy and identity in the digital age. Children and Youth Services Review, 70, 364–368. Smith, D. F. (2015, December 16). What the ESSA means for the future of computer science and STEM. EdTech Magazine, Retrieved from www.edtechmagazine.com/k12/article/2015/12/what-essa-meansfuture-computer-science-and-stem Smith, S. L., Choueiti, M., & Pieper, K. (2016). Inequality in 800 popular films: Examining portrayals of gender, race/ethnicity, LGBT, and disability from 2007–2015. Media, Diversity, & Social Change Initiative. Retrieved from http://annenberg.usc.edu/pages/~/media/MDSCI/Dr%20Stacy%20L%20Smith%20 Inequality%20in%20800%20Films%20FINAL.ashx Sokol, J. T. (2009, Spring). Identity development throughout the lifetime: An examination of Eriksonian theory. Graduate Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1(2), 139–148. Retrieved from http://epublications. marquette.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1030&context=gjcp Sulewski, J., Boeltzig, H., & Hasnain, R. (2012). Art and disability: Intersecting identities among young artists with disabilities. Disability Studies Quarterly, 32(1). Retrieved from http://dsq-sds.org/article/ view/3034/3065 The Olimpias/Petra Kuppers. (n.d.). The Olimpias performance research projects [Website]. Retrieved from www-personal.umich.edu/~petra/ The United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Treaty Series, 2515, 3. Trainer, A. A. (2008). Using cultural and social capital to improve postsecondary outcomes and expand transition models for youth with disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 42(3), 148–162. United States International Council on Disabilities. (2017). What is the convention on the rights of persons with disabilities? [Supplemental material]. Retrieved from http://usicd.org/template/page.cfm?id=221 Upstream Arts. (n.d.). Upstream arts [Website]. Retrieved from www.upstreamarts.org/ Whitney, C. (2006). Intersections in identity – Identity development among queer women with disabilities. Sexuality and Disability, 24(1), 39–52.

266

17 Family Perspectives on Access to Arts Education for Students with Disabilities Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

Nearly 57 million people in the United States (approximately 20 percent of the population) have a disability. This represents an increase of 2.2 million since 2005, according to 2010 data from the US Census Bureau (Brault, 2012). Data from an earlier study, conducted by the US Census Bureau in 2000, revealed that nearly 20.9 million American families had at least one member with a disability (Brault, 2012). Most of these families lived in southern states and rural areas, and one in three families were single-parent households (US Census Bureau, 2005). About 5.2 million children (roughly 8.4 percent of the nation’s child population) have a disability, and many of these children have limited access to the arts. Many families whose households include members with disabilities find access to the arts to be difficult (Hammel & Fischer, 2014; Hourigan, 2014; Wexler, 2014). Access is challenging for many reasons, not only because arts activities might not be available in local communities. More often, issues arising from family stress, siblings, lack of social support, family adaptation, and self-determination become part of the challenge of programming the arts for children and youth with disabilities. In this chapter, we address complex issues relating to families, disabilities, and the arts. We draw on research literature from the fields of arts education and special education in describing these issues and suggesting remedies to relieve stress and improve access to community arts activities. After considering our own work, and completing an extensive review of the literature, we have divided this examination into several categories. These categories include content regarding family stress and disability; social support and the arts; family resilience, self-determination, and arts education; and the arts and families with children who are gifted and talented. Our goal is to offer important considerations for arts educators who provide programming for young people with disabilities and to show how family dynamics play a role in offering appropriate arts education for all children.

Family Stress and Disability In examining the literature related to families and disability, one realizes the enormous amount of stress associated with raising a child with a disability. Multiple studies indicate that divorce rates among couples that have children with disabilities are higher than among those that do not (Van Riper, 2007; Wymbs, Pelhma, Molina, Gnagy, & Wilson, 2008). Among this group, parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) in particular have the highest rate

267

Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

Case Study Beth and Sean

The Importance of Community Arts Programs My 16-year-old son, Sean, was born with Down syndrome (DS), a chromosome disorder that can cause an array of physical, medical and cognitive disabilities. We did not know what to expect when he was born. What we did find out very quickly was that music played a huge part in his learning development. We had therapists work with him and we also did some music/listening therapy with him at a very young age. We continued to incorporate music therapy and programs. As Sean aged, we noticed that he could learn many things, but had a hard time speaking. He knew what he wanted to say, but did not speak or enunciate very well. We taught him how to sign and he was able to at least express his needs. We continued to enroll him in Kindermusik programs with our local support group and work with therapists. We would go to events with our DS group, and I honestly thought it was in the DNA of kids with DS to respond so strongly to music. Little did I know that all individuals need music to progress. We then moved to Central Indiana, where we met a wonderful music therapist, who was also involved with a program at the university where they incorporated music, dance, and theatre for kids with disabilities with the help of college students. We enlisted Sean for the next enrollment. We knew Sean was a ham for his family, loving to sing and do skits, usually imitating shows from TV. What we felt was that Sean was always overlooked when he was beyond the family home, that he was almost invisible. People can’t always understand him and his DS features made him unapproachable by some peers. But things changed once he joined the Prism Project, he started in the youngest group, and he was given attention by instructors and by college students. Sean started to feel as if he had a purpose, that he fit into something. Each year, Sean has progressed to the point where he was given a big speaking role; the instructors worked with him and he worked on his lines almost excessively at home. The audience understood him and responded, which gave him courage. It is evident that Sean is not invisible and that he is comfortable with who he is. It is also evident that he is a performer, not just for the family. If not for programs like The Prism Project or other performing arts programs that incorporate children or adults with special needs, we would have never seen this part of Sean. Performing arts are necessary for our kids; they tap into parts of them that will never be seen in other types of therapies or school classes.

of divorce (Hartley et al., 2010). A number of factors contribute to stress and affect the quality of life for families of children with disabilities, including lack of social support, lack of coping mechanisms, and changing family roles. The good news, however, is that research suggests that families learn to cope and develop changing belief systems to gain coherence in their lives (Van Riper, 2007). In the following sections, we examine the existing paradigms regarding family stress and disability. We also consider where the arts intersect with family dynamics and growth.

268

Family Perspectives

Socioeconomic Status, Poverty, and Geography It has been well documented in the literature that there are differences in services for students with special needs based on geography (Darling & Gallagher, 2004) as well as race and poverty (Groce et al., 2011; Hourigan, 2014). Early 21st-century school reform efforts have compounded the issues of appropriate access to both the arts and special education (Hammel & Fischer, 2014; Wexler, 2014). Those who live in poor, densely populated communities have more limited access to special education services (Whelchel, 2010), and in most communities, the arts are the first items either cut or diminished when schools are under academic or financial hardship. Public school programs having under-resourced arts programs for children with disabilities exacerbates the issue of access for families who see the value of the arts for their children with special needs. Lack of access to the arts can add to the stress of raising a child with a disability. Many parents have seen their children fail in multiple activities yet gain confidence and self-determination through an art activity that was part of a summer camp or extended school year program. It is easy to imagine the frustration of those who live in an area where the arts have been cut due to a narrowed focus on academic remediation because of poor standardized test scores in local schools. Examples like this illustrate the kinds of obstacles facing students with disabilities and families seeking arts programming in their communities.

Access to Arts Education It is important for arts educators, arts advocacy programs, and disability service providers to work together to provide necessary support for families stressed and in financial need. For example, if a child with a disability is interested in starting a string instrument, there are multiple challenges at play that do not necessarily affect all students. The obvious issue is being able to afford an instrument. There are programs, such as the El Sistema model (https://www.elsistemausa.org), that bridge this gap for students in poverty. However, securing financial support may start with finding grants or donors to assist with this need. Arts educators can help by understanding that the financial burden is just one of many challenges of raising a child with a disability (Patterson, 2002) and by finding ways to generate funding for instruments or other relevant materials when providing access to the arts. It is also important for arts educators to realize that it is not just the child who is affected by the disability—it is the entire family (Armstrong, Birnie-Lefcovitch, & Ungar, 2005). The underlying causes for lack of participation could also stem from family stress. Getting a child ready for a community arts activity can be stressful, but for some families, getting a child with a disability ready by packing up his things, checking on medications, and making sure there is proper support may be too much to bear. Limited assistance and support at arts activities can also put these events out of reach for some families. Providing sufficient aids and supports must also be a consideration for curricular and co-curricular arts programs within schools and communities. Partnering with disability organizations, special education administrators in local school districts, and not-for-profit programs is keys to success (Malley & Silverstein, 2014). Intensive focus on accountability, academic performance, and high stakes testing for all students, including those with disabilities, can also contribute to family stress (Hourigan, 2014). Music, art, theater, and dance, however, are areas where all students have a chance to succeed. They may also be among the only areas in which some children with disabilities find success and feel accepted. Parents should advocate for active arts participation at all levels of public schooling. According to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), under the Zero Reject provision, every educational opportunity provided in public schools must be available to all students, regardless of disability (Turnbull, Huerta, & Stowe, 2006). Often, families do not know this, and

269

Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

special educators should be the catalysts for ensuring needed support in arts classrooms for special needs learners (Hammel & Hourigan, 2017).

Social Support and the Arts Social support, defined as “support provided to a person by unpaid individuals such as relatives, friends, neighbors, and peers” (Armstrong et al., 2005, p. 271), is critical for parents and caregivers of children with disabilities as it provides reinforcement and care, and aids them in their ability to function. For families that do not have a member with a disability, finding and accessing social support is often easier. Social events, sports, the arts, and school functions are all places to meet people in the community and develop a social structure. Family functions are also times to gather support and share ideas. However, some families living with someone who has a disability find it difficult to access this support (Armstrong et al., 2005). Moreover, programming may not be accessible for some families, leading to a lack of social support and isolation from the community (Whelchel, 2010). The arts have many access points, and there are many not-for-profit programs offering arts programs nationwide. It is important that stakeholders advocate for an increase in social support as part of the experience of establishing or improving arts education for students with disabilities. As Malley and Silverstein (2014) noted, “arts education and special education communities need a more collective and stronger national voice” (p. 41), and partnerships should include various national education, special education, and arts education organizations. Respite should also be a consideration when planning or implementing an inclusive community arts education program. Typically, many families use the time when their children attend music, dance, and various activities to attend to errands or personal pursuits. However, families who have children with special needs frequently find themselves serving as their children’s aides because arts programs are not structured to provide appropriate support (Hourigan, 2016). Arts programs that do not find ways to handle the challenges associated with offering equal access to all participants, expecting family members to serve as assistants for their children, add to families’ stress and turn them away from involving their children in community arts activities.

Family Resilience and Arts Education Some research reveals that, with time, families can learn to adapt to new expectations and life plans, and create a better quality of life. Examining stress and resilience among families raising children with Down syndrome, Van Riper (2007) identified “support for the growing argument that many families are able to respond to the experience of raising a child with a disability” (p. 124). However, evidence suggests that such adaptation comes with support, resilience, and a change in worldviews, values, and priorities (King et al., 2006). Research suggests that there are several key factors in overcoming stress and becoming resilient. These factors include making meaning of diversity, keeping a positive outlook, and having spirituality or a belief system (Bayat, 2007). The reality of family stress and the necessity of finding a path to resilience emphasize the need for experiential arts programming that is not high stakes and that is appropriate for younger children with disabilities. The practice of creative arts therapy (music therapy, art therapy, drama therapy, etc.) is supported by modest research, suggesting the benefit of these activities for children with disabilities (Adamek & Darrow, 2018). There is also evidence that these activities can be beneficial to families. In the area of music therapy, for example, Australian researchers (Nicholson, Berthelsen, Abad, Williams, & Bradley, 2008) found that integrated music experiences with young children and their families increased parent and child relationships, and encouraged more

270

Family Perspectives

music in the home. Results from this study “indicated that a 10-week group intervention using music in a therapeutic context can enhance a child’s behavioral, social and communication skills and promote positive parenting” (Nicholson et al., 2008, p. 234). This was reported as the first study of its kind and involved over 358 children, aged 0–5 years, and their parents. Many arts programs enroll children at a young age, typically while families of children with disabilities are still working through the challenges of adjusting to the changes in their lives. Dance programs can begin for children at as early as three years of age. Music programs (e.g. Suzuki strings, band, orchestra, piano lessons) can begin at as early as five years of age. However, families facing the challenge of a diagnosis, and finding their way through the complicated special education process, may feel overwhelmed at beginning arts instruction for their children at the same time in their lives as their peers. Children with disabilities are often enrolled in speech, occupational, and/or music therapy, while other children are exploring the athletic and artistic offerings available in their communities (Hammel & Hourigan, 2017). Unfortunately, as children get older, they have even fewer opportunities to be part of traditional arts education experiences with their peers. In some cases, there may not be a point of entry at all after a certain age. For example, there are rarely beginning orchestra and band programs in typical public high schools in the United States. Therefore, if students (with or without disabilities) do not join in elementary or middle school, there is no opportunity for them to receive instrumental music education (Hammel & Hourigan, 2017). When possible, arts programs should address this issue in offering comprehensive arts instruction for all students. Consideration may be given to the following questions: • •

Could a path be created in the community for students unable to start instruction at the typical time to gain the requisite skills to participate in the program? Could there be a blend of peer-to-peer and private instruction to put young students with disabilities on the path to eventually play, sing, dance, or create art with their peers?

Inclusive and equitable opportunities to learn in the arts are crucial when considering the entirety of an education for a young person with a disability. However, it is even more crucial when considering life beyond school. No later than 16 years of age, special education students must begin transition services into adulthood. They begin to look at vocations and the possibility of living independently in the community; for some students, these services extend until 22 years of age (Carter et al., 2013). Research has shown that choice-making, decision-making, goal-­setting, problem-solving, self-advocacy, leadership, and self-management skills are necessary for this transition into adulthood (Carter et al., 2013). However, the arts are not necessarily looked at as a catalyst in developing these skills. Often, the arts are not discussed when these decisions are being made. However, if arts educators could develop the skills necessary for a young adult to continue with their chosen art form into adulthood, it would increase their quality of life (Hammel & ­Hourigan, 2017; Harvey & Kemp, 2018).

Self-Determination and the Arts As children with disabilities grow older, just as any children, they develop likes, dislikes, o ­ pinions, and goals. Unfortunately, some children do not develop the skills to express these personal preferences (Carter et al., 2013). In these cases, the family needs to encourage their child’s self-­ determination, defined as “a characteristic of a person that leads them to make choices and decisions based on their own preferences and interests, to monitor and regulate their own actions and to be goal-oriented and self-directing” (National Gateway to Self-Determination, n.d., para  1). The d­ evelopment of skills that lead to self-awareness, self-knowledge, self-regulation,

271

Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

and self-advocacy is an important consideration for parents and professionals when designing ­programs for children and youth with exceptionalities (Carter et al., 2013). Mounting empirical evidence suggests that self-determination may contribute to valued postschool outcomes, including college, employment, independent living, and community engagement (Carter et al., 2013). As a result, self-determination is considered to be crucial, especially to people with developmental disabilities. Often, as they grow, these individuals are told what they should like, what they should do, or whether or not something is appropriate for them. Often, they are left without an opportunity to discover or express their own senses of self. Most important, with self-determination comes motivation. If young people want to learn a skill or an activity, or become better at it, they will be internally motivated to pursue the specific skills and understandings necessary to get there. With assistance, people with disabilities can gain confidence and senses of identity. Families can assist in this process by listening to their members with disabilities, whose voices are often drowned out by good intentions (Brotherson, Cook, Erwin, & Weigel, 2008). The arts can often be where self-determination is built. Music participation, for example, is considered a catalyst to developing self-determination in children and adults with disabilities. “Music experiences can be motivating, flexible, and challenging while providing opportunities for students with disabilities to practice important life skills that will benefit them in educational, social, and employment settings” (Adamek & Darrow, 2012, p. 103). In examining the links ­between music and the development of self-determination, Adamek and Darrow (2012) emphasized that with assistance, music experiences can provide opportunities for assertiveness, creativity, flexibility, self-esteem, and socialization as well as creativity and expression: “Asking students to articulate their reasons for preferring one style of music to another, or one song to another, is one way to promote critical or analytical thinking” (p. 5). Moreover, music experiences can offer young people a better quality of life when entering adulthood, which is of deep concern to many parents of children with disabilities (Brotherson et al., 2008; Carter et al., 2013).

Families, the Arts, and Students who are Gifted and Talented The National Association for Gifted Children (2017) reports that 6 percent of public school students in the United States are enrolled in gifted and talented programs. It is important to remember that students who are considered to be gifted and talented also face family challenges. In addition, they “can face a number of situations that may constitute sources of risk to their social and emotional development” (Reiss & Renzulli, 2004, p. 119). One of these situations is “unsupported social, school, and home environments” (p. 119). The following two case studies are based on students who are considered twice exceptional. Each has documented disabilities as well as a classification of intellectual giftedness. The first student has a dual classification of intellectual giftedness and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD as well as a specific learning disability). The second student has a dual classification of intellectual giftedness and ASD. These cases are presented to illustrate the experiences of families with children who are twice exceptional.

Intellectually Gifted Students Students who are highly gifted often experience no cognitive academic challenges in school for the first few years (Winner, 1996). When students have little to no experience developing self-determination or problem-solving skills, they are less able to do so when they first encounter a challenge (Silverman, 1993). When students who are intellectually gifted are provided with purposeful and intentional challenges, their social and emotional development can be enhanced

272

Family Perspectives

Case Study Alethea My daughter, Alethea, was a very active child. She talked and walked early and was usually crabby when we weren’t doing something outside. She went to kindergarten early (she was only 4-yearsold) and her teacher was impressed that not only did she know all her letters and numbers, she was reading Little House on the Prairie. At the same time, Alethea would come home frequently telling me that her “bear left the cave” (referring to her behavior chart) and that the teacher made her sit in the purple chair for talking too much. She was often invited to birthday parties and sleepovers, however, after we reciprocated, the relationship seemed to fizzle. We even threw a New Year’s Eve sleepover to give parents a night out and to try to foster friendships. It seems that Alethea was often rough with her friends, both verbally and physically, and was considered too bossy to play with on the playground. As Alethea progressed through school, we saw repeats of the same experiences. She loved singing and dancing so we signed her up for musical theatre classes and dance classes. The teachers were always delighted to have her in the beginning. After a month or so, we would start getting notes home or a teacher would meet us at the car. After one particularly bad musical theatre session, we were asked to stay in the classes with Alethea to help her with social skills and getting along with others. It was at about this same time that Alethea was identified as being highly gifted, and as having ADHD and a specific learning disability. We weren’t sure what to do with this information, so we didn’t tell the dance and musical theatre teachers. Honestly, we were afraid they wouldn’t let her come to class anymore if they knew how complicated she was. Alethea’s complications continued into high school. She dropped out of almost everything once she had burned through the friend group or alienated the adults. It was no longer socially acceptable for us to sit in on classes, and Alethea thought that just made things worse. We stayed home a lot more and Alethea spent almost all of her free time watching Netflix or on Facebook where she would create multiple profiles and had many make believe friends. We felt the after school arts had let us down and our school system didn’t have any dance or musical theatre options. It broke our hearts to see our active and artsy daughter stay home without friends or an outlet that made her happy. School was very easy for her and she floated her way into college without even trying. She tried to do theatre there, however, found she didn’t have the collaborative or social skills necessary to work in a group like that. I really wish the arts teachers in the beginning had made more effort, or I wish we had known what to do to help. Alethea is now a computer programmer who creates fabulous outdoor worlds for video games.

prior to their first daunting cognitive encounters (VanTassel-Baska, 1998). This can, perhaps, ameliorate the possibility of a formidable and highly frustrating situation. Having a child in the family who is gifted can pose challenges. “A student may have the chronological age of 10, and the mental age of 15. This can cause a great deal of difficulty when processing information and overcoming emotional situations” (Hammel & Hourigan, 2017, p. 172). These challenges can have far-reaching implications in the home and the arts classroom. Students who are intellectually gifted may not necessarily be talented in the arts (Hammel, 2016). One assumption is that gifted means globally gifted, and if a student is gifted, she is going to find all academic situations relatively easy to master. For most students, this is incorrect. It can also be fairly frustrating for a child who is intellectually gifted to find that she must work more assiduously

273

Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

than expected in an arts situation (Silverman, 1993). Students who are intellectually gifted may find their first challenges in a music or arts situation (Hammel & Hourigan, 2013). By building on the academic and social strengths and interests of students, teachers form relationships with them. These relationships can lead to more appropriate risk-taking behaviors in students, who may otherwise be unwilling to risk struggling or failing in a music or arts situation (VanTassel-Baska, 1998).

Highly Talented Students The arts are essential to shaping who we are (Bennett, 1986) but, for talented students with disabilities, the focus often remains on the disability, while the development of talent is delayed or

Case Study Joel Joel’s voice could fill an auditorium by the time he was 3-years-old. He often sang instead of speaking and thrilled his speech therapists with his own versions of folk songs for children. The hospital staff loved him and enjoyed seeing his happy face as he trotted in for speech and occupational therapy 3 days a week. Joel also had ASD. Once he learned to sing, Joel then began talking. Once he got started talking, he never looked back. By the time Joel started school, he happily no longer qualified for speech therapy. He loved school and enjoyed talking to everyone about his favorite subject—The Waltons television show. He did not notice that others were not as excited as he was. Joel found school exhausting. Between the sensory challenges and the academic expectations, he frequently found himself zoning out and singing songs during class. He hadn’t made any friends by the end of third grade and his parents were worried. They started looking around for opportunities for Joel to make friends out of school. Because he liked to sing, they signed him up for the local children’s choir. It seemed a perfect way to meet other children who liked to sing. The children’s choir was not a success. It met for 2 ½ hours after school on Mondays. Joel was always extra tired on Mondays because of the transition back to the school week. The director was initially thrilled to have his beautiful soprano voice and told the parents that Joel also had perfect pitch. Once rehearsals started, the director was less positive about Joel and required his mother to come to dress rehearsal with him. Joel loved to ask questions about music. He often asked them during rehearsal. His mother tried to include the behavior system used at school, but the director said she didn’t have time. Joel was getting frustrated about the negative interactions and started losing interest in choir. He quit going before the school year ended. In middle school, Joel signed up for choir. His mother was nervous about choir and wanted him to have a good experience. She asked his special education teacher to talk to the choir director about Joel and what he needed to succeed in choir. This director was the opposite of the community director and Joel loved choir! He had solos on almost every concert and the choir director enrolled him in a special camp that summer. Joel was so reinforced by the music and his participation in choir that he continued into high school. While show choir was difficult, the choreographer designed parts that fit his ability to move and Joel was successful in choir all the way through high school. His family was thrilled that Joel had found his place and a group of friends who appreciated and accepted him. Joel continues to sing today in a church choir and wants to start a choir for adults with disabilities.

274

Family Perspectives

considered to be far less important. While this is reasonable in one sense, it suspends the ability of the child to develop his own sense of self-worth and the purpose he sees for his life. Many decisions are made for, rather than with, children who have special needs. The catalyst to change this is the involvement of parents and their abilities to advocate for their children. Parents and guardians are the change agents and can make all the difference in the amount of time and attention focused on their children’s talents rather than the amelioration of academic and/or social deficits. A Google search provides several well-known talent showcases for children with disabilities. The most prestigious of these opportunities is sponsored by the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts and is available through the VSA International Young Soloists Competition. Videos are available online and can provide support, challenges, and a way forward for talented children with disabilities (http://education.kennedy-center.org//education/vsa/programs/ young_soloists.cfm). The most important caveat regarding children with talent who also have disabilities is that those closest to them have a great responsibility to nurture the talent while also working with therapists and teachers to continue to support efforts to improve levels of functioning at home, school, and in the community (Winner, 1996). This additional task makes the job of parenting talented children more complicated but well worth the effort as their children have the opportunity to know and develop their potentials in the arts.

Conclusion Are the arts an important part of the qualities of life for families who are challenged by disability and differences? Many families may not know how participation in the arts can benefit their ­children and their entire families, and they may not feel comfortable advocating for the arts education of their children. Turnbull, Turnbull, Erwin, Soodack, and Shogren (2015) explained that many family members feel welcome as part of the team with professionals working together to provide the best qualities of life for their families, while other families, based on their backgrounds, educations, or socioeconomic statuses, view special educators and administrators as not valuing their inputs. In fact, many yield to the experts, thinking that they know what is best. Turnbull et al. cautioned that without mutual respect and trust among all team members (e.g. special educators, problem solvers, and service providers), there would be less chance for success. From their perspective, “establishing an open and honest communication is essential to creating effective partnerships” (p. 189). Where do opportunities in the arts fit within this scheme? This examination of the literature suggests four main areas where the arts can provide an enhanced quality of life for families: (a) communication, (b) respite, (c) self-determination and resilience, and (d) community support. First, the arts can enhance opportunities to communicate. This communication can either be within the family or with potential social circles. Providing the opportunity for children with disabilities, those who are intellectually gifted, and those who have exceptional talent presents occasions for social communication that may increase the amount of social engagement, joint attention, and sincere interactions they have with others. The more children can experience increased interactions within artistic endeavors, the more opportunities they will have for communication in group settings. This can greatly increase their feelings of self-worth and senses of belonging (Hourigan, 2016). Second, the arts provide opportunities for respite. Community arts programs can be designed in ways that support families by permitting children to be dropped off and picked up when the program is concluded. As illustrated in the case study at the beginning of this chapter, Sean’s mother dropped him off at the Prism Project. She then had time to herself to do what she needed. This is important. Many families discourage the participation of their children in community

275

Ryan M. Hourigan and Alice M. Hammel

arts activities because of extra work and complicated arrangements. For families of children with disabilities, this might include, for example, specialized transportation, the availability of a nurse, or bathroom assistance. Arts programs that build in necessary supports for children also provide valuable support for their families as well. Lastly, the arts can provide social and community support for children and youth with disabilities and their families. As illustrated in the case study example, Sean’s mother not only found friends for her son but also found a friend or two for herself. In addition, she found a college student willing to be trained and serve as a respite worker. Coordination among all stakeholders can result in more successful arts programming, better support, and enhanced qualities of life for families and their children with disabilities.

References Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2012). Music participation as a means to facilitate self determination and transition to community life for students with disabilities. The intersection of arts education and special ­education: Exemplary programs and approaches. Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the ­Performing Arts. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/resources/ FinalprofessionalpapersbookArticle6.pdf Adamek, M., & Darrow, A. A. (2018). Arts in the therapeutic process: Art therapy, dance/movement t­ herapy, and music therapy in schools. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 216–231). New York: Routledge. Armstrong, M. I., Birnie-Lefcovitch, S., & Ungar, M. T. (2005). Pathways between social support, family, well being, quality of parenting, and child resilience: What we know. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 14(2), 269–281. Bayat, M. (2007). Evidence of resilience in families of children with autism. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 51(9), 702–714. Bennett, W. (1986). First lessons: A report on elementary education in America. Washington, DC: Department of Education. Brault, M. W. (2012). Americans with disabilities: 2010, household economic studies. Washington, DC. US ­Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration: US Census Bureau. Brotherson, M. J., Cook, C. C., Erwin, E. J., & Weigel, C. J. (2008). Understanding self determination and families of young children with disabilities in home environments. Journal of Early Intervention, 31(1), 22–43. Carter, E. W., Lane, K. L., Cooney, M., Weir, K., Moss, C. K., & Machalicek, W. (2013). Self-­determination among transition-age youth with autism or intellectual disability: Parent perspectives. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 38(3), 129–138. Darling, S. M., & Gallagher, P. A. (2007). Needs of and supports for African American and European American caregivers of young children with special needs in urban and rural settings. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 24(2), 98–109. Groce, N., Kembhavi, G., Wirz, S., Lang, R., Trani, J., & Kett, M. (2011). Poverty and Disability-a critical review of the literature in low and middle-income countries. The Leonard Cheshire Disability and InclusiveDevelopment Centre. Working paper series no. 16. Retrieved from www.ucl.ac.uk/lc-ccr/centrepublications/ workingpapers/WP16_Poverty_and_Disability_review.pdf Hammel, A. (2016). Twice exceptional. In D. V. Blair & K. A. McCord (Eds.), Exceptional music pedagogy for children with exceptionalities (pp. 16–38). New York: Oxford Press. Hammel, A., & Fischer, K. (2014). “It’s not easy being green”: Charter Schools, the arts, and students with diverse needs. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 44–51. Hammel, A. M., & Hourigan, R. M. (2013). Teaching music to children with autism. New York: Oxford ­University Press. Hammel, A., & Hourigan, R. M. (2017). Teaching music to students with special needs: A label-free approach (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. Hartley, S. L., Barker, E. T., Seltzer, M. M., Floyd, F., Greenberg, J., Orsmond, G., & Bolt, D. (2010). The relative risk and timing of divorce in families of children with an Autism Spectrum Disorder. Journal of Family Psychology, 24(4), 449–457.

276

Family Perspectives Harvey, M. W., & Kemp, J. D. (2018). New designs in career and workforce development for youth with disabilities in the arts. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 278–297). New York: Routledge. Hourigan, R. H. (2016). Lessons from the Prism Project: Pedagogical viewpoints in music education in teaching students with Autism Spectrum Disorder. In D. Blair & K. McCord (Eds.), Exceptional pedagogy for children with exceptionalities: International perspectives (pp. 61–84). New York: Oxford University Press. Hourigan, R. M. (2014). Intersections between school reform, the arts, and special education: The children left behind. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 35–38. King, G.A., Zwaigenbaum, L., King, S., Baxter, D., Rosenbaum, P., & Bates, A. (2006). A qualitative investigation of changes in the belief systems of families of children with autism or down syndrome. Childcare, Health & Development, 32(3), 353–369. Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. National Association for Gifted Children. (2017). Frequently asked questions about gifted education. Retrieved from www.nagc.org/resources-publications/resources/frequently-asked-questions-about-gifted-education National Gateway to Self-Determination. (n.d.). What is self-determination? Retrieved from www.ngsd.org/ everyone/what-self-determination Nicholson, J. M., Berthelsen, D., Abad, V., Williams, K., & Bradley, J. (2008). Impact of music therapy to promote positive parenting and child development. Journal of Health and Psychology, 13(2), 226–238. Patterson, J. (2002). Integrating family resilience and family stress theory. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(2), 349–360. Reiss, S. M., & Renzulli, J. S. (2004). Current research on the social and emotional development of gifted and talented students: Good news and future possibilities. Psychology in the Schools, 41(1), 119–130. Silverman, L. K. (1993). Counseling the gifted and talented. Denver, CO: Love. Turnbull, A. A; Turnbull, H. R; Erwin, E. J.; Soodak, L. C.; Shogren, K. A. (2015). Families, professionals, and exceptionality: Positive outcomes through partnerships and trust (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Turnbull, R., Huerta, N., & Stowe, M. (2006). The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act as amended in 2004. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. US Census Bureau. (2005). Disability and American families: 2000. Census 2000 Special Reports. Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce. Van Riper, M. (2007). Families of children with Down syndrome: Responding to “a change in plans” with resilience. Journal of Pediatric Nursing, 22(2), 116–128. VanTassel-Baska, J. (1998). Excellence in educating gifted and talented learners (3rd ed.). Denver Co: Love. Wexler, A. (2014). Reaching higher? The impact of the Common Core State Standards on visual arts, poverty, and disability. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 52–61. Whelchel, R. (2010). What’s in a name? Minority access to precollege art education. Arts Education Policy Review, 102(1): 32–36. Winner, E. (1996). Gifted children. New York, NY: Perseus. Wymbs, B. T., Pelham, W. E., Molina, B. S. G., Gnagy, E. M., & Wilson, T. K. (2008). Rate and predictors of divorce among parents of youths with ADHD. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76, 735–744.

277

18 Career and Workforce Development in the Arts for Youth with Disabilities Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

My father was not a quadruple congenital amputee, was not born nor did he live without arms or legs as I have my entire life. He did contribute mightily to my wonderful, well-prepared life. But he doesn’t truly know how difficult it is to open a door with a shiny round doorknob using two artificial clamps for hands or to pull these same heavy doors open. That inaccessible door was not just a physical barrier; it told me, unintentionally, that my passage through the door was not a right but merely a permission not accomplished independently but with the help of another. This is oppression, fully despised by those of us with disabilities who are proud, free, and productive. And it is quite easily solved by universal design. (Kemp, 2002, para 3)

Reflecting on his own experiences as a person with a disability, John Kemp (2002; co-author of this chapter) expressed his appreciation for the influential architect Ron Mace, who created the term and promoted the practice of Universal Design. Mace used a wheelchair for most of his life and exemplified how people with disabilities who choose careers in the arts and design bring unique perspectives, shaped by years of practice, in devising innovative ways to maneuver through inaccessible environments. “Designers with disabilities,” wrote Kemp, “are essential in the creation of a more universally accessible world” (para 5). In today’s economy, art and design are an integral part of how we conduct business and how we learn. Composing an email, designing an electronic circuit, creating a brochure, and ­m anaging a project all require a creative design approach. The current focus on careers in the STEM fields of Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics encourages students, teachers, administrators, and stakeholders to collaboratively shape their visions of learning and work. Commonalities include blended learning, flipped classrooms, and strong incorporation of ­technology; ­project-based learning, which requires critical thinking and problem-solving skills; and the c­ reation of a maker culture, which often includes fabrication laboratories, or fab labs, that use coding skills with 3-D and laser printers. Does education’s emphasis on preparing youth for careers in the STEM fields leave the arts behind? Not at all, assuming that educators, parents, students, and funders accept a broader, more inclusive definition of these fields by converting STEM to STEAM through the addition of the Arts. Building on the National Core Arts Standards (NCCAS, 2014) and the principles of design, these skills can come to life through arts education. STEAM learning, according to its advocates, positions today’s students as collaborators, innovators, and designers, preparing them

278

Career and Workforce Development

for work in a world that will be more functional, accessible, engaging, and rewarding (Keane & Keane, 2016). For students with disabilities (SWD), pursuing creative career paths as artists, performers, and designers can offer many opportunities. However, despite a broad array of potential careers in design, media, and the performing and visual arts, people with disabilities are underrepresented in these cultural fields due to barriers in education, training, and employment (Hayward & R ­ aynor, 2014). In this chapter, we address issues of public policy, Disability Culture, employment and post-school outcomes, and career and workforce development, regarding SWD and the arts. We discuss career opportunities in the arts from our respective vantage points: Author Harvey studies career readiness and workforce development policies and practices that help youth transition successfully to adult living, and author Kemp is an employer, advocate for the arts and people with disabilities, and member of the disability community. From our perspectives, we view the arts as a viable industry, or career choice, for youth with disabilities to engage with in career exploration and training. We first introduce youth-oriented federal policies addressing postsecondary transition and workforce development before author Kemp offers personal reflections on the culture of disability and its influence on the identity of young workers. We next look more closely at employment for youth with disabilities and strategies that support the development of their careers in the fields of creative arts and design.

The Context of Youth-Oriented Public Policy Public policy, especially concerning the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), provides supports, services, and individualized program plans designed to support post-school outcomes for SWD in their movements from school to adult life (IDEA, 2004). Specifically, IDEA mandates that all SWD aged 16 and older have transition plans as part of their individual education programs (IEPs) so that specific transition planning is a coordinated and personalized set of activities. The transition plan follows a results-oriented process focused on improving the student’s academic and functional achievement “to facilitate the movement from school to post-school activities, including postsecondary education, vocational education, integrated employment (including supported employment), continuing and adult education, adult services, independent living, or community participation” (IDEA, 20 U.S.C. 1401(34) § 300.43). The transition IEP is based on the strengths, preferences, and interests of the SWD. Professionals working with SWD interested in the arts and STEAM need to explore educational and career development opportunities as a logical approach to transition planning for these individuals. More recent public policy, such as the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA, 2014) that became effective in mid-2015 for five years, mandates a much greater emphasis on serving youth generally, and youth with disabilities specifically, through programs funded by the US Departments of Education and Labor. Each state using these funds must now devote no less than 15 percent of its WIOA monies to youth programs and, with each successive year, increase that percentage of its WIOA funding to youth. More specifically, WIOA’s Section 129(c)(2) spells out 14 youth program elements to focus these substantial, federally provided resources on youth. Some of the most critical elements, supporting the arts and career development, include: 1 Summer employment opportunities directly linked to academic and occupational learning, 2 Paid and unpaid work experience, including summer employment opportunities, internships, pre-apprenticeship programs, job shadowing, and on-the-job training opportunities, 3 Occupational skill training, which includes priority consideration for training programs that lead to recognized postsecondary credentials aligned with in-demand industry sectors and occupations,

279

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

4 Entrepreneurial skills training, 5 Services that provide labor market and employment information about in-demand industry sectors and occupations, 6 Activities that help youth prepare for and transition to postsecondary education and training. This federal government program is intended to drive new national investments in career planning for all youth, including youth with disabilities. As a result, it is important to understand how the context of Disability Culture helps shape the emerging identities of these young people as potentially successful members of the workforce.

A Personal Perspective on Disability Culture and the Workplace For those of us who identify as people with disabilities, much in our lives is the result of others telling us what they think we can and cannot do—for work, pleasure, recreation, sport, or in the arts, as examples. Only in the past 15–20 years have we, as a group, begun to embrace our identities as people with disabilities. By embracing our identities, we develop pride in ourselves and our rightful belonging as equal and contributing members in society; failing to embrace our disability identities propagates a continuous pattern of lowered self-worth and self-esteem, marginalization, and being financial burdens upon society and our families. As the disability civil rights mantras, Nothing About Us Without Us and having control and choices in any matters that involve us, are nurtured within and shared with others, we take equality more seriously and our disability identities more proudly. Younger people with disabilities respect this phenomenon as a normal part of their lives, whereas older people with disabilities are slower to accept this empowered self-view, remaining grateful for whatever kindnesses are extended to them, even if they are government or charitable programs (Kemp, 2004).

Core Cultural Values According to the thought leaders of Disability Culture over the past 25 years (i.e. Steve and Lillian Gonzalez Brown, Carol Gill, and Paul Longmore), Disability Culture is not simply the shared experience of oppression. The elements of our culture include our emerging art and humor; the piecing together of our history; our evolving language and symbols; our remarkably unified worldviews, beliefs, and values; and our strategies for surviving and thriving. The most compelling evidence of a Disability Culture is the vitality and universality of these elements, in spite of generations of crushing poverty, social isolation, a lack of education, silencing, and imposed mobility. The following tenets are among the core values of Disability Culture, as defined by these modern-day philosophers (Kemp, 2004): 1 People with disabilities have a more heightened acceptance of human differences, given others’ regard and reaction to their known and observable disabilities; 2 Interdependence is an essential element of human life. We cannot and do not pass through this world untouched or unmoved by others in need, oftentimes finding ourselves receiving assistance, sometimes unwanted. In turn, it is believed that to maintain social equality, people with disabilities enter into a social contract to assist others in the ways we are most capable of assisting; 3 People with disabilities have a high tolerance for lack of resolution, often finding ourselves repeatedly living unresolved issues within our lives, such as that of funding for services or having to prove repeatedly that we are so “disabled” that we are entitled to legally obligated human services;

280

Career and Workforce Development

4 We tap into our ability to use disability humor to find common bonds with nondisabled people, i.e. to find something absurdly hilarious in almost anything and everything about our lives, however dire they may seem to others; 5 We use a sophisticated future orientation in our lives so that if asked to travel somewhere, we literally teleport ourselves through fast time travel by thinking about what barriers we might encounter and exploring solutions to them—all at lightning speed; 6 It is strongly felt that, by living with a disability for more than just a few years, we gain the ability and insight to read others’ attitudes and conflicts through body language, tone of voice, or even physical gestures—the micro-communications of nondisabled people—in order to sort out, fill in the gaps, and grasp the latent meaning in contradictory social messages. We know, just as other minorities and women know, when condescension or patronization is occurring, though spoken words may not be, in and of themselves, wrong, illegal, or even hurtful. In essence, Disability Culture may be much like the emotional intelligence that Daniel Goleman proposed years ago. Goleman (1996) concluded, for example, that violence prevention programs are more effective when teaching core emotional competencies, such as impulse control, anger management, and how to find creative solutions to difficult social predicaments. The solution to emotional unrest, Goleman wrote, is emotional learning that is ingrained; as experiences are repeated over and over, the brain itself reflects them as strengthened pathways: neural habits to apply in times of duress, frustration, and hurt. The outcome—decent human beings—is more critical to our future than ever.

Equal Access and Barriers For people with disabilities, struggling to live a meaningful, purposeful life with dignity, much work is needed in developing high self-esteem and self-respect to throw off the frequently reinforced negative opinions and views placed unfairly upon us by nondisabled people, those ­supervisors and human resources executives who seek to fill their positions. The more people with disabilities can embrace this culture of disability to embrace self-worth and value in the workplace, as self-employed artists or as artists in the employment of others, the better and sooner we can achieve the goal of righteously belonging as equals in our society. High intelligence, it is ­estimated, is attributable to only 20 percent of life’s success, leaving a full 80 percent of success attributable to emotional intelligence: the ability to reign in impulses, read other’s innermost feelings, and handle relationships smoothly (Goleman, 1996). People with disabilities must ­understand that, when anger takes hold after confrontation with disability discrimination, this anger must be managed and redirected, ultimately to the good of all. After all, it was Aristotle who said that it is a rare skill to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, for the right purpose, in the right way (Aristotle, 350 B.C.E.). If we have learned to manage anger in this way, we might be right to be angry. If not, we will have to learn how to manage these frustrations and hurts to go forward and live good lives (Kemp, 2004). This is the intent of IDEA regarding transition services: for youth with disabilities to go forward and live good lives.

Relevant Post-School Data The United States has a long history of valuing personal and individual independence, and this is especially true regarding the qualities and characteristics of employment. Americans strongly identify with their occupations and the levels of independence these occupations afford them. However, being marginalized in society and employment is a significant barrier socially, emotionally, and relative to the self-worth of individuals with disabilities. This is unjust and does not

281

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

allow American society to benefit from the unique contributions of this community, including contributions related to the arts. President George H. W. Bush emphasized this injustice when signing the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Employment is a benchmark of our economy but continues to be a challenge for individuals with disabilities (US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016). This is especially true for youth with disabilities, who often have difficulties (a) accessing employment, (b) making meaningful attachments to the labor force, and (c) attaining independence with real quality of life, as reported by the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (see Newman et al., 2011).

Employment Data for Individuals with Disabilities Employment data from the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics (US DOL BLS, 2016) indicated that 17.5 percent of individuals with disabilities aged 16 years and older were ­employed, while 10.7 percent were unemployed. There is a significant difference when compared to persons without a disability, with data indicating that 65 percent of people were employed, and only 5.1 percent were reported as unemployed. Drilling down into the BLS data, youth with disabilities aged 16–19 years had a 30.7 percent unemployment rate compared to their same-age peers without disabilities at 16.6 percent. Youth with disabilities had a 20.3 percent unemployment rate compared to their peers without a disability at 9.4 percent for those aged 20–24 years. These gaps are endemic of employment concerns for youth with disabilities. Education and proactive IEP transition planning (e.g. STEAM) are factors in improving post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities, especially concerning employment. Art education can promote career pathways, leading to postsecondary education, arts employment, and labor market advantage for youth with disabilities in this occupational area. BLS (2016) reported employment data regarding educational levels for those aged 25 years and over. Education attainment categories included (a) less than a high school diploma; (b) high school graduate, no college; (c) some college or associate’s degree; and (d) bachelor’s degree and higher. BLS data found differences by both education level and disability classification (persons with a disability v. those without a disability). Findings regarding unemployment rates included (a) less than a high school diploma: 12.6 percent v. 7.7 percent; (b) high school graduates, no college: 9.9 percent v. 5.2 percent; (c) some college or associate’s degree: 9.9 percent v. 4.3 percent; and (d) bachelor’s degree and higher: 6.8 percent v. 2.5 percent. There was a consistent gap for persons with disabilities compared to those without disabilities (−4.3 percent = bachelor’s degree and higher, −4.7 percent = high school graduates, no college, −4.9 percent = less than a high school diploma, −5.6 percent = some college or associate’s degree). The unemployment rate for workers with disabilities was higher than for workers without disabilities across all age groups (US DOL BLS, 2016). Workers with disabilities also had a higher percentage of employment in part-time jobs (32 percent) compared to workers without a disability (18 percent). In addition, they were more likely to be employed in service-related jobs (21.7 percent) compared to workers without disabilities (17.2 percent). These findings suggest that individuals with disabilities continue to face real challenges related to employment in our society. This warrants attention, especially given the development of STEAM education, in which added value in the arts can be a positive contributor for individuals with disabilities. Education and training is critically important concerning employment (Harvey, 2002).

NLTS2 Post-School Outcomes Data NLTS2 is the second federally funded US Department of Education (US DOE) longitudinal study. NLTS2 includes a national representative sample of over 11,000 youth with disabilities

282

Career and Workforce Development

and provided data collected over a multi-year time frame using five waves of data collection for ­a nalysis. As a result, it provides “a national picture of the characteristics, experiences, and ­outcomes of secondary students with disabilities” (US DOE, 2006, p. 1). NLTS2 reports, among other components, on postsecondary education and employment participation for youth with disabilities. This longitudinal study is the only comprehensive source of its kind available to Congress and the public regarding youth with disabilities and post-school outcomes.

Postsecondary Education Participation There has been an increase in the number of youth with disabilities participating in postsecondary education and training in recent years. Data from the NLTS1 and NLTS2 indicated an increase of 19.3 percent participation rate for SWD between 1990 (26.3 percent) and 2005 (54.0 percent), while students without disabilities only realized an 8.6 percent increase during the same period (1990 – 54.0 percent; 2005 – 62.6 percent). The increases in the types of postsecondary education were equally impressive. There was a 18.8 percent increase between 1990 (13.6 percent) and 2005 (32.4 percent) for two-year college participation; a 9.1 percent increase between 1990 (5.2 percent) and 2005 (14.3 percent) for four-year college participation; and an increase of 12.8 percent between 1990 (10.2 percent) and 2005 (23.0 percent) for vocational, business, or technical school participation (Newman, Wagner, Cameto, Knokey, & Shaver, 2010). Data from the NLTS2 Wave 5, as reported over an eight-year period after their leaving high school, indicated that young adults with disabilities had a 44.2 percent participation rate in twoyear or community college; 32.3 percent in vocational, business, or technical school; and 18.8 ­percent in four-year college (Newman et al., 2011). An interesting finding was that young adults with ­d isabilities have a high rate of participation in the arts. Their enrollment in a two-year or community college indicated majors in the following areas: (a) 16.8 percent Health Care, (b) 11.1 percent ­Business/Clerical, (c) 9.1 percent Engineering/Science, (d) 8.8 percent Arts, and (e) 8.6 percent Computer-Related (see p. 28). Those enrolled in a four-year college indicated that they majored in the following areas: (a) 15.0 percent Business, (b) 12.2 percent Social Sciences, (c) 10.7 ­percent Health Care/Premed, (d) 9.8 percent Arts, (e) 8.9 percent Communication/English, and (f ) ­Engineering (p. 30). It is important to note that young adults with disabilities showed a strong interest in the arts. It is compelling that youth with disabilities are pursuing majors and/or enrolling in a primary program of study in the arts at both the two-year or community college and the four-year college level. The data validates the movement toward STEAM and careers in the arts as part of a more unified effort in career awareness, transition planning, and workforce development for youth with disabilities. STEAM makes logical sense in the next wave of educational reform. Art education in the K-12 educational system is an important aspect of schooling for SWD, leading to postsecondary education and occupational endeavors in the arts.

Employment Outcomes It is important to note that data reported by the NLTS2 is results from a targeted longitudinal study of a national representative sample of youth with disabilities, who were ages 13–16 years old and receiving services from special education programs in the 2001–2002 school year. Follow-up data were collected in waves over an eight-year period (2001–2009)1. Longitudinal employment data for youth with disabilities in the NLTS2 Wave 5 reported that 60.2 percent of young adults with disabilities were employed at the time of their interview compared to 66.1 percent for young adults without disabilities. In real terms, employment was up four percent for young adults with disabilities compared to the NLTS2 (2005) Wave 3 data (56.3 ­percent). The average number of jobs held by young adults with disabilities since high school

283

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

ranged from 2.2 to 4.6, and the average length of employment in a job ranged from 18.8 to 30.4 months (Newman et al., 2011, p. 60). Youth with disabilities had an average hourly workweek of 35.8 hours. Hourly wage earning for youth with disabilities was reported at $9.00 for parttime workers and $11.10 for full-time workers. Full-time employment was defined in NLTS2 as 35 hours or more per week. The types of jobs most frequently cited for youth with disabilities included (a) 13.1 percent food preparation and serving-related work, (b) 12.1 percent sales and related work, (c) 8.8 percent office and administrative support, (d) 8.4 percent construction and extraction, (e) 8.3 percent personal care and service, (f ) 8.0 percent transportation and material moving, and (g) 6.5 percent building and grounds cleaning and maintenance. There were 10.1 percent of youth with disabilities employed in the category of “other.” Other was constructed by combining those employment/job categories with fewer than 2.7 percent employment. The employment categories listed above and the general findings from the NLTS2 align with the overall findings reported by the US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016) on key variables (e.g. hours worked, wages, job types). The fact remains that positive employment outcomes for individuals with disabilities are challenging. This is telling, regarding both mandates and efforts in secondary transition planning, career development, and occupational training associated with post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities. Employment in the arts was not highlighted in these efforts.

Employment in the Arts There are 2.1 million artists in the United States, representing 1.4 percent of the total workforce and 6.9 percent of the professional workforce. More than one-third (39 percent) of working artists are designers (e.g. graphic, commercial, industrial, interior, fashion, floral, merchandise displayers); 17 percent are performing artists (e.g. musicians, actors); and the remaining 44 percent include fine artists, animators and arts directors, architects, and writers (National Endowment for the Arts, 2011). Data suggest that artists are highly entrepreneurial and 3.5 times more likely than the total United States workforce to be self-employed. For example, data from 2003 to 2004 indicate that 7.5 percent of the workforce was self-employed, but the rate was far higher for those in the arts, with 62 percent of fine artists, 61 percent of multimedia artists and animators, and 56 percent of art directors self-employed (Boeltzig, Hasnain, & Sulewski, 2008). Artists are generally more educated than other workers, with more than half having earned a college degree. Although artists are three times more likely to work from home, they are less likely than other workers to be employed full-time or for the full year, resulting in lower annual median incomes than those of workers with similar education levels (NEA, 2011). These data do not address the demographics of artists with disabilities, and to date, little disability research has been conducted concerning careers in the arts and published in the professional literature (Boeltzig et al., 2008). Boeltzig et al. (2008) argued for a career in the arts as a viable and even desirable choice for people with disabilities for several reasons. First, the arts continue to be a growing career field, and jobs should remain plentiful. Second, arts careers offer the flexibility to be self-employed or to work from home, options that might accommodate the needs of individuals with disabilities. Third, “involvement in the arts offers an opportunity for self-expression and the chance to participate in a vibrant disability arts community” (Boeltzig et al., 2008, p. 1). Becoming an established artist is challenging to any young person, with or without a disability, and research reveals that artists work multiple jobs more often than do workers in other sectors. This could have a negative impact on the financial situation of artists whose disability benefits might be affected by additional sources of income. Well-meaning adults, who see the arts as an impractical pathway, may discourage youth with disabilities from pursuing a career in the arts (Boeltzig et al., 2008). Therefore, it is important to learn from effective career development

284

Career and Workforce Development

strategies that have worked for successful young artists and the public policies that have helped them take their places in the workforce.

Public Policy The United States has long recognized that good education policy is also good economic public policy. The idea of having a well-educated citizenry dates back to the founding fathers. K ­ nowledge and enlightenment provide the moral and intellectual structure with which society can function under democratic principles. Education is recognized as a means to support American society with key implications related to our economic prosperity. This is especially true, with most recent educational policy developments concerning College and Career Readiness (US DOE 2009); the Every Student Succeeds Act of 2015; and the WIOA of 2014, which, among other laws, re-­ authorized the 1973 Rehabilitation Act’s Title V provisions, which emphasize employment and civil rights for people with disabilities.

Disability Policy From a constitutional perspective, education is a state’s right, but it has had historic federal ­involvement, most notably with the Great Society of the Lyndon B. Johnson Administration. The passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1964 is an excellent example. ­Education public policy has evolved over the years. Education, especially for individuals with disabilities, is a complex process with complicated mandates (Skrtic, Horn, & Clark, 2009). The IDEA includes six core principles that emphasize a free appropriate public education (FAPE) ­offered in the least restrictive environment (LRE) as two essential components of the law (­Crockett, 2018; Turnbull, Huerta, & Stowe, 2006). Equal access and equal opportunity are at the heart of disability public policy. Most importantly, through a network of broadly focused federal legislative acts, such as PL 108-446 The Individuals with Disabilities Improvement Act of 2004 PL 101-336 The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 PL 110-325 The Americans with Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008 PL 93-112 The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Section 504 PL 108-364 The Assistive Technology Act of 2004 PL 113-128 Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2014, federal disability public policy has intended to create a more seamless continuum of education and employment rights and opportunities for children, adolescents, and adults with disabilities. Since 1990, IDEA created transition planning requirements, intended to begin the process of transition from the educational system to higher education and competitive and/or integrated ­employment, including military service or community service, for youth with disabilities. Connecting these educational, transition, and vocational systems more cohesively together enables young adults with disabilities, and their families, to look at a much brighter future, including greater community participation, gainful employment, and meaningful adult life choices.

Workforce Development Workforce development and related public policy has also been critical in supporting our ­n ation’s economic well-being. Workforce development, including career development and specific occupational training, is essential in meeting the skill demands of a more technical job

285

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

market prevalent in the 21st-century labor force. As noted before, IDEA requires that all youth identified with a disability aged 16 years and older (or younger, if deemed appropriate) have a written transition plan as part of their IEP. The intent of transition planning is to identify postschool goals for SWD that focus on postsecondary education, employment, and independent living skills for success in adult life. Youth with disabilities are afforded school programs under IDEA that specify an IEP, with special education and related services that facilitate movement toward these goals. There are several relevant federal policies that support career and workforce development ­opportunities for youth with disabilities beyond the transition requirements of IDEA (2004). The Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006 (PL 109-270), the Higher Education Opportunity Act (HEOA, 2008), and the WIOA (2014) are key pieces of legislation that support career and workforce development and have a specific impact for youth with disabilities. The main purpose of the Perkins Act (2006) is to fully develop the academic and career and technical skills of secondary education and postsecondary education students enrolled in career and technical education (CTE) programs (20 U.S.C. § 2301, Sec. 2., Purpose). Specific ­occupational skills training (i.e. automotive, electronics) and career development exploration (i.e. tech ed, ­family and consumer science) are offered to high school students through a ­secondary CTE program of studies (Brustein, 2006). The Perkins Act provides programming for special populations in all CTE areas. Special population groups include those “individuals with ­d isabilities, ­individuals from economically disadvantaged families, including foster children, ­individuals preparing for non-­t raditional fields, single parents, including single pregnant women, displaced ­homemakers, and i­ndividuals with limited English proficiency” (20 U.S.C. § 2301, Sec. 3 ­Definitions  – 29 S­ pecial Populations). The Perkins Act mandates program of study linkages with ­academic ­content  and CTE occupational content that supports college and career readiness. It also supports integrated career pathways programs that align with the goal of supporting college-ready and ­career-ready high school graduates (US DOE, 2009). CTE programs have been identified as very beneficial for SWD, concerning post-school employment (Harvey, 2002; Wagner, Newman, & Jauitz, 2015). Occupational skills training offered through a sequenced concentration of program of study courses (i.e. automotive tech, graphic arts, CNA) and career pathways offered through career cluster programs lead to positive post-school outcomes for SWD. These ­include higher levels of employment and greater attachment to the labor force, with more ­full-time ­employment, more hours worked, higher wages, and higher levels of satisfaction and quality of life indicators  (­Harvey, 2002; Rabren, Carpenter, Dunn, & Carney, 2014; Rhodes, 2014; Wagner et al., 2015). The HEOA of 2008 supports the efforts of higher education, with mandated policies, provisions, rules and responsibilities, and resources, including financial assistance, for postsecondary students. This legislation provides supports for individuals with disabilities in the revision to student loan requirements and the dollars available to support SWD enrolled in postsecondary education. The qualifications for these financial resources mirror those ­r equired by the Social Security Administration, related to Social Security Disability Insurance eligibility determination. This change to the HEOA created significant supports for the participation of individuals with disabilities in higher education. Transition to postsecondary education with supports and resources for SWD is important (Venezia & Jaeger, 2013). The HEOA also addressed college affordability by increasing Pell Grant awards, reducing interest rates on student loans, capping loan repayment levels based on income, and addressing loan forgiveness options. The HEOA supports greater opportunities and access for persons with disabilities participating in postsecondary education by limiting one of the main barriers: affordability.

286

Career and Workforce Development

The HEOA also addressed STEM programs. Emphasis on STEM programs, and supports for this focus area, is a critical component of College and Career Readiness, supporting advanced skills demanded by the 21st-century workplace (Bottoms & Sundell, 2016). Program integrity is also addressed in the HEOA (see Part H). Providing equal opportunity and equal access with adequate resources and supports to all individuals, including those with disabilities, is the intent of HEOA. Youth with disabilities benefit from participation in postsecondary education, and their transition to post-school adult life is significantly enhanced through their engagement (Doren & Miesch, 2011; Grigal, Hart, & Migliore, 2011). The WIOA of 2014 offers a broad array of supports for those seeking jobs (e.g. employment, education, training, support services) in the labor market (US DOL, 2014a). This re-­authorization focused on improvements in several areas so that the Act (a) aligns federal investments to support job seekers and employers, (b) strengthens governing bodies of state, regional, and local workforce investment priorities, (c) targets workforce services to better serve job seekers, and (d) improves services to individuals with disabilities, among others. (p. 1) High-quality workforce services and specific youth programs for individuals with disabilities are a highlight of the WIOA. Increased access to programs designed to provide employment and training services are the intent. The goal is to support individuals with disabilities in workforce development specifically, to “require better employment engagement and promote physical and programmatic accessibility to employment and training services” (p. 1). The goals of the WIOA Youth Program are to increase the number of youth entering employment, postsecondary education, or advanced training as well as the number attaining a degree or certificate and making gains in literacy and numeracy. The WIOA (2014) advances skills training, employment access, and opportunities, and provides supports to occupations and specific jobs in the 21st-century labor market. This Act specifically targeted resources, supports, and services for individuals with disabilities, including youth programs that align with the goals of college and career readiness (see 29 U.S.C. § 3101, Section 129(c)(2)). Workforce development is highlighted in disability public policy. This has direct application to and implications for the arts for youth with disabilities, especially concerning access and supports for positive post-school outcomes.

From Policy to Practice in Schools The recently re-authorized Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA, 2015) has several important mandates. One specific area of the re-authorization focuses on a well-rounded education. This is important, concerning SWD and career development, college and career readiness, and student preparation for jobs in today’s skilled labor market.

Moving toward a Well-Rounded Education School improvement has dominated educational reform for more than three decades, and ESSA continues this emphasis. Provisions under ESSA support a well-rounded education including such areas as counseling, music and arts, and accelerated learning (see C ­ rockett, 2018). A well-rounded education is required as part of the ESSA mandate, and school ­d istricts can use 20 percent of Title IV funds to support these efforts (ASCD, 2015). ESSA continues to support access to the general education curriculum for SWD. In addition, it

287

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

“ensures concepts of Universal Design for Learning” (CEC, 2015, p. 3) in program and instructional provisions associated with IDEA. The intent of ESSA supports the transition mandate of IDEA and the goals that students graduate from high school with the appropriate skills to be college- and career-ready. This focus on transition is important, given the shift in employment skills identified by Bottoms and Sundell (2016). The authors indicated that for the 21st century, jobs will require advanced levels of education and training to serve a workforce, with 36 percent requiring a bachelor’s degree and 29 percent requiring an associate’s degree or some college, as dictated by the labor market (p. 1). The level of employment is anticipated to grow by 15 percent, with new economic growth in sectors of the economy that require advanced skills (National Collaboration on Workforce and Disability, 2009). These data complicate the already challenging status of employment for individuals with disabilities, especially concerning youth with disabilities (BLS, 2016). Part of proactive transition planning at the local level under IDEA (2004) includes comprehensive approaches to career development. Career development should begin early and extend through the K-12 system for SWD. This includes career awareness, career exploration, career preparation, and career assimilation (Flexer, Baer, Luft, & Simmons, 2013). These are progressive stages in career development, designed to assist in the successful transition of youth with disabilities as they move through the school system. Career development provides learning opportunities for SWD to experience work/occupation orientation, exploration of jobs, and career decision-making with specific skill development, all leading to postsecondary education and/or employment. Transition in secondary schools typically follows a model of Taxonomy for Transition Programming to include (a) student development, (b) student-focused planning, (c) family engagement, (d) program structures, and (e) inter-agency collaboration (Kohler, Gothberg, Fowler, & Coyle, 2016). Critical elements from this model that support SWD in pursuit of college and career readiness include, among others, “assessment, academic and employment/occupational skills, instructional context, IEP development, family involvement, transition planning strategies, student participation, and a collaborative framework for student success” (p. 3). Person-centered planning, tied to career development, that enhances post-school opportunities for youth with disabilities is also an important aspect of secondary transition. Person-centered planning includes using the educational aspects of career development and transition programming that assist SWD in planning for adult life, using self-determination, decision-making, and empowerment to make good choices (­Wehman, 2013).

Transition Models Approaches that guide movement from school to adult life for SWD can include The Pathways Model (Kochhar-Bryant & Greene, 2009). This model is focused on four specific pathways leading to post-school outcomes for youth with disabilities: (a) academic/postsecondary education linked to 2 and 4-year college, (b) career-technical training linked to vocational technical school or career apprenticeships, (c) employment linked to competitive employment, and (d) supported settings linked to competitive or supported employment and independent or supported living. (p. 14) The intent of transition planning is to design an appropriate program of study in high school that provides educational opportunities and supports to meet the unique needs of SWD. A key goal is

288

Career and Workforce Development

to facilitate successful transitions for youth with disabilities to post-school outcomes and college and career readiness. Toms Barker (2014) espoused a Basic Career Pathways Model, which included a progressive pathway to workforce development and employment. The pathways include (a) Basic Bridge Programs leading to unskilled jobs, (b) Sectional Bridge Programs leading to semi-skilled jobs, (c) Short-Term Certification Programs leading to entry-level skilled jobs, (d) 1–2 Year Certification leading to Articulation Agreement Programs leading to mid-level skilled jobs, and (e) BA+ Programs leading to upper skilled jobs. (p. 5) This pathway model provides approaches to careers that lead to specific outcomes focused on targeted occupational employment for youth with disabilities. The Taxonomy for Transition and related pathway models provide direction in transition planning, career development, and self-determination, addressing both career-ready and college-ready aspects for youth with disabilities. These models need to be considered for SWD who are interested in the arts and STEAM education. The development of these career pathways in the transition planning process for youth with disabilities is essential in meeting the goals of the IDEA. They are especially important for SWD interested in the arts, whereas career and workforce development opportunities have not typically focused on occupational outcomes and/or career pathways into the arts as represented in traditional transition, IEP postsecondary education/employment planning. The field needs to explore more ways of establishing career development efforts and more well-articulated pathways into the arts for youth with disabilities.

Arts and Effective Career Development Strategies Without meaningful engagement and encouragement by knowledgeable and accommodating professionals, many young people with disabilities rarely gain the necessary experience in exploring the arts for personal, creative expression and future careers. Failing to make this learning available also fails student artists with disabilities by making potential careers in the arts seem unattainable. Young people with disabilities and their career counselors need to see examples of how design-related work and employment in the arts can be viable opportunities. Examples and strategies are also important in raising the expectations of employers in design firms, theaters, studios, and galleries, who may never have had an employee with a disability (Ostroff, 2002). Several sources, initially generated by conversations among members of the arts and disability communities over the past two decades, continue to provide effective strategies for career development, based on the lived experiences of successful designers and artists. The first National Forum on Careers in the Arts for People with Disabilities in media, performing, visual, and literary arts was held at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in 1998. Over 300 representatives from government and state agencies, service groups, and nonprofit organizations as well as artists and teachers came together to examine the state of education and job opportunities, and to identify strategies for overcoming obstacles. The National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) and inter-agency partners convened a second forum at the Kennedy Center in 2009 to evaluate the progress made since 1998, and a subsequent evaluation was conducted of the Statewide Careers in the Arts Forums or Follow-Up Projects, conducted across the United States between 2002 and 2013. These efforts engaged over 9,000 artists with and without disabilities, service providers, arts organization staff, educators, and others working with artists

289

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

with disabilities, and generated hundreds of partnerships across arts and disability organizations (Hayward & Raynor, 2014). Among the many activities that followed the 1998 forum were national studies offering recommendations for pursuing careers in design (Ostroff, Limont, & Hunter, 2002), effective career development strategies (Boeltzig, Hasnain, & Sulewski, 2009), and facilitating careers in the arts for people with disabilities (Bienvenu, Tuzzolino, Raynor, & Hayward, 2016). These studies are discussed briefly, along with recommendations for improving education and workforce development.

Design Careers Data collected from interviews and questionnaires of 33 international designers with disabilities provided detailed information about education and employment in the design field and also revealed a strong need for mentoring and networking to make young people aware that this field is a satisfying profession (Ostroff et al., 2002). Questions explored “issues of disability and self-identity, presentation of self in the marketplace, the relationship of disability activism to professional life in design, and levels of inclusion in their professional organizations” (Hunter, 2002, para 1). Findings revealed that the majority of participants’ interest in the arts and design began during childhood, but they received little assistance in the transition period between school and employment. Participants also experienced physical, programmatic, and attitudinal barriers in pursuing access to design education. Those who did use disability resource centers on college campuses reported that staff needed more knowledge about the frequent inaccessibility of studio-based classes, especially in architecture and landscape, interior, apparel, and industrial design for students with disabilities. Most of the designers (88 percent) reported that their design practice differed from that of others without disabilities and that “the creative response to disability, not disability itself, is what improved one’s expertise. Skills developed in strategies for living well with disability are skills which are fundamental to successful design” (Hunter, 2002, para 9). According to these designers, not only will design education improve with the addition of more students with disabilities—so will the practice of design, when more designers with disabilities are recruited and supported in the workplace. (A list of successful strategies for students to use in developing a design career is included in Appendix A.)

Career Development Strategies To determine effective career development strategies, Boeltzig et al. (2009) reported on the educational and career development experiences of 47 young artists with disabilities, who were finalists in a program funded over 10 years by Volkswagen America, Inc. and coordinated by VSA, the international organization on arts and disability (http://education.kennedy-center.org// education/vsa/). The purpose of this program was to expand curriculum in the fine arts in high schools and colleges to include more people with disabilities, to encourage careers in the arts and arts education for young people with disabilities, and to showcase the artistic talents of artists with disabilities through annual juried fine arts competitions. The young artists ranged from 16 to 25 years of age, and most had been making art since they were children. Boeltzig et al. (2009) focused on how these participants overcame barriers and employed strategies they found to be effective in establishing themselves in artistic careers, ranging from painting and drawing to photography, graphic arts, and digital imaging. “Art was overwhelmingly a positive influence in the lives of these young people” (Boeltzig et al., 2009, p. 765), with some youth remarking that art helped them to cope with academic difficulties. Others saw art as a tool for overcoming communication barriers and as a means for coping with depression and anxiety. Each young artist had employed effective career strategies before being selected as a finalist, such as (a)

290

Career and Workforce Development

enrolling in postsecondary education; (b) joining professional arts associations; (c) working in art studios or in arts-based programs; (d) studying with a professional artist; (e) interning at galleries, museums, and art centers; and (f ) submitting their art work for public exposure to progress in their artistic development. These strategies were found to be successful in helping these young artists overcome obstacles to pursuing their educational and career goals in the arts.

A National Dialogue on Careers in the Arts To build upon the national dialogue initiated two decades earlier, the NEA, in partnership with the National Arts and Disability Center (NADC) and the US Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), conducted the Careers in the Arts for People with Disabilities National Online Dialogue in 2016. This study utilized crowdsourcing tools to engage 400 artists with disabilities and their allies in an online conversation about ways to increase career preparation and employment in the arts (Bienvenu et al., 2016). Participants were encouraged to share personal experiences and success stories about the challenges and opportunities of arts employment; preparation for careers as artists or arts administrators; issues of disability identity, disclosure, and representation in the arts; and examples of arts and disability organizations supporting people in their arts careers. The most pressing recommendations resulting from this online dialogue addressed the importance of (a) increasing access to arts education and professional development opportunities for employers; (b) including disability as part of the diversity agenda; (c) using social media and virtual platforms to reduce isolation and increase networking, the showing and selling of art, and the publicity of events; (d) improving funding opportunities and strengthening grant writing skills; (e) maintaining crucial public benefits, including Social Security income; and (f ) improving career supports for arts employment from Vocational Rehabilitation agencies. In sum, the data suggested that efforts should continue on two fronts: (a) working with the arts community to include artists with disabilities and (b) working with the disability employment community to promote the arts as a viable career choice for people with disabilities (Bienvenu et al., 2016).

Impact and Implications for Practice Bottoms and Sundell (2016) indicated a lack of support from counselors, teachers, and parents in encouraging students to take college-ready academic courses or career CTE programs. In meeting the ESSA requirement of a well-rounded education, English, Rasmussen, Cushing, and Therriault (2016) concluded that a “well-rounded program of instruction provides opportunities to broaden students’ academic readiness and may include nonacademic readiness” (p. 10). Best practices in high school transition for SWD also include participation in employment preparation programs, self-determination training, and community and/or inter-agency collaboration (Landmark, Ju, & Zhang, 2010). Brand, Valent, and Danielson (2013) suggested several ways to improve transition and college and career readiness for SWD. These include means to (a) revisit and strengthen guidance counseling and transition services; (b) develop and assess a variety of approaches for knowledge, skills, attitudes, and behaviors needed in adult life; and (c) design multiple pathways to college and careers (p. 5). All aspects are important to meaningful transition planning for youth with disabilities and hold promise for those aspiring to the arts. Although SWD are participating in greater numbers in postsecondary education, challenges remain for professionals involved with transition planning in this area (Newman et al., 2010). There is equal concern with the post-school employment outcomes for youth with disabilities (Grigal et al., 2011). Guiding principles from the National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability (NCWD, 2009) addressed School-Based Preparatory Experiences

291

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

in Guidepost 1, which specifies that “academic programs are based on clear state standards, CTE programs are based on professional and industry standards, and curricular and program options are based on universal design of school, work, and community-based learning experiences” (p. 4). NCWD also speaks to Career Preparation and Work-Based Learning Experiences in Guidepost 2, which specifies career assessments to help identify students’ school and post-school preferences and interests, structured exposure to postsecondary education and other life-long learning opportunities, and exposure to career opportunities that ultimately lead to a living wage, including information about educational requirements, entry requirements, income and benefits potential, and asset accumulation. (p. 5) The implications here are that career development, person-centered planning, and self-­ determination need to be at the core of transition planning at the secondary level (IDEA, 2004). Career pathway decision-making is a major part of career development for youth with disabilities and needs to lead to college and career readiness. Realistic workforce development options and successful post-school outcomes that improve the status, condition, and quality of life for individuals with disabilities are essential components. It is important to provide opportunities for youth with disabilities to pursue their hopes and dreams. This is especially true with regard to STEAM education and careers in the arts, with broader opportunities for youth with disabilities.

Recommendations for Supporting Young Artists with Disabilities The following recommendations, adapted from Boeltzig et al. (2008, 2009), are intended for educators, rehabilitation counselors, and others who support young people with disabilities pursuing careers in the arts and design: 1 Enhance and increase access to the arts by designing programs responsive to the strengths and unique art-producing needs of young artists with disabilities; 2 Enhance and increase access to postsecondary arts education and training for professional careers through transition experiences that explore opportunities that match young artists’ career goals and requirements; 3 Build awareness of the wide array of careers in the visual, performing, and media arts and other professions that use artists’ skills, such as in architecture and landscape, graphic, interior, and clothing design; 4 Facilitate professional networking and mentoring in the arts and disability communities through internships and opportunities to perform and display artwork in local community venues; 5 Provide exposure to funding opportunities and training in writing grants to cover the ­expense of supplies, instruments, and other costly materials and resources; 6 Provide opportunities to learn about the business aspects of a career in the arts. Artists with disabilities planning to commercialize their art should learn about starting and running a business and promoting their art. They also need to be aware of how part-time work or self-employment intersects with disability benefits. Social Security work incentives, for ­example, can be valuable tools to help artists pursue art-making opportunities; conversely, earning above what is considered to be substantial gainful activity could risk their continued receipt of Social Security benefits.

292

Career and Workforce Development

Recommendations for Transition, Career Awareness, and Workforce Development The following recommendations are directed at K-12 school professionals, regarding important issues of transition planning, career awareness, and workforce development for students with disabilities. These include: 1 STEM to STEAM education, with the inclusion of more emphasis on the arts, needs to be part of broader college and career readiness and educational reform efforts. All aspects of college and career readiness for learners in the American educational system need to be a priority, including career awareness and career development in the arts. This needs to be an emphasis at the federal, state, and local levels; 2 Transition IEP teams need to seriously explore pathways in the arts as viable options for youth with disabilities in decision-making and transition planning efforts, leading to successful post-school outcomes for SWD in the arts; 3 A well-rounded education as defined in ESSA (2015) needs to include programs of instruction that support CCR for all students and provide pathways to success for all learners. STEAM education and success in CCR, especially in the arts and music for youth with disabilities, must be a focus for school counselors, general and special education teachers, the CTE community, parents, and students, if sound career planning choices and appropriate career pathway decision-making is to occur for youth with disabilities; 4 Career development, as supported by Flexer et al. (2013), coupled with an emphasis on the ­Taxonomy for Transition Planning and pathway models (e.g. Kochhar-Bryant & Greene, 2009; Toms Barker, 2014) need to be implemented in the K-12 School System for SWD and integrated with Boeltzig et al.’s (2008) recommendations for supporting young artists with disabilities; 5 All stakeholders, including educators, parents, and SWD, need to be well aware of labor market needs, occupational demands, and their associated educational/skill requirements for ­employment regarding jobs in the 21st-century labor force. This includes industry options, career opportunities, and employment specifically focused on endeavors in the arts.

Conclusion Artists and designers are an integral part of the workforce, and people with disabilities of all ages must be afforded every opportunity to participate in every art form, from every perspective—as students and interns, educators, business owners, and employees of others. Disability Culture teaches us to understand how our disabilities impact others and how we must learn to manage our emotional responses to the numerous times we will face societal discrimination on the basis of disability. Access to a career in the arts can be an appropriate pathway and a good option for people with disabilities to consider. Society is well served by the inclusion of the arts in all aspects of our lives, and we are even better served by the inclusion of all people with disabilities in the arts. Disability policy (e.g. HEOA, 2008; IDEA, 2004; Perkins, 2006; WIOA, 2014) has been and will continue to be a guiding light in supporting individuals with disabilities to assimilate into and provide significant contributions to American society through employment, education and training, and community participation. The arts are yet another opportunity for us to realize the unique contributions that members of the disability community can make, given the ­opportunity. The arts provide social, economic, and occupational/employment opportunities for individuals with disabilities to achieve the American dream (i.e. independence, self-­sufficiency, self-actualization). We all have a responsibility in making this a reality; STEAM education and creative/progressive school-community partnerships are important stepping-stones in the path forward.

293

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp

Appendix A Design Career Strategies Explore options. Talk to counselors and learn about majors and career fields that might be of interest. Pay attention to entrance requirements. While in high school, participate in college fairs at your school or in your community to meet college representatives in person. Choose a program carefully. Some design fields require completion of an accredited program to obtain a license to practice. Establish a timeline. Establish a timeline that includes deadlines for college applications and financial aid paperwork as well as your schooling. Determine how long your education will take. In some design programs, it takes five years to earn a bachelor’s degree. Find support services. Resources are not the same at each postsecondary institution. Ask specifically about accommodations for courses in your major addressing barriers presented by studio classes, software, or fieldwork and field trips. Develop and apply self-advocacy skills. Self-advocacy skills include knowing how to skillfully initiate action and interact with faculty, staff, and other students to obtain support services necessary for your learning needs. Develop and apply self-management skills. Take into account your abilities and strengths, as well as your disabilities, when scheduling classes, work, and social activities. Develop good study skills. Study skills involve knowing how you can effectively learn academic content. Use technology effectively. The use of computer and Internet resources is often essential in design education and careers. Assistive technology makes it possible for people with a variety of disabilities to use these tools. Network. Throughout the process of preparing for and attending college, conversations, interactions, and assistance from a broad range of people will likely take place. Take advantage of networking opportunities offered by the career center, professional organizations, friends, family, and coworkers, because who you know, as well as what you know, can determine your success. Build your résumé. To begin building a résumé, make a list of all of your relevant work experiences (paid and volunteer), academic experiences, and other activities. Participate in work-based learning. The career services office at your postsecondary institution may offer employment, cooperative, and internship opportunities in design fields. These Guidelines are adapted and abridged with permission from DO-IT (Disabilities, Opportunities, Internetworking, and Technology; 2011). Design careers and students with disabilities. Seattle, WA: University of Washington. Retrieved from www.washington.edu/doit/ design-careers-and-students-disabilities. DO-IT (www.washington.edu/doit/) is funded by the National Science Foundation at the University of Washington and “serves to increase the successful participation of individuals with disabilities in challenging academic programs such as those in science, engineering, mathematics, and technology” (p. 4). These strategies were developed in partnership with the Institute for ­Human Centered Design in Boston.

294

Career and Workforce Development

Note 1 The NLTS2 data do not represent “real time” national labor force participation and employment/unemployment rates as reported across the labor force by age, occupational, and industry sectors as do the US DOL BLS data.

References Aristotle. (350 B.C.E.). Nicomachean ethics. Book II, Chapter 9, 1109a27. Retrieved from http://classics.mit. edu/Aristotle/nicomachaen.2.ii.html Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD). (2015). Every student succeeds act: Comparison of the no child left behind act to the every student succeeds act. Alexandria, VA: ASCD. Bienvenu, B., Tuzzolino, L., Raynor, O., & Hayward, K. (2016). Careers in the arts for people with disabilities national online dialogue brief. National Endowment for the Arts. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/ files/careers-in-the-arts-brief-rev3_0.pdf Boeltzig, H., Hasnain, R., & Sulewski, J. S. (2008). Effective career development strategies for young artists with disabilities. The Institute Brief, 24. Retrieved from www.communityinclusion.org/article. php?article_id=295 Boeltzig, H., Sulewski, J. S., & Hasnain, R. (2009). Career development among young disabled artists. Disability & Society, 24(6), 753–769. Bottoms, G., & Sundell, K. (2016, August). Career pathways: Accelerating access to the middle class. Southeastern Regional Education Board (SREB Publication 16V18). Retrieved from https://www.sreb. org/sites/main/files/file-attachments/16v18_career_pathways_accelerating_access_middle_class. pdf.pdf Brand, B., Valent, A., & Danielson, L. (2013). Improving college and career readiness for students with disabilities. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Retrieved from www.air.org Brustein, M. (2006). Perkins Act of 2006 the authoritative guide to federal legislation for career and technical education. Alexandria, VA: Association for Career and Technical Education.  ISBN: 9780895140128. Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act. (2006). PL 109–270, 20 U.S.C. § 2301 et seq. Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). (2015). CEC’s summary of selected provisions in Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA). Arlington, VA: CEC. Retrieved from http://cecblog.typepad.com/files/cecs-summary-ofselected-issues-in-every-student-succeeds-act-essa-1.pdf Crockett, J. B. (2018). Legal aspects of teaching students with disabilities in the arts. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 59–71). New York, NY: Routledge. DO-IT. (2011). Design careers and students with disabilities. Seattle: University of Washington. Retrieved from www.washington.edu/doit/design-careers-and-students-disabilities English, D., Rasmussen, J., Cushing, E., & Therriault, S. (2016, August). Leveraging the every student succeeds act to support state visions for college and career readiness. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Retrieved from www.ccrscenter.org/ Every Student Succeeds Act. (2015). PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. Flexer, R. W., Baer, R. M., Luft, P., & Simmons, T. J. (2013). Transition planning for secondary students with disabilities (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc. Goleman, D. (1996). Emotional intelligence. New York, NY: Doubleday. Grigal, M., Hart, D., & Migliore, A. (2011). Comparing the transition planning, postsecondary education, and employment outcomes of students with intellectual and other disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals. 34(1), 4–7. Harvey, M. W. (2002). Comparison of postsecondary transitional outcomes between students with ­ ational and without disabilities by secondary vocational education participation: Findings from the N Education Longitudinal Study. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 25, 99–122. Hayward, K. & Raynor, O. (2014). Cultivating talent: Improving access to arts careers for artists with disabilities. National Arts and Disability Center, Los Angeles: University of California Los Angeles, Tarjan Center. Retrieved from www.semel.ucla.edu/sites/all/files/nadc/12-20-14%20Cultivating%20Talent_­ Statewide%20Forums%20report.pdf Higher Education Opportunity Act. (2008). PL 110–315, 20 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq.

295

Michael W. Harvey and John D. Kemp Hunter, D. G. (2002). Research summary. In E. Ostroff, M. Limont, & D. G. Hunter (Eds.), Building a world fit for people: Designers with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center. Retrieved from www.adaptiveenvironments.org/adp/profiles/research.php Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act. (2004). 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq. Keane, L., & Keane, M. (2016). STEAM by design. Design and Technology Education, 21(1), 61–82. Kemp, J. D. (2002). Foreward. In E. Ostroff, M. Limont, & D. G. Hunter (Eds.), Building a world fit for people: Designers with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center. Retrieved from www. humancentereddesign.org/adp/profiles/foreword.php Kemp, J. D. (2004). Afterword: Disability culture. In S. Klein & J. D. Kemp (Eds.), Reflections from a different journey (pp. 195–200). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. Kochhar-Bryant, C., & Greene, G. (2009). Pathways to successful transition for youth with disabilities (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill-Pearson. Kohler, P. D., Gothberg, J. E., Fowler, C., & Coyle, J. (2016). Taxonomy for transition programming 2.0: A model for planning, organizing, and evaluating transition education, services, and programs. Kalamazoo: Western Michigan University. Landmark, L. J., Ju, S., & Zhang, D. (2010). Substantiated best practices in transition: Fifteen plus years later. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 33, 165–176. doi:10.1177/0885728810376410 National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014). National Core Arts Standards. Dover, DE: State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org National Collaborative on Workforce and Disability. (2009). Guideposts for success. Washington, DC: Institute for Educational Leadership. Retrieved from NCWD/YOUTH at www.ncwd-youth.info National Endowment for the Arts. (2011). Artists and art workers in the United States. NEA research note #105. Retrieved from www.arts.gov/sites/default/files/105.pdf Newman, L., Wagner, M., Cameto, R., Knokey, A. M., & Shaver, D. (2010). Comparisons across time of the outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). (NCSER 2010–3008). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncser/pubs/20103008/pdf/20103008.pdf Newman, L., Wagner, M., Knokey, A. M., Marder, C., Nagle, K., Shaver, D., … Schwarting, M. (2011). The post-high school outcomes of young adults with disabilities up to 8 years after high school. A report from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2) (NCSER 2011–3005). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/reports/ Ostroff, E. (2002). Preface. In E. Ostroff, M. Limont, & D. G. Hunter (Eds.), Building a world fit for people: Designers with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center. Retrieved from www. humancentereddesign.org/adp/profiles/preface.php. Ostroff, E., Limont, M., & Hunter, D. G. (Eds.). (2002). Building a world fit for people: Designers with disabilities at work. Boston, MA: Adaptive Environments Center. Retrieved from www.humancentereddesign.org/ adp/profiles/ Rabren, K., Carpenter, J., Dunn, C., & Carney, J. S. (2014). Actions against poverty: The impact of career and technical education. Career development and transition for exceptional individuals. Advanced online publication. doi:10.1177/2165143414522091 Rhodes, W. W. (2014). CTE promotes prosperity. Techniques, 89(4), 39–41. Skrtic, T. M., Horn, E. M., & Clark, G. Mi (Eds.). (2009). Taking stock of special education policy and practice: A retrospective commentary. Denver, CO: Love. Toms Barker, L. (2014, May). Career pathways for youth with disabilities: Transition from school to work and lifelong learning. Paper presented at the meeting of the Pac Rim International Conference on Disability and Diversity, Honolulu, HI. Turnbull, R., Huerta, N., & Stowe, M. (2006). The individuals with disabilities education act as amended in 2004. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education. US Department of Education. (2006). An overview of findings from Wave2 of the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). (NCSER 2006–3004). Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncser/ pubs/20063004/ US Department of Education. (2009). Race to the top (Education Recovery Act as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009), Pub. L. No. 111–5, Stat. 115. US Department of Labor. (2014a). The Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act fact sheet. Retrieved from www.doleta.gov/WIOA US Department of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2016). Economic news release persons with a disability: Labor force characteristics summary (USDL-16-1248). Retrieved from www.bls.gov/news.release/disabl. nr0.htm Venezia, A., & Jaeger, L. (2013). Transitions from high school to college. The Future of Children, 23, 117–136.

296

Career and Workforce Development Wagner, M. M., Newman, L. A., & Jauitz, H. S. (2015). The benefits of high school career and technical education (CTE) for youth with learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, Advanced online publication, 1–13. doi:10.11770022219415574774 Wehman, P. (2013). Life beyond the classroom: Transition strategies for young people with disabilities (5th ed.). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co. Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. (2014). PL 113–128, 29 U.S.C. § 3101, et. seq.

297

19 International Perspectives on Arts Education and Special Education Views from the Field Donald DeVito, with Gertrude Bien Aime, Hannah Ehrli, Abijah Bertrand, and Gloria Valladares

Understanding the perspectives, attitudes, and abilities of children with exceptional needs is becoming increasingly imperative in the field of arts education. What types of artistic and pedagogical processes positively influence students who have severe physical, cognitive, and emotional needs? Which factors activate student engagement? How can the educator inspire creative artistry and response with exceptional students? These are the kinds of questions that drive my work and that of my collaborators across the globe. I am writing this chapter as a first-person narrative because my career choices have placed me directly at the intersection of arts education and special education. I work as a music educator and special education teacher at the Sidney Lanier Center in Gainesville, Florida: a public school for students with severe physical, intellectual, and emotional disabilities, between 3 and 21 years of age. I teach 180 students with autism, cerebral palsy, Down syndrome, traumatic brain injury, and significant behavioral needs. Our school has a history of providing strong support for creative programs. As a result, our students have performed inclusively with other young musicians at Carnegie Hall as well as in adaptive music lessons online with university- and community-based music programs. The Sidney Lanier music program has been internationally recognized for its local and global performances (Bingham & DeVito, 2012) and has been referred to in publications that highlight the use of assessment, technology, and collaborative instruction in music for special learners (DeVito, 2009, 2013; Higgins, Akuno, Chong, & DeVito, 2016). In 2011, I was honored to receive the Clarissa Hug National Teacher of the Year Award from the Council for Exceptional Children (CEC). The award is regarded as the highest international honor for a teacher of students with exceptionalities, including those with disabilities as well as those who are gifted.

Collaborative Engagement through the Arts Through community music activities, I aim to serve children with special needs by using technology to engage music educators from around the world in educational experiences with my students

298

International Perspectives

at the Sidney Lanier Center. We grow professionally and write grants together to benefit everyone’s programs in places such as China, Pakistan, Brazil, Haiti, and Guinea. As an active member of the International Society for Music Education (ISME), which has members from over 100 countries, I chaired the ISME Community Music Activity Commission, which includes researchers and practitioners who develop music programs to support underserved populations. Recently, I was part of music education development in the West Bank, Kazakhstan, and Haiti, where I am collaboratively developing an inclusive music and special education program at the Notre Maison orphanage in Port au Prince. This is one of the few Haitian orphanages that shelters children with disabilities. This chapter is a reflection on how my background in arts education and special education has influenced my career as a teacher and helped me to transform services with challenged populations in local and global communities. The focus of the chapter is on sustainable development for underserved populations and the importance of community art initiatives that combine both music and special education practitioners working collaboratively in a global setting. From my perspective, the value of holding credentials in both special education and music education benefits students as well as their service providers. Like a helix, music and special education have, in my experience, become entwined as a two-pronged approach to global change for children with disabilities. The collaborations described in this chapter reflect the commitment of the professional associations affiliated with the World Alliance for Arts Education (WAAE, 2015) to help connect arts educators with sustainable development initiatives around the globe. These descriptions also reflect UNESCO’s (2010) overarching goals to realize the potential of high-quality arts education “to positively renew educational systems, to achieve crucial social and cultural objectives, and ultimately to benefit children, youth, and life-long learners of all ages” (p. 2). These collaborations also reflect the commitment embodied in the guiding principles of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (United Nations, 2006) to abolish customs and practices that constitute discrimination. Several countries with more sophisticated educational systems, including the United States, have signed the Convention but have not ratified it because of concerns that some provisions might weaken more comprehensive national laws already in place (McCord, 2016). Nevertheless, recent data indicate that more than 1 billion people worldwide are considered to have disabilities, and many live in developing countries with no guarantees of their civil rights. In many places, children with disabilities have no right to an education, and “in some countries babies born with disabilities are still left to starve and die by parents who adhere to outdated thinking that there are no possibilities for people with disabilities to live meaningful and productive lives” (p. 297). In an ideal world, communities would offer all children an inclusive education in the arts, with supportive opportunities to learn and create with others (McCord, 2016). The following narrative provides an example of how relationships among international partners committed to the arts education of children with disabilities enabled the establishment of the first national center for inclusive music education in the developing country of Haiti. Although I serve as the primary narrator, my colleagues tell parts of this story in their own words.

Initiating the Development of Inclusive Arts Education in Haiti The global connections and components of music education and special education that inform this chapter are featured in the work of the Notre Maison Orphanage in Port au Prince, Haiti. Implementing inclusive music education and special education for children with significant physical and intellectual disabilities in a global setting with a significantly low Human Development Index (HDI) has been accomplished through collaborative engagements with professional associations, academic institutions, and the community-based program staff located at Notre Maison. The orphanage has a group membership in ISME, and the orphanage director, Gertrude Bien Aime, has

299

Donald DeVito et al.

an individual membership in both ISME and CEC. The research journals of these organizations can be found at the orphanage. As partners committed to sustainable development, we engage in collaborative activities in the region. Documentation of our projects includes community-based leaders as contributing authors to publications and as presenters of keynotes and conference sessions. Local leaders are full participants, networking to enhance action research and development for the populations they serve. Our partnership is not hierarchal in structure, nor is it a charity or an outreach but is educational development on equal terms through the triangulation of organizations, institutions, and community program engagement. My key partner in this work is Gertrude.

Box 1: In Her Own Words Gertrude Bien Aime Director, Notre Maison Orphanage I used to be a nun with the Missionaries of Charity, Mother Teresa’s congregation. I left the convent in 1993 and with an American, Ruth Zimmerman, opened a home for children with disabilities. We take in children off the street or those left in the abandonment room of the general hospital. I live here in the building with the children. When Social Services in Haiti has a child with a disability that they cannot help or save, they bring them to me at Notre Maison. We try to keep them going and at times can restore some to health. They light up when they hear the music around them as we are feeding and caring for them. Some cannot leave the bed, but they can hear the music. Sometimes, we carry them into the main area, so they can see all the music being made around them. The children in our orphanage started with no music, but through Donald DeVito’s visits and Skyping with his students at the Sidney Lanier School, all of us are learning together. Through inclusive music at Notre Maison, we have raised awareness in this global community about the acceptance of children with disabilities who do not have homes. Our children perform for the community and use music in their academic lessons in the orphanage. We received congas and a projector from the Society for Education and Music Psychology Research (SEMPRE) so that all the children and helpers in Notre Maison can see the people who share music with us from other countries. The community in Port au Prince is in poverty, with little sanitation, and it is still recovering from our natural disasters. Yet all the children in our orphanage either make or share music. We want to work with other orphanages in Port au Prince. First, to show the importance of music for everyone; second, as a way to create the inclusion we have at the Notre Maison Orphanage. I need to see the music approaches and styles of learning around the world for myself, so I can demonstrate and oversee this goal with other orphanages. Networking via Skype with Drs David Edmund and Chen-­ Edmund from the University of Minnesota, Duluth, makes me feel that we are not alone in doing the job. We have people who think of us and bring a feeling of hope to me and the kids, who share their Haitian music with other people online. Only with the computer have we been able to share this with others because it is not safe for the children in wheelchairs to travel far outside the area of our street. I get so much joy from serving the kids and seeing them play music; for me, it is a dream come true. These are the kids they call “good for nothing,” but they are doing something great that adults can enjoy. I really have no words to express my gratitude to those who helped to make this happen. Through our music and special education collaboration, we have demonstrated to a global community that our children in the orphanage are part of a larger world.

300

International Perspectives

Since 2014, Gertrude and I have worked together to build a special education and music education program that began thanks to Raymond and Renee Cloutier, who adopted one of my music students, Lina Cloutier, from Haiti. Lina came to the Sidney Lanier Center from Notre Maison, where she was rescued by Gertrude as one of the children that Haitian Social Services was unable to help or save (DeVito, 2013). At what was a typical school open house, Mr. Cloutier walked into the music room and ­surprised me with a check and a request to go to Haiti to visit the orphanage and replicate  what  I do with students at Sidney Lanier. When told of this opportunity, Dr. Steve Bingham, the jazz band director from Florida’s Santa Fe College, who has provided my high school students with countless inclusion activities, simply added, “Well, you’re not going alone.”

First Trip to the Notre Maison Orphanage The first incorporation of professional organizations and university affiliations with ­Notre Maison began with our first trip to Haiti in 2014. Our local chapter of CEC provided ­f unding  for two conga drums. In addition, we were able to gather various recorders, a ­g uitar, and drumsticks. Through the Sidney Lanier Center, shirts were made, featuring the ­outline of Haiti and reading Notre Maison Music Ensemble in Creole, and used as performance “uniforms.” The Ensemble consisted of every student in the orphanage. There were enough drumsticks and hand drums for everyone. Two students—one child without disabilities and one from the population of children with disabilities—were chosen to play the congas. With Bingham on saxophone and myself on pifano (Brazilian flute), a whole-orphanage improvisation on a traditional melody began. Children in wheelchairs (white plastic lawn chairs typically used on patios in the United States with wheels attached) were clapping, swaying, and tapping with their sticks, and some who could not speak were verbalizing sounds of enjoyment. A complete, 56-member inclusive ensemble, the first of its kind in Haiti, was engaged in its first music education experience. The remainder of the sessions included small group and individual music activities, but greater advancements were to come. At the end of our visit to Notre Maison, Bingham and I brainstormed the potential benefits of incorporating projected materials onto a large screen at the orphanage for future music education experiences.

Second Trip to the Notre Maison Orphanage Collaboration with the United Kingdom’s SEMPRE began with our second trip to Haiti in 2015. SEMPRE has been a fundraising arm and sponsor of the ISME for years, supporting the development of music education in areas of need. I knew Professor Graham Welch of University College, London, one of SEMPRE’s leaders and a past president of ISME. I told him of our inclusive music education activities and sent him photographs from the orphanage. He responded with, “What is needed?” We requested a projector, so we could open the orphanage to international collaboration and engagement via video conferencing. We do this in my music program at Sidney Lanier, with ISME members from around the world who engage with my students. Within a week, SEMPRE provided $1,000 for a projector and two GoTalk Augmentative Communication devices, all of which I took with me on the second trip to the orphanage.

301

Donald DeVito et al.

GoTalk Augmentative Communication Devices The majority of the children with disabilities at the orphanage have significant speech and language impairments, and the GoTalk augmentative communication devices were programmed into Creole for both academic and music instruction. Students utilized this technology to communicate their preferences and to learn numbers, shapes, colors, and additional academic concepts. After using the GoTalk system in individual and small group games, the children gained experience with using the devices. During music sessions, the devices were loaded with preferred songs for the children to listen to and select. These skills would take time to develop, but for the first time, special education technology was incorporated into the daily routine of the orphanage.

One Projector and a World of Difference Typically, in developed countries, we think of a projector as a standard piece of classroom equipment for showing instructional slides and videos. At the orphanage, though, the projector becomes a window to another world. Utilizing Skype, the children, in one large inclusive setting, are able to share their culture with my students at the Sidney Lanier Center in the United States and beyond through music. This global classroom initiative was initiated with ISME professors from around the world with my students. Transitioning this approach to the orphanage was immediate, thanks to the projector and a couple of high-powered computer speakers. One example of this initiative was the introduction of creative movement lessons, led by Dr. David Edmund from the University of Minnesota, Duluth. Because traveling outside the confines of the orphanage is infrequent and difficult to manage, being aware of space and exploring movement and wellness takes on a much greater importance for children with disabilities. Besides creating an opportunity to connect with the outside world in the literal sense, the global classroom experiences allow these children to explore their inner selves. Each of the daily activities, especially inclusive music performances, are photographed and videotaped. At the end of the day, children and caregivers gather to watch themselves projected onto the screen. Our purpose is for the children to develop a sense of self-identity and community through these interactions and to advance the personal development of those unable to speak by using the augmentative communication devices (see McCord & Malley, 2018).

Expanding our Affiliations After the second trip to the orphanage, Gertrude and I expanded our affiliations to enrich the global classroom. New partners included the Sounds of Intent (SOI) research project from England, and Projects for Haiti and the Haitian Teachers Association, each of which would benefit the professional growth of Gertrude and her staff at Notre Maison.

Sounds of Intent Thanks to assistance from SEMPRE, we were introduced to Dr. Adam Ockelford of Roehampton University in London who, with Dr. Welch, created and distributed SOI, a formalized framework to determine the level and complexity of behavioral responses to music activities in any given setting (http://soundsofintent.org/about-soi). With this affiliation, the

302

International Perspectives

orphanage in Port au Prince was about to lay the Haitian groundwork for implementing an innovative approach, developed at some of the most highly regarded academic institutions in the world. The SOI research team has developed a framework of musical development that covers the whole range of ability, from students with profound and multiple learning difficulties to those with autism, with or without exceptional musical abilities (so-called savants). The approach has been implemented at the Sidney Lanier Center and translated into Creole by Gertrude for implementation in Haiti. The developmental progression of the SOI framework begins with behavioral responses to music and continues through complex communicative musical interactions with others (Ockelford, 2012). Professional development opportunities at Notre Maison expanded when Ockelford and Welch asked if I would share an American school experience in the implementation of SOI at the 2015 VSA Intersections: Arts and Special Education Conference, sponsored by the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. I agreed and suggested that we include the Haitian perspective already in place at Notre Maison, along with a live video performance by the Notre Maison Music Ensemble. This would be the first live performance by the Ensemble outside of Haiti, other than in my classroom at Sidney Lanier. Technology allowed Gertrude and me, as equal collaborators, to showcase the Ensemble and be co-presenters with Ockelford and Welch at this international conference.

Projects for Haiti Our next affiliation was with an educational organization called Projects for Haiti, Inc. This organization fosters sustainable development in two ways: first, through partnerships with Haitian educators to provide quality teacher training, and second, through partnerships between Americans and local Haitian communities, with the goal of providing trainings that help build mutually beneficial relationships (www.projectsforhaiti.org/mission). Within five years, the organization grew from attracting 15 participants to its teacher trainings in 2011 to attracting 600 participants in 2015 (Miller, 2015). I accepted an invitation from Projects for Haiti to travel to the northern city of Cap-Haitien with a group of teachers from the United States to provide training on the concept of inclusion. This was an important topic, considering that people with disabilities in Haiti are typically shunned from community life and certainly not a part of their local school systems. To reinforce the importance of including people with disabilities in the lives of their communities, I asked Gertrude if she would come with us. When we landed in Port au Prince for the six-hour ride through the mountains to Cap-Haitien, Gertrude met us at the airport. The next major step forward was about to begin. As a previous recipient of CEC’s Clarissa Hug Special Education Teacher of the Year Award, I asked other former recipients of the award if they were interested in accompanying me to reinforce the inclusion concept at the workshops. Dr. Hannah Ehrli, CEC’s 2012 award recipient and an early childhood special educator, quickly agreed and came along to do her own session. Her experience as a mother of a child with special needs made our presentations even more powerful. There was no electricity at the training site, so photographs, handouts, examples, and Gertrude’s 20 years of dedication to supporting vulnerable children came to the forefront for a very engaging week of training (DeVito & Mullen, 2015).

303

Donald DeVito et al.

Box 2: In Her Own Words Hannah Ehrli Special Education Teacher I have been a National Board Certified special education teacher for more than 15 years and serve as a teacher, consultant, and advocate. I earned my doctorate in special education and have worked extensively in Eastern Europe and Haiti as a member of CEC’s Division of International Special Education Services (DISES) and of the International Association of Special Education (IASE). In my work, I explore the benefits and feasibility of implementing effective practice in international communities on individual, school, and systems levels to inform future efforts for international education and partnerships. Although, like the rest of the world, I had been re-awakened to the multiple needs of Haiti by the earthquake in 2010, it was an invitation from Dr DeVito to join him for an educational conference that truly set the stage for my journey in Haiti. This was also my first meeting with Gertrude Bien Aime of Notre Maison. Through this process of engaging in special education and the arts, the initiative of support and collaborative interventions for effective practice with Haitian educators has been ongoing. Our next step is the development of a curriculum guide, to be developed at Notre Maison, that can be connected to inclusive efforts in Haitian schools in Port au Prince. Gertrude and I are researching and preparing a proposal of recommendations for effective educational accommodations for the inclusion of special needs children in Haiti’s public and private school systems. These recommendations will be presented to the Ministry of Education with a proposal that a task force of Haitian educators and other professionals be formed to examine current practice and effective pedagogy for systemic change.

The Haitian teachers participating in the inclusion workshops at Cap-Haitien shared their responses to the presentation, and many questions, concerns, ideas, and beliefs were discussed. The teachers shared their own experiences with people with disabilities and compared them to the examples given in the presentations. The concept of inclusion and points of access were presented through the lens of theory and practice (DeVito & Mullen, 2015). Inclusion was defined as lessons that allow all types of students to participate, regardless of their disabilities. Gertrude and I discussed the following statements about inclusion: 1 2 3 4



Everyone has the right to live in and be a part of society; Everyone can learn, regardless of disability; Everyone can contribute something to a group learning activity; Everyone can communicate. We just need to understand the way in which a person shares his or her thoughts, preferences, and knowledge.

The Haitian teachers were shown examples of what inclusion looks like at Notre Maison Orphanage for students ranging between 6 and 17 years of age. We taught them ways of engaging with students who might be teenagers but who learn at the level of a six-year-old. We also taught them how to break down the steps in doing everyday tasks and think creatively about how to teach each student to access learning and participate in activities, based on their physical and learning needs (see DeVito & Mullen, 2015, for a full description). We asked the Haitian teachers to use the strategies they learned in these lessons to teach a child with a disability in their local community for one hour each week. We hoped the inspiration and 304

International Perspectives

positive effects of these workshops would help to develop practical and meaningful interactions between teachers and children with special needs throughout Haiti. The end results we aimed for were improvement of the quality of life for young people with disabilities and a growing support network of teacher-advocates for inclusive educational services (DeVito & Mullen, 2015).

First Publication of the Haitians Teachers Association1 After taking a photo of the 360 Haitian teacher-participants, we sat and drank our bottled water in the training facility, which registered a temperature above 100 degrees Fahrenheit throughout the week. I saw people taking down poster papers from the training sessions, taking pictures and videos on cell phones of charts that contained a weeks’ worth of discussions on educational topics, and folding handwritten homework assignments in Creole on topics presented in each session. I realized there was a great resource of collaborative discussion, and at our final training meeting, I asked the participants to collect their materials and suggested that we edit them together into what would be called the First Publication of the Haitian Teachers Association (DeVito & Mullen, 2015). The participating American teachers wrote chapters for the book that would be translated into Creole. There were several key benefits to developing this publication. An ISBN code for the completed book would make it an official document that could be sold and shared internationally with library systems and universities for teacher training programs. This book would provide a diverse example of the creation of what would become a Haitian foundation for academic and scholarly growth, the first in Haiti for future generations of teachers to build upon, with less scaffolding from visiting teachers and trainers from the United States.

From Haiti to Florida Word of our professional development work through Projects for Haiti began to spread, and I was asked to provide the keynote address for the 2016 conference of the Florida CEC. I agreed but realized the foolishness of discussing the work in Haiti at a hotel in Orlando, Florida, while Gertrude was back at the orphanage in Port au Prince. I arranged for Gertrude’s airfare, and CEC provided her hotel and registration costs. Gertrude and I would jointly deliver the keynote address, and she would have her first international experience—this time, in person—with the distinction of addressing hundreds of experienced special education teachers in attendance. The keynote addressed the Haitian book, created from the workshops in the mountains of Cap-Hatien. The session concluded with a performance by my student Lina, who surprised Gertrude at the finale of the presentation and led the audience in a final song. Immediately after the session, Dr. Rosalind Hall, past president of Florida CEC’s Council for Administrators of Special Education offered to fund a printed copy of the book for the teachers associated with Projects for Haiti, saying, “global collaboration is essential as we examine our pedagogical approaches and share our resources to improve education for our students” (personal communication with R. Hall, September 19, 2016). Funds from current sales of the books are being used to enhance the documentation of research and the distribution and development of teacher training through Projects for Haiti.

Developing Inclusion and Special Education Teacher Training In Haiti, attending school comes with a cost. Notre Maison, being a part of the local community, was able to arrange payment for children without disabilities to attend school three hours a day. It took the efforts of Florida CEC members, however, to create a GoFundMe account to pay for one year of inclusive lessons in a nearby school for three of Notre Maison’s children with disabilities. For the first time, these children began to leave together with other residents for local schooling. 305

Donald DeVito et al.

Third Trip to the Notre Maison Orphanage In 2016, several colleagues from the Sidney Lanier Center joined me on the third trip to the orphanage. These were experienced special educators who understood that the mission of educating students with significant disabilities is to provide individual students with what they need to enhance their capabilities and qualities of life. Developing greater levels of proficiency in the areas of self-determination; communication; academics; daily living; and social, job, and community skills help in achieving this ultimate goal (Browder, Wood, Thompson, & Ribuffo, 2014; Jones, 2017). Lessons and activities that would help us assess the levels of skills students had already acquired in these areas—noting their individual strengths and weaknesses and planning for the future with functional behaviors that were realistic for each student—became the focus of classroom instruction. We had a lot on the agenda for this trip, but overcoming the language differences of English and French was initially a barrier for some of my colleagues. Gloria Valladares found that the best way to connect with the children was through music.

Box 3: In Her Own Words Gloria Valladares Middle School Special Education Teacher The children would sing some popular songs, Disney songs, and then finally, they sang a song I quickly recognized from my youth, “Father Abraham.” The beautiful thing about this song is that there are motions that go along with the words, and every child knew every lyric and every motion. Dr DeVito started leading some children with recorders and percussion instruments, and Mr Abijah Bertrand was playing his saxophone. Pretty soon, I found myself singing and dancing with them. From there, things became very easy and effortless. Nothing can compare to the atmosphere that was created here through music.

Special educator Bertrand, who teaches life skills and community-based learning to his ­ lorida high school students, was impressed with the Haitian children’s desire to learn English. F He was also struck with how important being bilingual could be in contributing to their future employment.

Box 4: In His Own Words Abijah Bertrand High School Special Education Teacher The children were eager to learn English. Ironically, prior to arriving in Haiti, I, too, was on a mission to learn as much Creole as possible. This mutual desire for language acquisition was the catalyst for wonderful interactions. The children affectionately referred to me as their teacher, and likewise, I gave them this same title as they taught me an assortment of Creole words and statements. As I taught them many English phrases, I realized that in a developing country such as Haiti, bilingual individuals have increased job opportunities available to them. When we visited places such as the airport, restaurants, and tourist stands, for example, many of the employees spoke English.

306

International Perspectives

As a 21st-century educator, Abijah found it difficult to imagine a society where children have limited access to basic technologies, such as computers, cell phones, or even televisions. He expressed surprise, however, at how quickly they learned to use a variety of smartphone applications and remarked, even with the orphanage’s internet connection operating at dial-up speeds, they patiently and excitedly waited for YouTube videos to load and seamlessly navigated through the internet just like digital native peers in countries yielding much higher Human Development Index scores. As my colleagues and I reflected on these rich experiences, it was obvious to us that the Notre Maison Orphanage could benefit greatly from a computer lab. Such a resource could enhance learning opportunities for children and staff alike, particularly with regard to language acquisition. Eventually, Abijah was able to purchase and repurpose laptops, and downloaded French software and suitable online educational materials to promote basic language development, academic skills, and technology familiarity. The next step included the installation of the computer lab at Notre Maison.

From Haiti to Scotland To expand Gertrude’s opportunities to share our music education and special education work in Haiti with a broader audience, I nominated her as a candidate for the 2016 ISME World Conference Award to support her travel and presentation at an international conference. Each of the international collaborative partners engaged with Gertrude’ s community program in Haiti wrote a letter of support, documenting her outstanding leadership and the value of the professional development she provides to Haitian teachers. Gertrude received the award and flew to Scotland, where she spent the week networking with music educators and meeting with international researchers in the field of music. A copy of the Haitian Teachers Association’s book was given to professors from the China Conservatory in Beijing, Queensland University in Australia, New York University in the United States, and University College London, where Professor Welch and SEMPRE had provided initial support for its publication. As part of her ISME experience, Gertrude and I presented a workshop in the Special Music Education and Music Therapy commission strand with our partners in dance education, Drs ­Edmund and Chen-Edmund from the University of Minnesotta-Deluth. A performance by the children at Notre Maison was recorded and presented at the session, and Gertrude was there in person to discuss the results of this collaborative professional development. Meeting educators from across the globe was a highlight for Gertrude, as she noted in her own words: My visit to the UK for the ISME conference was a great experience. The opening ceremony was fabulous and uplifting, and I was very fortunate to present my work in a session. It was a great opportunity for me where so many people were listening, and seeing some of what I do with my kids. During the conference it was great to see people I knew; meet for the first time people I only knew through Skype; and also to meet new people from all over the world who are eager to give priority to music in their schools. After attending presentations and talking with new colleagues, Gertrude noticed the commonality that universities had centers specializing in a particular field. On the last evening in Glasgow, she stated her goal: We would create the Haitian Center of Inclusive Music Education (HCIME).

307

Donald DeVito et al.

The Haitian Center for Inclusive Music Education Upon returning to Haiti, Gertrude went to the government office in Port Au Prince to register the HCIME name. Once the Center was established, the scholars, researchers, and practitioners she met at the ISME World Congress would be able to collaborate and share their efforts. Future grants would be written for HCIME, with the purpose of funding two primary goals. The first goal is to teach local Haitian musicians inclusive practices at Notre Maison and then place them across a network of orphanages in the Port au Prince area, so they can stay in contact with each other for mutual support. This goal is intended to introduce formalized music education throughout Haiti, beginning with the orphanages and then, in time, with local schools. The second goal is to extend academic inclusion for students with disabilities in schools, funded initially through the GoFundMe account, with the development of the curriculum previously discussed by Ehrli. After returning from Scotland, Gertrude received news that a local church was closing its school facility. With the help of the nuns from the parish, Gertrude petitioned the church to allow her to develop the site for the purpose of inclusion. The facility houses four classrooms, space for occupational and physical therapy, a cafeteria, guest rooms, and a chapel. The school is within a walled compound that, like Notre Maison, is an oasis in a community that is in the greatest of need. Upon receiving the good news that Gertrude would be given the opportunity to establish a new school, the facility was renamed the Haitian Center for Inclusive Education. Twenty-two local teachers worked with special educators Ehrli, Valladares, Bertrand, and me to learn topics covering the basic concepts of inclusion and accommodation in elementary, middle, and high school as well as vocational and arts-based education. In the spring of 2017, Gertrude moved the special education teacher serving Notre Maison three days a week to the new Haitian Center for Inclusive Education, along with a class of children with disabilities from the orphanage. To create an inclusive environment, she offered a free education to 10 local kindergarten-aged children who live in the community surrounding the new school. The collaborative approaches we developed over the past few years are now culminating in the hiring of Haitian teachers, who attended our trainings on special education instruction in academics and the arts. As one of these educators proudly stated, “we are the first generation of teachers in Haiti to include children with disabilities in our schools.”

The Next Step: Replicating the Global Professional Development Approach From our perspective, our collaborative efforts to foster music education and special education in Haiti align with the WAAE goals to connect arts educators worldwide with sustainable development initiatives (WAAE, 2015). We also see alignment with the broader goals of the United Nations (2006) to protect people with disabilities from discrimination and to engage in “constructive transformation of educational systems that are struggling to meet the needs of learners in a rapidly changing world characterized by remarkable advances in technology on the one hand and intractable social and cultural injustices on the other” (UNESCO, 2010, p. 2). Partnerships with colleagues from ISME are underway to establish a nonprofit organization to generate grant funds, allowing us to develop similar projects to those in Haiti and those initiated in the West Bank. Our goal is to develop a formalized mentoring component similar to the approach we engaged in with Gertrude. Our next step in this development initiative includes community musicians and music educators, who aim to enable music participation for everyone by • • • •

Creating inclusive music projects with underserved communities, Developing and professionalizing community music workers, Sharing expertise, knowledge, and understanding, Working with existing organizations to develop an inclusive approach to music participation and development. 308

International Perspectives

Conclusion What began as a visit to Haiti, with the surprising request from the adoptive father of one of my students, has led to significant inroads in making inclusive music and special education available in this developing country. My own sense of identity, as both a music and special education teacher, continues to be fulfilled through multiple collaborations with members of professional organizations, university and P-12 educators, and community practitioners, all demonstrating the enlightening potential of our combined areas of study for the benefit of children with disabilities in the most challenging of settings. The approaches described in this chapter are offered to inform the development of other projects in low HDI countries with multiple needs. As I observed after my first trip to Haiti, experiences in music education and special education have more to do with empowering and collaborating with others than with charity or outreach: When we engage in the arts with people from other communities and backgrounds, we all benefit from music education. Sending drums to Haiti is not charity, but the sharing of resources so we can all learn together. They are experts in Haitian music and culture and bring that expertise as equals to our lessons and music making. The same is true for those from China, Guinea, Pakistan, and all of the other people our Sidney Lanier students, and soon our Haitian friends, will learn from and share their expertise with in return. (DeVito, 2013) When I began this journey to Haiti, I had no idea the degree to which that statement would extend. I also had no idea how these relationships would enhance my career as an educator at the intersection of arts education and special education.

Note 1 The Haitian Teachers Association is a not-for-profit organization created by Projects for Haiti, Inc. founders Berthrude Albert and Priscilla Zelaya.

References Bingham, S., & DeVito, D. (2012). New pathways of community music inclusion: Children with disabilities in college jazz ensembles. ISME CMA XIII: Transitioning from historical foundations to 21st century global initiatives. Salvador Bahia, Brazil: ISME. Retrieved from https://issuu.com/official_isme/ docs/2012_cma_proceedings Browder, D. M., Wood, L., Thompson, J., & Ribuffo, C. (2014). Evidence-based practices for students with severe disabilities (Document No. IC-3). Retrieved from University of Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator, Development, Accountability, and Reform Center website: http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/tools/ innovation-configurations/ DeVito, D. (2009). The communicative function of behavioral responses to music: A precursor to assessment for students with autism. In T. S. Brophy (Ed.), The practice of assessment in music education: Frameworks, models, and designs (pp. 239–252). Chicago, IL: GIA. DeVito, D. (2013). From Haiti to Carnegie Hall: An inspiring story of music education and an FMEA student with disabilities. Florida Music Director, November (4), 14–19. DeVito, D., & Mullen, P. (2015). The first educational publication of the Haitian Teachers Association. Gainesville, FL: Projects for Haiti. Higgins, L., Akuno, E., Chong, E., & DeVito, D. (2016). International Cooperation in Music Teaching and Learning: Perspectives from the International Society for Music Education. European Perspectives on Music Education, 5, 117–128. Jones, P. (2017). Curricula for students with severe disabilities: Narratives of Standards-referenced good practice. New York, NY: Routledge. McCord, K. (2016). Special education and special music education outside of the United States. In D. V. Blair & K. MCord (Eds.), Exceptional music pedagogy for children with exceptionalaities: International perspectives (pp. 296–301). New York, NY: Oxford Press.

309

Donald DeVito et al. McCord, K., & Malley, S. M. (2018). The impact of technology innovations at the intersection of arts ­education and special education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 313–331). New York, NY: Routledge. Miller, S. (2015). Annual report 2015. Gainesville, FL: Projects for Haiti. Retrieved from https://static1. squarespace.com/static/5899247486e6c0878c6d8dbd/t/58a1546b197aeac626e67287/1486968101458/20 15report.pdf Ockelford, A. (2012). Sounds of Intent: A music curriculum framework for pupils with learning difficulties. NAME Magazine, 37, 7–8. UNESCO. (2010). Seoul Agenda: Goals for the development of arts education. The Second World Conference on Arts Education, Seoul, Korea, May 25–28. Retrieved from www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/ MULTIMEDIA/HQ/CLT/CLT/pdf/Seoul_Agenda_EN.pdf United Nations. (2006). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (CRPD). Retrieved from www. un.org/development/desa/disabilities/convention-on-the-rights-of-persons-with-disabilities/­­g uidingprinciples-of-the-convention.html World Alliance for Arts Education. (2015). 2015 International Arts Education Week information pack: Arts education for sustainable development. Author. Retrieved from http://static1.squarespace.com/ stat ic/5503d5b4e4b055a8f656a8f b/t/55418e85e4b0a561968a77eb/1430359685035/ WA A E _ Int+Arts+Ed+Week+Info+Pack_Reviewed%5B2015%5D.pdf

310

Section V Emerging Trends and Future Directions in Arts Education and Special Education

The Arts Education Partnership (AEP), a national coalition of more than 100 education, arts, business, cultural, government, and philanthropic organizations, set an aspirational goal that by the year 2020, “every young person in America, at every grade level, from pre-kindergarten through grade 12, will have equitable access to high quality arts learning opportunities, both during the school day and in out-of-school time” (AEP, 2017, p. 2). Although AEP’s goal is indeed lofty, it sets an inclusive direction to improve the availability of arts education for all learners, including students whose learning is adversely affected by various physical, cognitive, emotional, sensory, and communication challenges. The chapters throughout this volume advance this vision by addressing important questions specific to providing equitable opportunities for special education students to engage successfully in high-quality arts learning. The chapters in this final section examine emerging trends in technology innovations, including media arts; issues in research and evaluation in arts education; and other trends and issues influencing the future of arts education for students with disabilities. Kim McCord and Sharon Malley (Chapter 20) address how assistive technology has enabled individuals with disabilities to produce art in a multitude of ways that most of us could never have imagined. Malley brings expertise in special education and visual arts to her collaboration with McCord, whose scholarship addresses music pedagogy for exceptional learners, to describe assistive technology in general and the challenges and promises for its specific applications in arts education. The authors also address the emergence of media arts as well as the overlap of assistive technology innovations with technology innovations across the arts disciplines. In looking to the future, McCord and Malley point out the exciting possibilities of assistive technology and media arts for stimulating the creativity of teachers and students. Rob Horowitz (Chapter 21) explores the effects of arts education on the socialization, engagement, communication skills, and literacy of special education students, describing what has been learned from previous research and paving a path forward with implications for future study. He illustrates the applications of different methodological approaches within a large-scale research study by using examples from his work with the Everyday Arts for Special Education (EASE) program, conducted in New York City’s District 75 and funded by a grant from the US Department of Education’s Invest in Innovation (i3) initiative. Findings from this study demonstrate an impact on the reading, social and communicative skills, and emotional development of students with significant disabilities. In examining research and evaluation in arts education for students with disabilities, Horowitz notes the significant need for more study and for leveraging the findings to influence policy and practice. 311

Emerging Trends and Future Directions in Arts Education and Special Education 

In concluding this section, Jean Crockett and Sharon Malley (Chapter 22) examine several trends with the potential to reshape the future and stimulate thoughtful action at the intersection of arts education and special education. Diverse perspectives derived through conversations with leading scholars and practitioners were used to inform this discussion of issues likely to impact progress toward equitable access to high-quality arts education for all students and especially for young people with disabilities. Five overlapping social and educational trends are examined, including the growth in population of individuals living with some form of disability, the personalization of learning, the emphasis on innovation, the ongoing need to clarify the scope of arts education, and the appreciation of the values of well-being and personal meaning in a fast-paced society. The authors discuss these trends in relation to the professional literature and the Arts ­Education Partnership’s 2020 Action Agenda for Advancing the Arts in Education.

Reference Arts Education Partnership. (2017). The arts leading the way to student success: A 2020 action agenda for advancing the arts in education. Retrieved from www.aep-arts.org/wp-content/uploads/AEP-Action-Agenda-­Webversion.pdf

312

20 The Impact of Technology Innovations at the Intersection of Arts Education and Special Education Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

Assistive technology enables all students access to the curriculum. In the arts, assistive technology has enabled individuals with disabilities to produce art in a multitude of ways that most of us could never have imagined. For example, guitarist/composer Don Gaynor lost the ability to play guitar and speak after a massive stroke. He now composes and plays virtual guitar using his Dynavox™ communication device and Band-in-a-Box™ software. He recently released his latest recording on iTunes and has contributed many songs that have been recorded by others. Assistive technology has made it possible for Gaynor to compose again, and in that way, he is able to have access to music. Innovations in assistive technologies and digital media offer those with disabilities pathways to artistic expression. In this chapter, the impact of technology innovations on the artistic engagement of individuals with disabilities is examined. The legal basis ensuring equal opportunities through technology is addressed, as is the available range of assistive devices. Examples illustrate how assistive devices are used to facilitate access and participation in the arts and in arts education for those who need various kinds of support. New media innovations and the intersection of media arts education and assistive technologies are discussed, with implications for their influence on the arts education of students with disabilities.

Assistive Technology for Individuals with Disabilities In 1988, the term assistive technology device was first defined in the Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act (P.L. 100–407), also known as the “Tech Act,” and this definition was later used in the 1990 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; McCord, 2017). Assistive technology as defined in the Tech Act and subsequent laws refers to “any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially offthe-shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain or improve the functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities” (29 U.S.C. § 2202(2)). Bryant and Bryant (2012) explained further that “this definition is sufficiently broad to include just about any item or system,

313

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

from electronic wheelchairs for people with mobility impairments to remedial reading programs for children with dyslexia” (p. 3). They also pointed out that there are three components of the definition of an assistive technology device: “What it is, how it’s made, and its use” (pp. 3–4). What refers to the device or equipment itself. Gaynor used a Dynavox™ communication device that enables individuals with communication disabilities to use a computerized system to speak. This is an expensive high-tech device, which the person usually owns. Assisted listening devices are often owned by schools and brought into each classroom by the students needing the devices. In noisy environments, students benefit from having the teacher wear the device to amplify and transmit their voice directly to the students’ hearing aids. Imagine a student in a chaotic rehearsal of a play, trying to hear instructions from the director, who is sitting in the audience; when the director uses the technology, the assisted listening device transmits his instructions into the student’s hearing aid. Both assisted listening devices and hearing aids enable people with communication disabilities to participate more fully in life. How it is made refers to whether a device has been purchased to function a certain way or if it needs additional modifications to be used. For example, a French horn player who lost her left arm in an accident was no longer able to operate the valves of the horn with her left hand. Her horn was adapted by a good instrument repairperson to be played with the right hand. The musician further needed to have a special prosthesis made for the hand that goes inside the bell. The material for the prosthesis would need to be close to the weight and density of a human hand in order not to impact tone quality and pitch. The prosthesis includes a hook to easily manipulate mutes as well (McCord, 2017). Use refers to how the person makes use of the device. For example, although wheelchairs are typically used for transportation, children who use wheelchairs can make prints by attaching rollers to their wheelchairs and literally driving them over massive pieces of paper. The adaptive rollers make it possible to print in a different approach from what typical students might use, thus giving access to art-making in a printmaking curriculum. Assistive technology naturally brings to mind computers and electronic devices. Computers and electronics have contributed to improved access to art and music-making, and the quality of life for countless individuals with disabilities. In general, digital learning tools would most likely qualify as assistive technology for students with disabilities (Edyburn, 2014). However, there is one exception. Assistive technology does not include “a medical device that is surgically implanted, or the replacement of such device” (IDEA, 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1401(1)(B)). For example, cochlear implants improve hearing for individuals who are deaf. They are implanted surgically, so they are not considered assistive technology. Assistive technology devices can range from simple items to sophisticated, multi-component product systems. Applied science, engineering advances, and the digital revolution have resulted in over 29,000 items or devices that progress from low to high technology (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Low-tech devices are mostly considered to be those items that are either inexpensive or have no cost, are easily obtainable, and require little or no training to use (Blackhurst & Lahm, 2000). For example, Dycem™ is a nonslip material that comes in a roll, much like ordinary kitchen plastic wrap. The material is helpful for holding onto markers, tablets, or drumsticks. Tablets and smartphones are most likely considered medium-tech devices, requiring some training to operate the applications (apps) that are installed. Many apps provide less expensive and simpler solutions than high-tech devices. For example, there are a number of apps that activate eye gaze or facial movement, making it possible to draw, paint, manipulate pitches, and use music notation (Creed, 2016; Seurstemont, 2016). High-tech devices are often expensive, may have more than one component, are electronically complex, and have a steep learning curve for the user. An example of a high-tech device would be an infrared switch coupled with a reflective sensing material and software that allows the user to

314

Impact of Technology Innovations

control the cursor on the computer screen as she moves her head, when using music composition software. Features of simplicity or complexity should certainly be carefully evaluated periodically when considering whether a device matches the student’s anticipated needs, activity requirements, task demands, and barriers (Bryant & Bryant, 2012; King-Sears & Evmenova, 2007; Scherer & Craddock, 2002; Zabala, Bowser, & Korsten, 2005). The IDEA now requires individualized education program (IEP) planning teams to consider whether special education students, regardless of disability, need assistive technology devices and services (Yell, 2016). Perhaps, most importantly, cost cannot be a factor in the decision to provide devices considered necessary for students to address their IEP goals because federal law mandates the right of students with disabilities to “a free, appropriate public education…that is provided at public expense, under public supervision and direction, and without charge” (IDEA, 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1402 (9)(A)).

Assistive Technology and the Arts When students have access to appropriate assistive technology in arts education that facilitates meaningful participation, independent engagement, and self-determination, they are able to engage in the National Core Arts Standards defined artistic processes, which are creating, performing/presenting/producing, responding, and connecting to arts curricula (NCCAS, 2014b). Assistive technology innovations in the arts overlap, to some degree, with technology innovations in the arts, some of which exist within the realm of media arts. Within educational practices, incorporation of the range of low-, medium-, and high-tech adaptations or devices is dependent on many factors that, unfortunately, reach beyond the actual needs of students, such as personnel knowledge and skills, and available planning time for staff collaboration. This is especially true in arts education, as most arts teachers receive minimal preparation in working with students with disabilities and even less training and understanding of assistive technology (Cramer, Coleman, Park, Bell, & Coles, 2015; McCord & Watts, 2010; Dorff, 2018; Nabb & Balcetis, 2010; Rush, 2015). Across arts education disciplines, developments and uses of assistive technology are most prevalent in music and visual arts education, most likely related to the prevalence of these subjects in public schools as compared to the other arts disciplines (see Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012). Recent creative uses of technology innovations indicate possibilities for increasing opportunities for students and adults with disabilities to engage in community dance and theater arts, which can lead to adoptions in classrooms.

Music Education and Assistive Technology Assistive technology in music education, when appropriately developed and/or adopted, facilitates access to music curricula, regardless of severity of disability. Music and special education teachers, related personnel, and technology engineers are finding creative solutions for students to independently discover and realize their full potentials.

Students with Visual Impairments For students with visual impairments, assistive technology for academic instruction exists in the form of large print and video access, speech access, Braille access, and scanned material access (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). Advances in specialized software, available for computers and tablets, enable access to the Internet and any other printed or visual material. Access to music reading and producing is available through software that transcribes print to Braille music or Braille music to print and software enabling the production and manipulation of musical sounds (Adamek & Darrow, 2010).

315

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

Students with Hearing Impairments Students with hearing losses benefit from assistive technology used continuously throughout the day, such as hearing aids and FM loop systems that amplify teacher voices and closed-captioning for videos (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). These technologies, along with other classroom adaptations, facilitate independent engagement in music education.

Students with Physical Disabilities The category of physical disabilities ranges widely, and thus, types and uses of assistive technology for students with physical disabilities in the music classroom ranges from mobility devices used throughout a student’s day to customized, adapted instruments. Simple adaptations for playing instruments include Velcro straps, touch-sensitive pads, large knobs and buttons, stands that hold instruments, and color-coded systems (Adamek & Darrow, 2010). Teachers and related personnel can draw upon the long history of instrumentalists who have found ways of adapting musical instruments for particular disabilities for woodwind, brass, percussion, and string, with particular suggestions offered by McCord and Fitzgerald (2006). For example, guitarists have made picks that are large or twisted to accommodate limited hand movement, or that attach to the finger or hand in an effort to eliminate the need to pinch a pick between the thumb and forefinger. Teachers can also create simple adaptations for music reading, playing, and writing (McCord & Fitzgerald, 2006; McCord, Gruben, & Rathgeber, 2014). With the introduction of tablet computers, specialized apps have made it possible for music students to access alternative ways to listen to, play, and create music. Through digital applications, all instruments are now accessible to students with the most significant disabilities (Miranda & Wanderley, 2006).

Computer Technology When students with significant disabilities learn through multisensory virtual music experiences and physical access, they make use of higher level thinking skills and have increased opportunities for creativity. Music apps on personalized tablets enable students to see, hear, and feel the music up close, within the realm of their abilities, allowing them direct control of musical parameters (Nelson, 2013). Innovations in music software and hardware that support accessibility for students with a range of disabilities are numerous and continue to be developed and adapted. Use of computer ­technology in music classrooms can support students by providing: • • • • • •

(Teachers) use of multisensory learning approaches, Instruction delivered in more than one mode of learning, Haptic, hands-on, or kinesthetic learning activities, Modified curriculum, Small group learning structure, Individualized instruction (McCord, 2001, p. 31).

Some music teachers are working with computer specialists in their schools or districts and even advocating for software designers to include features specifically for the needs of students with disabilities (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Nelson, 2013). Commercially available software includes GarageBand™, Music Mania™, Band-in-a-Box™, and Rock Rap ‘n Roll™, and software and hardware designed for students and adults with disabilities includes Dancing Dots™, Lime-Lighter

316

Impact of Technology Innovations

Low-Vision Music Reading Device™, Soundbeam™, Midi Creator™, Kaoss Pad™, Fruity Loops™, The Tactile Musical MIDI Mate™, and Fractunes™ (Adamek & Darrow, 2010; Darrow & Adamek, 2018; Swingler & Brockhouse, 2009). Soundbeam™ and Midi Creator™ elicit music and sounds that are controlled through gestures or movement (gestural control) rather than by touching or manipulating an instrument or device. They operate by emitting beams of high frequency sound not audible to humans, which, when interrupted by movements within the beam, reflect back to the device that transforms the beam into a digital code. That code is then translated into an array of musical sounds. Students moving within the range of the beam learn the cause and effect of their actions through the sounds emitted and create music. For some students, this provides a rare opportunity for them to independently initiate an action and cause something to happen (Swingler & Brockhouse, 2009).

Applications in the Classroom Nelson (2013) provided examples of how she facilitates access to music for her students with significant disabilities. She uses a simple communication board system on a tablet, such as ­MyTalkTools™, to personalize learning, loading pictures and videos during instruction. She ­programs the communication system to offer individual cells with note names, providing the sound of the note when touched, and matching games that match symbols of emotions to music (i.e. happy face matches upbeat music) and match music style to a particular picture, for example. The use of RadMusic™ on a tablet with a Bluetooth switch interface enables her students to control music coupled with visuals. Some students benefit from a seat cushion designed to vibrate with switch control. They are able to experience a sense of control and cause and effect by operating the vibrating cushion. Nelson first sets up a repeat pattern that mimics rhythm and then allows students to create their own sets of patterns. Every student has the right to engage in music creating, performing/producing, responding, and connecting, regardless of disability. Personalized access to music learning through assistive technology, whether through customized musical instruments, communication and music-­ making software, or rhythmic cushions, provides the means for each student to attain her/his maximum creative ability.

Visual Arts Education and Assistive Technology The liberty inherent in visual arts instruction allows for many solutions to the art-making process and outcome within which teachers have the freedom to provide various means for students to express themselves, with increased opportunities to experience success. All students, regardless of significance of disability, should have opportunities to create works of art independently, and advances in assistive technology are making that possible. Visual arts education teachers developing and using assistive technology to benefit students with disabilities have traditionally focused on materials within the low-tech category. However, with increasing advances in digital technology, medium- and high-tech solutions for creating art are becoming more prevalent for students with and without disabilities. Recommendations for assessing assistive technology needs for students to access the visual arts education curriculum include conducting an activity analysis to identify the physical, cognitive, psychological, and interpersonal aspects of an activity (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013), and using the Checklist of Assistive Technology Solutions for Enhancing Art Instruction for Students with Physical, Visual, Severe, and Multiple Disabilities, developed by Coleman and Cramer (2015).

317

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

Students with Physical Disabilities Traditional visual art-making is a physical activity, thus, most recommendations for assistive ­technology are for students with physical disabilities or who are tactile sensitive. Low-tech ­accommodations in visual arts education are those that are not electronic and are easy to acquire or make, such as large-handle brushes and slant boards (Coleman & Cramer, 2015; Loesl, 2012). Medium-tech accommodations include those that are battery operated or use noncomputerized electronic technology, such as Spin Art™. High-tech solutions to art-making are found in various commercially available software drawing and painting applications, and specialized software and digital adaptations used by artists with disabilities (Coleman & Cramer, 2015; Creed, 2016; Pasko & Adzhiev, 2013; Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 2013). Physical disability is a broad category, and each student has particular needs for traditional art-making support, based on physical limitations and complexities. Many students with physical disabilities need more opportunities to engage in the visual arts that can serve the dual purpose of facilitating fine and gross motor strength and movement and creativity. Coleman and Cramer (2015) recommended considering whether a student has gross motor or fine motor limitations, not assuming that a student with a physical disability has cognitive limitations. When a student has gross motor limitations, simple solutions to accessing art-making are ­focused on positioning both the materials and the student to maximize comfort and performance. For example, using a rolled-up towel positioned under a student’s arm or changing the incline of a slant board can reduce the effort needed to draw or paint (Coleman & Cramer, 2015). For students with fine motor limitations, low-tech solutions include various grips for brushes and drawing utensils, homemade stamping tools, round-handle crayons, squeeze bottles instead of brushes, and appropriate choices of scissors (Coleman & Cramer, 2015; Loesl, 2012). When students’ abilities are limited to operating a switch, battery operated spinning art or scribbling devices can be modified to facilitate mark-making. High-tech solutions for art-making for students with fine motor disabilities include drawing and painting software that can be controlled with a mouse, joystick, or trackball (Coleman & Cramer, 2015). Eye-tracking devices with painting software enables drawing and painting for students with movement limited to their faces, although there are limitations still inherent in some of the interface solutions (McLoughlin et al., 2016). The eye-tracking device designed for use with eye-drawing software EyeWriter™ has provided a low-cost, do-it-yourself solution for many artists and serves as an example of possibilities for classroom use (EyeWriter, n.d.).

Students with Visual Impairments Assistive technology for accessing written material for students with visual impairments in visual arts education is the same as that used for academic material. Solutions for viewing visual material include the use of computers and tablets as the backlighting can be adjusted to facilitate optimal viewing. Because most students with visual impairments possess some vision, particular color choices or lighting solutions for art-making are often enough. When students have difficulty seeing their art while working, placing it on a light box can provide the backlight needed for better vision. For students with severe vision loss, adaptations include the use of tactile materials for 2-D art and lessons that engage students in sculpture creation (Coleman & Cramer, 2015).

Computer Technology Current innovations in art-making are technology-driven, and many are not yet incorporated into visual arts classrooms. Those that are used in the classroom tend to be commercial software that any artist can use on a computer or tablet but that have particular appeal for students with sensory 318

Impact of Technology Innovations

and fine motor disabilities. Art-making software includes ArtRage™, ArtWeaver™, SketchUp™, and TuxPaint™. Interactive software that enables students to virtually visit museums and engage in lessons about their art holdings include Destination Modern Art and The Art Zone (National Center for Technology Innovation, 2009). However, most software and online environments are not developed for easy access by users with disabilities. “Usability [useABILITY] principles are not the same as accessibility [accessABILITY] principles” (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p.  34). Most computers can support new user interfaces in a variety of modalities, but software that ­a llows for individualized interface requirements tends to be limited to information consumption rather than information creation (McLoughlin et al., 2016). Media Access Generator™ (MAGpie) allows teachers and students to caption, subtitle, and audio-describe images, and VoiceThread® enables teachers and students to display artwork with audio-recorded descriptions and responses (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013). Questions teachers should consider when developing or selecting Web resources or using virtual environments are: • • •

Is the content accessible to readers? Can discussion also be asynchronistic, so speed in responding is not an issue? Are there ways to interact with the content to increase retention and relevance in learning? (Kraft & Keifer-Boyd, 2013, p. 35).

Innovations through Research Advances and reduced costs in 3-D printing extend the possibilities for designing and creating in visual arts classrooms, benefitting all students. A group of engineers, designing interactive software to improve creative visual thinking in artistic and technical education, has adapted and tested its designs with students with disabilities. The SHIVA project developed new solutions to virtual sculpting for students with significantly limited motor skills (McLoughlin et al., 2016; Pasko & Adzhiev, 2013), enabling access to skill building in spatial awareness and object recognition as well as opportunities for self-expression. The aim of the engineers was to create interactive applications for users to manipulate virtual objects and create shapes in a 3-D environment. Researchers developed new interface tools that allowed users to interact with software that analyzes and responds to each user’s physical and cognitive needs. The system offered many control features, including multiple switch supports, mouse or touchscreen control, and basic eye-gaze support. Users with significant disabilities were able to manipulate and create geometric shapes in a virtual environment, resulting in 3-D sculptures, and many were delighted to work with the software engineers in prototype development. A school assistive technologist working on the team has incorporated SHIVA software into visual art lessons at the Victoria Education Centre, UK. Other researchers developing digital tools for visual artists with disabilities include members of the D2ART team (Creed, 2016). Although their focus is on improving interfaces and outcomes for established artists, their work has implications for visual arts classrooms in the future. Artists with significant physical disabilities indicate that although head wands, mouth sticks, and custom designed sticks allow for accessibility, the use of these tools requires unnatural movements, resulting in neck ­ icrosoft strain or tooth damage. Real-time eye and body movement tracking is available through M Kinect™, Leap Motion™, Tobii EyeX™, and other sensors and devices, but improvements are still needed to provide individualized supports for artists. D2ART is working to make art-making available in digital form with personalized accommodations, posing the following questions: • •

How can innovative and affordable sensor-based digital tools support, extend, and transform the creative process for people with physical disabilities? Which new art forms will emerge, and what impact will they have on artist identity and audience/artist perceptions of authenticity? (Creed, 2016). 319

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

These questions lead to considerations of the impact of assistive technology on the new field of media arts and vice versa. Assistive technology for visual arts students spans the range of low-tech solutions for gripping a paintbrush to high-tech computer interfaces for drawing and painting. As technology advances, many high-tech solutions for creating art will become more widely available for visual arts classroom use, with lowered costs and increased reception by the educational community in general. Technology inventors have always worked in advance of those who are adopting or generalizing their innovations for instruction (Meyen, 2015). The creativity of multidisciplinary collaborators in the development of new technology and interfaces leads to an increased range of possibilities for students using visual arts media.

Performing Arts and Assistive Technology Theater and dance education are not as widely available in US schools as music and visual arts education (Parsad & Spiegelman, 2012), and assistive technology developments with particular applications to performing arts education are currently limited. However, some recent innovations hold promise for expanding the opportunities for students with disabilities in performing arts, some of which can be categorized as new media or media arts.

Theater Education Assistive technology for students participating in theater education includes all of the various devices that students use throughout their school day. Some students with communication and mobility needs will benefit from assistive technologies when participating in skits and plays. For example, reading aids used in academic subjects, such as enlarged lettering, highlighters, and tablets with lighting and letter size adjustment, can assist students when they are reading scripts. Augmentative and alternative communication devices that facilitate independent communication with voice output include basic multiple message portable communicators, communication board software on tablets, text-to-speech computer software, and voice synthesizers and amplifiers. These devices allow students to use pictures, letters and/or words, and phrases to create dialogue (American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, n.d.). Many communication systems are portable for easy use within the context of a play, facilitating inclusive practices. Aita (2012) described the inclusion of a student using an electronic voice box attached to a computer keyboard in an actor training workshop, noting that the student demonstrated talent as a performer but would not have had the opportunity to perform without the device.

Dance Education Mobility devices promote the inclusion of students with physical disabilities in performance. Because dance focuses on the physical body moving to music, student dancers with physical disabilities and hearing or vision loss predominantly benefit from assistive technology. Students with hearing loss will benefit from the hearing aids that they use in everyday life. For students with vision loss, low-tech assistive technology can include brightly colored tape on the dance floor to mark their placement and positioning of sound sources for orientation. A medium-tech solution that creates a multimedia effect involves colored lighting, beamed from the ceiling or along the floor. More solutions are available for including students with physical disabilities in dance education because of the many ways that dancers with physical disabilities have found to participate in dance companies. “Dance invokes and revitalizes design possibilities for assistive devices”

320

Impact of Technology Innovations

(Morris, 2015b, p. 1). Many devices that have been developed for dance performance can be used in the dance classroom. Wheelchairs have been adapted for maximum gross motor movements and control. For example, Morris developed the Rolling Dance Chair (2015a, b), which allows dancers to move fluidly and use their arms independently. “The blurring of the distinctions ­between abled and disabled bodies and the reimagining of the assistive device as embodied design is perhaps no more visibly prominent than in the dance genre” (Morris, 2015b, p. 4). Morris collaborated with engineers to develop a dance-specific wheelchair, offering new possibilities for materiality and mobility, fitting with the way dancers with and without disabilities in integrated dance companies support and are supported by each other and the devices interdependently. The design allows for movement that is intuitive, seamless, and omnidirectional, with height change and seat rotation controlled by a smartphone attached to the dancer. The Rolling Dance Chair offers similar opportunities for actors to move about the stage and interact with their hands and bodies, and serves as an innovative solution to wheelchair mobility for users in their daily activities.

Categories of Devices Thompson, Watts, Wojcik, and McCord (2003) expanded the traditional categories for assistive technology devices and equipment by adding the category of Creativity Aids for the Arts. The new category of Creativity Aids was given the following definition: “products that allow participation or promote creative expression through the arts, such as music composition or improvisation, creation of visual arts (e.g., painting, drawing, sculpture), theatre and dance performance” (p. 2). See Appendix A for a brief discussion of these categories and their relevance to the arts. Readers are reminded that fast-paced technology development makes it impossible to identify all assistive devices being used worldwide and devices on the verge of becoming available for ­individuals with disabilities to use in making art.

Collaborations among Stakeholders Assistive technology services include training for the individual, teachers, and other professionals working with the device. Some complex devices require many sessions with specialists to learn their operations. In the case of students using assistive technology in arts education, an assistive technology specialist, along with an arts specialist, should collaborate to find an effective way for students to perform, create, or respond to the arts. A systematic approach to considering assistive technology for a particular student is the use of the Student, Environment, Task, and Tools (SETT) Framework, developed by Joy Smiley Zabala. The framework is a four-part model utilized by the IEP team in considering all aspects of assistive technology service and delivery (Loesl, 2017). “When a device is written into the student’s IEP, it must be provided with a­ ppropriate training” (Bryant & Bryant, 2012, pp. 9–10). If a student is in need of an adaptation, the arts ­educator should begin by consulting the special educator and then develop a collaborative working relationship with other specialists. The use of assistive technology is one component in helping students with disabilities to access the arts curriculum, but not all students express interest in using a special device. Students should be included in all decisions about their use of assistive technology devices. Students who decline the use of assistive technology devices might feel stigmatized when using them, or they might have different ideas of how to access arts education activities. For example, a music teacher might offer children with physical disabilities adaptive mallets to play certain percussion instruments. However, students might refuse the adaptive mallets and ask to use traditional ­m allets or play the instrument in their own way.

321

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

Ultimately, educators strive to prepare students to move toward independence and self-­ determination. When young people are able to set goals for themselves and take the initiative to reach those goals, they are demonstrating the ability to determine for themselves what they need to learn or make art (Ryan & Deci, 2000). When families and teachers protect children from real-world experiences, the result is often an adult who is unable to ask for what is needed. Self-­determination is an essential goal that should be nurtured at every opportunity. Watching a child struggle to ­complete a task can be difficult for caring adults, but struggling builds skills in perseverance.

The Intersection of Media Arts and Assistive Technology When students use advanced technology as assistive technology that facilitates novel approaches to creating, performing/presenting/producing, responding, and connecting within arts curricula, their work falls within the scope of media arts. The National Core Arts Standards identified media arts as incorporating diverse forms that include imaging, sound, moving image, virtual, and interactive categories of art (NCCAS, 2014a). The use of technology to create and consume art, particularly by young people, in everyday life “places art at the center of possibilities for social and cultural change” as the once sacredness or ritual aspect of art-making is replaced in modern times by “experimentation and play” (Dezuanni, 2015, p. 212). Children use whatever is available to make meaning, and there is a wealth of digital material at their disposal (Peppler & Warschauer, 2012). Art-making is readily accessible through technology, and children of all ages are able to create, mix, share, edit, and reproduce media artifacts using images, sound, and text. In essence, the use of various digital media facilitates the process of storytelling, providing students with a sense of agency and a means of identity formation, and places them within a global community of media cultures (Dezuanni, 2015).

Media Arts Standards in Education Media arts, as a designated discipline within national standards, is a relatively new category, included for the first time in the National Core Arts Standards released in 2014 (NCCAS, 2014b). Several states and countries have included media arts as an arts discipline over a much longer period and offer insight into the development of curricula and pedagogical approaches that have implications for students with disabilities and their uses of assistive technology. One of the questions posed in the development of the Media Arts curriculum for Australia was “How can we recognize creative and critical work in digital contexts where children and young people are able to use contemporary communications tools to appropriate, remix, and share with convenience and ease?” (Dezuanni, 2015, p. 214). These words could be appropriated to address a similar question related to the application of high-tech assistive technology by students with disabilities to engage in art-making: How can we recognize creative and critical work in digital contexts by students using assistive technology to appropriate, remix, and share with convenience and ease? Technical skills are needed to use various devices in creating media arts products and to move the body in space when presenting and performing (Dezuanni, 2015). Some students using assistive technologies that are natural aspects of their daily interactions and negotiations might have advantages in finding creative solutions to art-making, having already learned the skills needed to use their devices. In addition, tools used in media arts facilitate ease of access in ways that traditional tools for art-making might not (The College Board, 2011). For example, the ability to play a musical instrument requires a great deal of technical skill and practice, but accessible music-making software can enable music-making with simple manipulations. Thus, a wider diversity of students is given the opportunity to produce rich and complex content. Technology, and, in the case of students with disabilities, assistive technology, is embedded in all curricula and

322

Impact of Technology Innovations

disciplines, and media arts is intended for work across multiple disciplines. South Carolina standards, for example, have infused media arts standards in all of the other arts education standards: dance, music, theater, and visual arts (The College Board, 2011). For more than two decades, strategies in the 1994 Minnesota Framework for Arts Curriculum, meant for all students, have appealed to the notion of an intersection of media arts and assistive technology: • • • • • • •

The media arts teach students how to communicate effectively and creatively, using the new technologies of visual and auditory communication; The media arts give students the critical skills to ensure that they control the images they see or hear rather than let those images control them; The media arts emphasize the importance of understanding and respecting the personal, cultural, and historical contexts of the media; The media arts are oriented toward the meaningful use of knowledge on the ability to apply classroom analysis to the world in which they (students) live; The media arts emphasize a process or inquiry-based approach to learning; The media arts are cross-disciplinary and offer students an opportunity to apply knowledge in more than one discipline; The media arts teach students to work effectively in groups (The College Board, 2011, pp. 45–46).

Research in Media Arts and Assistive Technology Examples of ways that media arts and assistive technology intersect are found in both research and practice. Although much of the research takes place with artists as collaborators and participants, students are likely to benefit as media arts become ubiquitous and infused across arts education. The Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute’s Center for Cognition, Communication, and C ­ ulture and the Center for Deep Listening sponsor a yearly International Symposium on Assistive ­Technology for Music and Art, with a focus on new technologies for artists with spinal cord injuries and other physically restricting disabilities who are working in multimedia (ISATMA, n.d.). The symposium addresses the use of adaptive interfaces to control digital workstations for people with limited mobility and accessible tele-presence environments enabling groups of people with and without disabilities to collaborate, bringing together artists, musicians, designers, and engineers (Targeted News Service, 2013). Conference presentations have included the work of Rudd van der Wel’s foundation My Breath, My Music, facilitating ways for students with mobility limitations to make music with electronic wind instruments and the use of various switches, and a robot controlled by Jamboxx™, an electronic device similar to a harmonica that uses breath power to interface with digital music software (ISATMA, n.d.). As previously discussed, the D2ART project seeks to develop art-making assistive technology through research with visual artists with disabilities, and the SHIVA project’s aims are similar, developing new solutions for virtual sculpting (McLoughlin et al., 2016; Pasko & Adzhiev, 2013). Their next steps in research, once prototypes are stable and artists and students are engaged in art-making, would be to study the effects of the technology on a number of variables, such as increased independence and self-determination, spatial awareness, self-satisfaction, and the quality and forms of art created. Such studies could involve arts educators and special educators with teams of designers, engineers, and the student and artist participants. Research with a young student with cognitive disabilities demonstrated the role of arts and technology in enhancing inclusive opportunities in the community and increasing literacy skills (Peppler & Warschauer, 2012). The student attended a “Computer Clubhouse” in her community, where youth use new design technologies to create new media products in a socially mediated

323

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

setting. Employing Scratch™ software, the student learned to use simple programming tools to create art and stories. Before attending the clubhouse, she had not learned basic literacy skills. Use of the software facilitated her acquisition of pre-reading and reading skills, while she independently created art. The software, considered a media arts tool, served also as an assistive technology tool, benefiting her ability to learn to read and make art. Within the realm of theater, researchers are demonstrating the effects of “intermediality” with children with autism (Trimingham & Shaughnessy, 2016). Intermediality refers to “those co-­ relations between different media that result in a redefinition of the media that are influencing each other, which in turn leads to a refreshed perception” (Kattenbelt, 2008, p. 25). Researchers used an all-surrounding drama experience in which two students with autism were immersed in lights and sound with puppets and masked characters to facilitate opportunities to play freely and respond to multimedia. The experience led to students’ overall increased engagement by unlocking their various ways of communicating and offers a new approach for blending media in the delivery of arts education.

Media Arts and Assistive Technology in Practice Several examples demonstrate the possibilities of new technology in art-making for people with disabilities and/or the influence of assistive technology on the creation of media art. Voice recognition performance software has been used in seminars from 2014 to 2016 at the Glasgow School of Art, University of Warwick, and Falmouth University in the UK. Poetry performances have been augmented by Web-based software that has a native voice recognition function (Devanny & McGowan, 2016). The potentials and applications in performance are unlimited: Voices onstage can control other sounds and lights, with particular words triggering certain effects. For people with speech and language disabilities, the software can provide a multimedia tool for enhancing and illustrating meaning. Sarah Ezekiel is an example of an artist with motor neuron disease creating paintings that are richly colored, expressive, and painterly, using eye-gaze technology. To assist her, she uses a wheelchair, speech-enabling software, and the Tobii™ eye-gaze technology (Ezekiel, 2015). Another artist using eye-gaze technology was a graffiti artist named TEMPTONE, who was diagnosed with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) in 2003 and became almost completely paralyzed except for his eyes. An international team of engineers, members of Free Art and Technology, OpenFrameworks, the Graffiti Research Lab, and The Ebeling Group, collaborated with him to create the eye-gaze technology EyeWriter™. The technology enabled him to not only draw his tag, TEMPT, on a computer screen but project the image, as he was creating it in real time, in a large scale on the outside of the top floors of multi-story buildings in Los Angeles (EyeWriter, n.d.). Current research and practices in media arts and assistive technology hold promises for their adoption in classrooms. Resources and curricula devoted to assistive technology advances in arts education are available in schools dedicated to teaching students with disabilities and in inclusive schools. Such schools include the School of the Divine Child, Lavanagh Centre, Cork, Ireland (School of the Divine Child, 2014) and Public School 177, Queens, New York, where Adam Goldberg leads his jazz band comprised of students with significant disabilities playing music on tablets (Chapman, 2015).

Conclusion Assistive technology enables individuals with disabilities to access learning opportunities in the arts and across the general curriculum. It addresses the what, how, and use of various tools as specialists work to decide which devices would be best to investigate. There is a wide range of

324

Impact of Technology Innovations

assistive technology devices, and low-tech, medium-tech, and high-tech devices are available to address almost any challenge. Many devices are commercially available; however, occupational therapists, musical instrument repairers, and adaptive art specialists also customize and build assistive technology devices. Collaboration among special educators, assistive technology specialists, and arts specialists are essential to building success. If a device is used at home, families should also be part of the collaboration. With ever-increasing assistive technology advances, questions about implementation emerge. Will communication devices become so sophisticated that individuals with communication disorders are able to use a device that not only allows them to sing but to sing with an incredibly beautiful tone that presents an advantage in auditions? Will dancers experience longer careers when they use prosthetics that allow them to dance without injury? Will the public accept art created by an individual with almost superhuman skills? The world of sports regularly grapples with performance enhancement, but will the arts evolve to the point where assistive technology is considered an unfair advantage? The D2ART group’s question provides an optimistic outlook on the creative expressions and contributions of people with disabilities using assistive technology: “Which new art forms (will) emerge and what impact (will) they have on artistic identity and audience/artist perceptions of authenticity?” (Creed, 2016, p. 3). And, finally, how will assistive technology innovations be incorporated within school settings to facilitate meaningful creative expression and access to arts learning for all students? The impact of technology innovations raises many questions and holds the promise of a brave new world at the intersection of arts education and special education.

Appendix A Categories of Assistive Technology Devices (Thompson, Watts, Wojcik, & McCord, 2003) Communication: Speech/Language Aids • •

Definition: products and equipment designed to help persons with speech/language disabilities. Examples: electronic or computerized communication devices with speech synthesizers, note-taking devices, communication boards, DynaVoxT10, GoTalk, BigMAC Communication Device, CheapTalk 8 /communicator, Tech-Four, Step-by-Step Communicator.

Communication devices have become smaller, with the ability to use sampled human voices for a more natural sounding voice. The devices come with choices of voices, accents, and even ages that match the person. A ten-year-old child’s communication device will sound like a ten-­­yearold instead of an adult or a robot. Communication: Writing and Spelling Aids •

Definition: (a) products that assist people in physically writing with a pen/pencil/marker/ piece of chalk, a computer, a drawing slate, or other input devices to make writing p­ roduction easier, more legible, or larger, or facilitate change from print to cursive; (b) products that assist people in composing written language (grammar, punctuation, organization), along with the editing or revision process, and in spelling (visual patterning, word sorting, word f­amilies, proofreading, rule-based strategies, sound-letter correspondence, base forms, suffixes/ prefixes.

325

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

•

Examples: (a) lined paper, slant boards, pencil grips, large pencils, grooved fiber writing cards, color-coded lines, Five Finger Typist software, wipe-off markers; (b) talking word processor, voice recognition software, spell-checkers, word prediction, Dana, Braille text editor, outlining/brainstorming software, Internet encyclopedias & dictionaries, Franklin Homework Helper, WordMaker software.

Writing and spelling aids are of interest to visual artists. Products that assist people in writing words also work to assist people in drawing art. Computer Access Aids • •

Definition: hardware and software products that enable persons with disabilities to access, interact with, and use computers at home, work, or school. Examples: alternative and adaptive keyboards, expanded keyboards, head-operated pointing devices, eye-gaze pointing devices, voice recognition/voice command software, IntelliKeys keyboard, Kinesis keyboard, head pointer, mouth stick, Dragon Naturally Speaking software, Maltron (a one-handed keyboard).

As mentioned in the text, there are several interesting medium-tech and high-tech devices or apps that operate via eye-gaze and pointing devices, etc. A musical instrument called the Soundbeam operates through movement that activates a synthesizer. For example, a teenager on a respirator with very limited movement learned to operate the Soundbeam with her right eyebrow. After two years of occupational therapy and musical improvisation, she developed very good control over her eyebrow movement. Her eyebrow control made it possible for her to operate a computer keyboard and communicate with others for the first time via email; however, the most powerful result was the development of her musical independence. Using a Soundbeam, she could sing using sampled sounds of her mother’s voice. Her mother is a Gospel singer, and this young lady now sings in her church choir with her mother’s voice each Sunday. Creativity Aids •

•

Definition: products that specifically allow participation or promote creative expression through the arts, such as music composition or improvisation, creation of visual arts (e.g. painting, drawing, sculpture), and theater and dance performance. Examples: music notation and sequencing software, electronic instruments (e.g. Skoog, ­percussion synthesizer), musical shaker egg with Velcro, adaptive paintbrush holders, ­computer-based drawing software, touch technology (e.g. iPad).

Creativity Aids are primarily used to create art through assistive technology; other AT devices ­enable the performance of art. Creativity Aids are very common in both art and music, ­particularly on tablet computers. Daily Living Aids • •

Definition: devices that assist persons with disabilities in daily living activities, such as ­d ressing, personal hygiene, bathing, home maintenance, cooking, eating. Examples: clothing and dressing aids (zipper pull, button aid), eating and cooking aids (large-handle utensils, utensil grips, scoop plates, plate guards), home safety/maintenance aids (alerting devices, easy grips), toileting and bathing aids.

326

Impact of Technology Innovations

Educational Aids: Math •

•

Definition: products that assist people in learning math facts, following sequential procedures and directions with multiple steps, taking measurements, using computational symbols, counting money and making change, doing written calculations, conceptualizing time, and balancing a checkbook. Examples: handheld calculators, talking calculators, and on-screen calculators; big number buttons and large keypads; textbooks on CD-ROM; abacuses; Braille protractors; tactile clock faces; number lines; math skills games; math software. Also see “Reading” category.

Educational Aids: Reading •

•

Definition: (a) products that help people in the physical act of reading, with assistance in tasks such as visual tracking, focusing, left to right orientation, top to bottom orientation, page turning, and book holding; (b) products that assist people in the cognitive act associated with ­reading readiness/early literacy, decoding (word recognition in terms of sight words, phonics, and fluency), understanding meaning (vocabulary, listening, and text comprehension), and study skills (dictionary and reference use, such as charts, maps, glossaries; outlining, note-taking). Examples: (a) reading rulers, tactile letters, language flash cards in Braille, reading pens, ­multimedia books, screen readers, books on tape, variable speed control tape recorders, screen magnification or enlargement software, head pointers, highlighters, switches with eBooks, slant boards, Dycem, book holders, electronic page turners; (b) Internet-based dictionaries and books, phonics software, multimedia books, screen readers, books on tape, variable speed control tape recorders, screen magnification or enlargement software, personal dictionaries, Inspiration/Kidspiration software, Post-it notes, websites with differentiated reading levels.

Reading aids help individuals in theater and music to read scripts and music. Environmental Aids •

•

Definition: adaptations that remove or reduce physical barriers for individuals with disabilities; environmental adaptations that involve construction, engineering, and architecture; and environmental controls and switches that can control an entire living environment. Examples: Environmental Control Units (ECU) that control various appliances, lights, and telephone and security systems as well as work site/school/home design or modifications for accessibility, such as ramps and specially designed bath areas.

Ergonomic Equipment and Aids • •

Definition: equipment or devices designed to reduce the likelihood of repetitive stress injuries often associated with work-related situations. Examples: adjustable workstations, adapted furniture, modified seating and lighting, arm/ wrist supports, and back supports.

Ergonomic aids are important in both dance and music to reduce injury and maintain performance skills. For example, a student with rheumatoid arthritis must be very careful not to damage sensitive joints further by holding a heavy instrument. There are a number of instrument supports commercially available to position an instrument properly, so the musician can play it without having to hold it for long periods of time.

327

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley

Hearing and Listening Aids • •

Definition: products designed to assist people who are deaf and hard of hearing in accessing environmental sounds. Examples: Sound Field Amplification FM systems; infrared/personal amplification systems; TV amplifiers; visual signaling and alerting systems, such as a flashing alarm clock and TDDs/ TTYs devices.

Memory and Organization Aids •

•

Definition: products that assist people with cognitive skills associated with generating and organizing thoughts (e.g. note-taking, gathering facts, categorizing, identifying patterns, and sorting necessary and unnecessary information) and memory recall (facts, sequences of tasks, or events/schedules). Examples: smartphones with note features; Post-it notes; wipe-on/-off calendar boards; memo pads; to-do lists; DayRunners or Franklin Planners; Internet-based services for cell phones, pagers, or email; Inspiration Software.

Mobility, Positioning, and Transportation Aids •

•

Definition: products that help people with physical disabilities move around their environments; positioning products that provide greater body stability, maintain upright posture, and assist in head/trunk support; and reduce pressure to the skin. Examples: canes, cane accessories, crutches, walkers, walker accessories, adapted and modular seating, adaptive musical instrument mounts, cushions and wedges, standing tables, bolster chairs, corner chairs, seat lifts, therapeutic seats, scooters and wheelchairs, and wheelchair clips for paddle drums as well as vehicle conversions, such as customized cars and vans and adaptive driving controls.

At the US Paralympics training headquarters for wheelchair athletes at the University of Illinois, 3-D printers are now being used to print devices that fit the athletes perfectly to accommodate comfort and ergonomic placement for optimal racing. Prosthetics and Orthotics • •

Definition: replacement, substitution, or augmentation of missing or malfunctioning body parts with artificial limbs or other orthotic aids. Examples: splints, braces, helmets, and artificial limbs.

3-D printers are also taking over the manufacture of prosthetics. Prosthetics have been designed to operate a violin bow, for example. Recreation and Leisure Aids • •

Definition: products that help persons with disabilities to participate in sports, social, and cultural events. Examples: adapted toys, modified sports equipment, audio descriptions for movies and ­theater productions, adaptive controls for video games, adaptive fishing rods, cuffs for grasping paddles or racquets, volley beep balls, seating systems for boats, adapted soprano recorders, adapted guitar devices to play barred chords, the Rolling Dance Chair, and other devices that position individuals who could not normally support a standing position by themselves into a standing position.

328

Impact of Technology Innovations

Vision Aids • •

Definition: products designed to assist people with low vision and blindness in accessing ­v isual information from their environment. Examples: auditory and speech output devices, reading machines, scanning/document-­ reading systems, talking equipment (clocks/watches, calculators, etc.), Braille transcription and translation devices, Braille music transcription software, screen magnifiers/enlargers, large button phones, speaker phones, large-print books, taped/audiobooks.

References Adamek, M. S., & Darrow, A. (2010). Music in special education. Silver Spring, MD: The American Music Therapy Association. Aita, S. (2012). Pictorial essay: Exploring strategies to develop more inclusive approaches to actor training. Research in Drama Education, 17(3), 397–404. American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Augmentative and alternative communication (AAC). Retrieved from www.asha.org/public/speech/disorders/AAC/ Blackhurst, A. E., & Lahm, E. A. (2000). Foundations of technology and exceptionality. In J. Lindsey (Ed.), Technology and exceptional individuals (3rd ed., pp. 3–45). Austin, TX: Pro-Ed. Bryant, D. P., & Bryant, B. R. (2012). Assistive technology for people with disabilities (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Chapman, B. (2015, June 2). Queens teacher uses music to connect with disabled students. New York Daily News. Retrieved from www.nydailynews.com/new-york/education/hometown-heroes/queens-teachermusic-disabled-students-article-1.2244447 Coleman, M. B., & Cramer, E. S. (2015). Creating meaningful art experiences with assistive technology for students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Art Education, 68(2), 6–13. Cramer, E. S., Coleman, M. B., Park, Y., Bell, S. M., & Coles, J. T. (2015). Art educators’ knowledge and preparedness for teaching students with physical, visual, severe, and multiple disabilities. Studies in Art Education, 57(1), 6–20. Creed, C. (2016). Assistive tools for disability arts: collaborative experiences in working with disabled artists and stakeholders. Journal of Assistive Technologies, 10(2), 121-129. Darrow, A. A., & Adamek, M. (2018). Including students with disabilities in music education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 153–165). New York, NY: Routledge. Devanny, D., & McGowan, J. (2016). Voice-recognition augmented performance tools in performance poetry pedagogy. Research in Drama Education, 21(3), 401–405. Dezuanni, M. (2015). The work of media arts in the age of digital production. In M. Fleming, L. Bresler, & J. O’Toole (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of the arts and education (pp. 212–222). New York, NY: Routledge. Dorff, J. B. (2018). Preparing to teach students with disabilities in and through the arts. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 91–104). New York, NY: Routledge. Edyburn, D. L. (2014). What technology trends could significantly alter the future of special education? In J. McLeskey, N. L. Waldron, F. Spooner, & B. Algozzine (Eds.), Handbook of effective inclusive schools (pp. 451–463). New York, NY: Routledge. EyeWriter. (n.d.). The eyewriter [Webpage]. Retrieved from www.eyewriter.org Ezekiel, S. (2015, December 24). Sarah Ezekiel [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://sarahezekiel.blogspot.com/ Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. (2004). International Symposium on Adaptive Technology for Music and Art (ISATMA). (n.d.). ISATMA [­Webpage]. Retrieved from http://ccc-rpi.org/isatma/ Kattenbelt, C. (2008). Intermediality in theatre and performance: Definitions, perceptions and medial ­relationships. Culture, Language, and Representation, 6, 19–29. King-Sears, M. E., & Evmenova, A. S. (2007). Premises, principles, and processes for integrating TECHnology into instruction. Teaching Exceptional Children, 40(1), 6–14. Kraft, M., & Keifer-Boyd, K. (2013). Including difference. A communitarian approach to art education in the least restrictive environment. Reston, VA: National Art Education Association.

329

Kimberly McCord and Sharon M. Malley Loesl, S. D. (2012). The adaptive art specialist: An integral part of a student’s access to art. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 47–68). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Loesl, S. D. (2017). Consideration and implementation of assistive technology strategies through ­collaboration between arts and special educators. In J. Burdette (Ed.), VSA intersections: Arts and special education, ­exemplary programs and approaches professional papers series, Vol. 3 (pp. 22–33). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. McCord, K. A. (2001). Music software for special needs. Music Educators Journal, 87(4), 30 35, 65. McCord, K. A. (2017). Teaching the postsecondary music student with disabilities. New York, NY: Oxford ­University Press. McCord, K. A., & Watts, E. H. (2010). Music educators’ involvement in the individual education program process and their knowledge of assistive technology. Update: Applications of Research in Music Education, 28(2), 79–85. McCord, K., & Fitzgerald, M. (2006). Children with disabilities playing musical instruments. Music ­Educators Journal, 92(4), 46–53. McCord, K., Gruben, A., & Rathgeber, J. (2014). Accessing music. Van Nuys, CA: Alfred Music. McLoughlin, L., Fryazinov, O., Moseley, M., Sanchez, M., Adzhiev, V., Comninos, P., & Pasko, A. (2016). Virtual sculpting and 3D printing for young people with disabilities. IEEE Computer Graphics and ­Applications, 36(1), 22–28. Meyen, E. (2015). Significant advancements in technology to improve instruction for all students: Including those with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 36(2), 67–71. Miranda, E. R., & Wanderley, M. M. (2006). New digital musical instruments: Control and interaction beyond the keyboard. Middleton, WI: A-R Editions. Morris, M. L. (2015a). Pushing the limits: Making dance accessible to different bodies through assistive technology. Journal of Dance Education, 15, 142–151. Morris, M. L. (2015b). The dance lens: A new paradigm for envisioning assistive devices and disability. ­T heatre and Dance Faculty Publications. Paper 10. Nabb, D., & Balcetis, E. (2010). Access to music education: Nebraska band director’s experiences and a­ ttitudes regarding students with physical disabilities. Journal of Research in Music Education, 57(4), 308–319. National Center for Technology Innovation. (2009). Integrating the arts with technology: Inspiring creativity [Brief ]. Retrieved from www.brainline.org/content/2010/11/integtrating-the-arts-with-­technologyinspiring-creativity.html National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014a). An introduction to the media arts standards. Dover, DE: State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Retrieved from www.national­a rtsstandards. org/sites/default/files/Introduction%20to%20the%20Media%20Arts%20PK-12%20­Performance%20 Standards.pdf National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2014b). National core arts standards. Dover, DE: State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org Nelson, D. (2013). Professional notes: Reaching all students via technology. Music Educators Journal, 100(1), 26–29. Parsad, B., & Spiegelman, M. (2012). Arts education in public elementary and secondary schools: 1999–2000 and 2009–10 (NCES 2012–014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education. Pasko, A., & Adzhiev, V. (2013). Advancing creative visual thinking with construction function based ­modeling. Journal of Information Technology: Innovations in Practice, 12, 59–71. Peppler, K. A., & Warschauer, M. (2012). Uncovering literacies, disrupting stereotypes: Examining the (dis)abilities of a child learning to computer program and read. International Journal of Learning and Media, 3(3), 15–41. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. (2013, May 22). Rensselaer hosts conference on assistive technology for the arts [Press release]. Washington, DC: Author. Rush, T. W. (2015). Incorporating assistive technology for students with visual impairments into the music classroom. Music Educators Journal, 102(2), 78–83. Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and the well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Seurstemont, S. (2016, March 16). Virtual instruments let you play music using only your eyes [Online article]. New Scientist. Retrieved from www.newscientist.com/article/2081150-virtual-instruments-let-you-play-musicusing-only-your-eyes/ Scherer, M. J., & Craddock, G. (2002). Matching person & technology (MPT) assessment process. Technology and Disability, 14, 125–131.

330

Impact of Technology Innovations School of the Divine Child. (2014). Technology and the arts [Website]. Retrieved from www.lavanagh.ie/ home/technology-and-the-arts/# Swingler, T., & Brockhouse, J. (2009). Using music technology for learners with special needs. Australian Journal of Music Education, 2, 49–57. Targeted News Service. (2013, May 22). Rensselaer hosts conference on assistive technology for the arts. ­Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.proxygwa.wrlc.org/pqrlalumni/ docview/1353989087/2388430F7CB84C23PQ/1?accountid=33473 Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act, P. L. 100–407, 29 U.S.C. Sec ­2201–2202. (1988). The College Board. (2011, November). A review of selected state art standards. Prepared for NCCAS. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/NCCAS%20State%20 and%20Media%20Arts%20report.pdf Thompson, J. R., Watts, E. H., Wojcik, B. W., & McCord, K. (2003). The AT matching game. Unpublished manuscript, Illinois State University at Normal. Trimingham, M., Shaughnessy, N. (2016). Material voices: Intermediality and autism. Research in Drama Education, 21(3), 293–308. Yell, M. L. (2016). The law and special education. Boston, MA: Pearson. Zabala, J., Bowser, G., & Korsten, J. (2005). SETT and ReSETT: Concepts for AT implementation. Closing the Gap, 23(5), 1–4.

331

21 Educating Students in and through the Arts The Need for Research and Evaluation Rob Horowitz The arts offer unique opportunities for developing children’s potential in academic, cognitive, social, and affective domains while providing a means for their creative expression of ideas, feelings, and emerging self-identities. These developmental opportunities apply to all children but are a singular necessity for children with disabilities. The research literature on the effects of learning in the arts on children with disabilities is growing. However, there is a significant need for more study and to find ways of leveraging the findings to influence policy and practice.

Research Issues and Implications Arts education research focused on special education students is sometimes viewed as a new field without a consistent body of rigorous studies and venues for dissemination comparable to that of other social science domains ( Jindal-Snape & Vettraino, 2007; Malley & Silverstein, 2014). This view is particularly apparent when considered through contemporary frameworks of federal funding, policy mandates and paradigms of accountability, standards, and rigorous causal studies. A deeper look, however, reveals a long history of study and application in this area. Indeed, a contemporary sense of an incomplete or emerging field may be more due to the constraints of a strictly positivistic outlook on research; current views on educational program replication; and the siloing and stratification of subject domains and professions, which obscures the natural connections between learning in the arts and human development for those with disabilities. There are several fields working in parallel areas, and it is reasonable to expect that special education and arts education researchers can join and establish a vibrant research community that can continue to build a network of knowledge that can influence policy and practice. The challenge may be largely one of bringing together the disparate, parallel strands of research rather than a problem within the research. When it is viewed this way, one can consider that the lack of a consistent body of work is in part due to unrealistic expectations of fitting special education/arts research within contemporary, mandated causal and replication research models.

A Historical Sojourn Imagine, if you will, an instructor at the turn of the prior century, seeking guidance on how to help their “mentally-deficient children,” as they were once called (and which now sounds offensive). A notice in the Journal of Mental Science, next to the ads for male nurses, brain diagrams,

332

Educating Students in & through the Arts

and thyroid elixirs, catches their eye. It is for a recent book by Dr. Shuttleworth, a British expert, with a blurb that proclaims, “Altogether, there is no book on the subject so compact and so comprehensive, in which the busy practitioner will find all he might care to know of the subject in a condensed but scientific form” (Advertisement, 1898, p. i). Perfect. Examining Shuttleworth’s book (1895), our instructor would find many practical methods for engaging and developing the intellectual, emotional, and social skills of students with disabilities. And the most salient would be the arts. Music, Shuttleworth says, has the capacity to cultivate attention, with “the child being coaxed to fix its gaze on one thing at a time” (p. 59). He explains that “hearing is sometimes apparently deficient when the real deficiency is that of attention…. They may, however, be coaxed to do so by presenting to them agreeable sounds” (p. 83). As c­ hildren learn to “respond remarkably to congenial sounds… music is sometimes the stepping-stone to speech” (p. 59). Shuttleworth recommends that eventually, students learn to d­ iscriminate “the different quality of sounds produced by different instruments” (p. 83) as an exercise to develop their listening skills. He goes on to recommend artistic crafts, such as paper-­weaving, macramé, woodworking, and the use of the “chisel and graving tool” for the development of what we now call fine motor skills and for addressing athetoid movements and even improvement in intelligence and artistic expression (p. 92). In modern parlance, we might say that Shuttleworth is claiming that these arts have instrumental outcomes in supporting children’s engagement, grit, and literacy skills, along with their achievement in the arts. These beliefs that the arts had a unique capacity to improve the schooling of children continued through the early 20th century. In a summary of music in special education, Solomon (1980) described the diagnostic application of music and early practices of using music to develop speech. He described music as “an integral part of the pioneering attempts to educate and train handicapped children” (p. 241) and as helpful for enhancing verbal and expressive skills. He also mentioned that historians have traditionally ignored this rich history of music in special education, with music in 91 percent of early special education classes, more so than subjects such as history and spelling (p. 236). Similarly, Derby (2012) described a pattern of instructional practice in visual art education that existed since the 1930s. The influential Viktor Lowenfeld used creative approaches to therapy and, according to Derby, “left indelible impressions that art can remediate, rehabilitate, and socialize disabled children” (p. 1). Much of this early work, particularly in music, can be viewed as therapeutic rather than ­educational and therefore is not part of the history of special education. However, these distinctions may reflect our contemporary perspective and may have been meaningless to these early practitioners.

Current Conceptions Our current conceptions are strongly influenced by the cognitive and humanist psychologists who developed a more universal understanding of human potential. Even more significant, perhaps, was the growing notion of schooling as inherently inclusive—a civil right for all Americans— throughout the 20th century. It became increasingly accepted that all children should be educated and then that all should attend and graduate high school (Rényi, 1993). Children with disabilities became less likely to be shunted aside and began to receive increasing services, first as therapy, and then increasingly as what is now largely known as special education and related services. Ultimately, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004) codified special ­education as a civil right that included an Individualized Education Program (IEP) and free appropriate public educational services. IDEA mandates ensured that each child must receive a guaranteed public education that addresses her or his individual disability and achievement in academic areas. As special education services and programs grew, there was an increasing interest in special education research and evaluation. Despite the long history of instruction using the arts with

333

Rob Horowitz

children with disabilities, there was only a small body of rigorous outcome-based research to support its practice. This became more striking as the US Department of Education increasingly promoted evidence-based instruction and, with more rigorous criteria for funded research, included the “gold standard” of randomized controlled trials. IDEA and the Elementary and S­ econdary Education Act (ESEA) required that districts use evidence-based instruction and be part of state accountability systems (Crockett, Berry, & Anderson, 2015). The Institute of Education Sciences (IES)’s What Works Clearinghouse (WWC), coupled with federal initiatives, such as Race to the Top and Investing in Innovation Fund (i3) projects, ­further elevated the importance of research-based practice and rigorously designed evaluations (IES, 2017). IES standards recommend that evaluators use randomized controlled trials (RCT) or quasi-experimental designs (QED) when examining the educational impact of a program. The RCT is considered optimal and requires that subjects be randomly assigned to a treatment or control condition. With a QED, the treatment and comparison groups are matched prior to an ­educational innovation according to demographic or performance data. Both methods require baseline equivalence before the instructional intervention and examine impact through ­contrasting post-­intervention scores. A premise of WWC and the federal government’s approach is that objective evidence will be compiled on the best programs and practices—what works—and then these programs can be replicated elsewhere. However, even with all conditions well described in an impact report and the best intentions to replicate conditions and instructional characteristics, it is difficult to reproduce the same circumstance that generated the desired effect. Instruction is based upon a unique classroom context, and the more interlocking parts, the more components that are not under a program’s ­control—that the program can only influence at best—the less likely there will be replication that can obtain the same effects with the same conditions. Arts and special education programs tend to have many of these moving parts, often with outside partners, such as teaching artists. The challenge is to isolate those conditions that can be replicated and minimize those that cannot. Although there has been extensive practice of arts education for students with disabilities, the related research does not congeal into a coherent body of work consistent with a research field. Malley and Silverstein (2014) described several reasons for this, including the variety of stakeholders and the separation between the fields of arts education and special education. Each discipline has its own structure of journals, conferences, and professional organizations, with little direct collaboration. The sharing of methods and results tends to be within disciplines rather than across disciplines. The development of arts education/special education research may also have been constricted by the inherent conflict between conducting rigorous impact studies in a field based upon an IEP, with instruction tailored for each student. The focus on the individual characteristics of every student, classroom, and school setting makes it more challenging to construct a well-designed i­mpact study with findings applicable to other programs. Results from tightly focused experimental designs may have value for a specific classroom application but not so easily for program design or policy. The categorical nature of special education adds an additional challenge as the designation itself represents an amalgamation of multiple disabilities that vary in type and degree. Arts education research has a similar definitional challenge, with multiple art forms represented and taught in different ways by different providers. The arts are sometimes taught for instrumental outcomes, while at other times, they are taught for their intrinsic value. When these two fields—arts and ­special education—merge for a common effort, it is not surprising that it is difficult to design studies that might generalize to a broader population. Despite these caveats, there continues to be an understanding of how the arts support the development of children’s receiving special education, whatever their disabilities and whether the application of the arts is through discrete skills or arts integration in tandem with other academic subjects. Indeed, arts integration, with its emphasis on higher-order thinking and learning across

334

Educating Students in & through the Arts

domains, may have helped push this emerging research field beyond therapeutic outcomes into the metacognitive and social-emotional domains. Arts integration engages children (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015), helps them take ownership of their learning through their individual creation of art, and thereby helps them develop a deeper understanding of themselves, their relationships to others, and their environments. Loughlin and Anderson (2015) explained that arts integration helps special education students “discover relationships, nuances, and concepts; and to bridge the gulf between literal meanings and abstractions” (pp. 14–15). This, then, is an added challenge. As difficult as it is to construct studies to examine the effects of the arts on the development of children with disabilities—when the arts outcomes are narrowly defined skills, and the development is therapeutically based—the challenge is compounded with arts integration, in which the outcomes are metacognitive and difficult to define and measure, let alone track across multiple domains in a real-world education setting. No wonder, then, that there is only a small body of empirical research on the effects of integrated arts on academic, cognitive, and social skills (Mason, Steedly, & Thormann, 2008). The path forward seems to be to look at the underlying processes that are present in the arts and can also serve as mechanisms of transfer across domains (Burton, Horowitz, & Abeles, 2000; Horowitz & Webb-Dempsey, 2002). Loughlin and Anderson (2015) stated that current research in arts integration is going beyond purely outcome-based models “toward unearthing the mechanisms or affordances that gave rise to the descriptions of learning in high-quality” arts integration (p. 17). As they pointed out, this can help bridge the theoretical gap, identified by Eisner (1998), of a coherent theoretical framework for how learning in the arts connects to academic achievement. However, the limits of available social science measures and methods, coupled with the lack of funding for this kind of research, may have constrained growth of this body of research. Most funding has been for program evaluation, often to find “what works” and not answer more basic questions on how specific art forms—taught in different ways—might have an impact on the ­development of children, with or without disabilities.

What Have We Learned? Recent summaries of research on special education and the arts were published by Malley and ­Silverstein (2014), Crockett et al. (2015), and Catterall (2015). Other sources include a s­earchable database, ArtsEdSearch, supported by the Arts Education Partnership (2017); Critical Links (Deasy, 2002); and a bibliography compiled by The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Office of VSA (2012). Several of the studies and articles cited in this chapter include reviews of research as well (Derby, 2012; Mason et al., 2008). The American Music Therapy Association (2017) also compiled summaries of research specific to its expertise. The research studies cover a range of disabilities, methods, and art forms. Many are ­practitioner-based case studies and describe the application of arts education or art-based p­ edagogy in a special education setting with a broad range of instrumental and developmental outcomes (Agrotou, 1988; Kern, Wolery, & Aldridge, 2007; Miller & Toca, 1979). There are a few quasi-­ experiments (Riddoch & Waugh, 2003; Spackman, Fujiki, Brinton, Nelson, & Allen, 2005; Waugh & Riddoch, 2007) and at least two meta-analyses of other research (Standley, 1996; ­W hipple, 2004), pointing to therapeutic, artistic, and developmental gains. As Malley and S­ ilverstein noted (2014), there are studies with controlled variables, but they typically have measured different ­effects, inhibiting the replication and development of a body of shared knowledge. There are broad commonalities that may point the way to future research. Besides gains specific to therapeutic applications (such as motor skills) or learning within the art forms, the most common successful outcomes were in the areas of socialization, engagement, communicative skills, and the use of language.

335

Rob Horowitz

Social Dimensions The strongest claims for the effects of arts on children with disabilities may be in the development of social skills, including peer and teacher relationships, collaborative skills, and overall socialization. Jindal-Snape and Vettraino (2007) reviewed research studies on drama education, noting its potential for social-emotional development. De La Cruz (1995) identified four sets, or clusters, of behaviors and skills that supported a positive classroom experience, including courtesy, self-­ control, focus, and social compliance. According to a subsequent controlled experiment, special education elementary school students improved their social skills through participation in creative drama when compared with a control group. The social competence measure that was used was matched to the behavioral clusters identified at the outset of the study. Effects were sustained ­according to a follow-up test after two months. The study was assessed as significant in Critical Links for being the first sizeable experimental test of the social development of children with learning disabilities through creative drama (Catterall, 2002). Dance programs have also been found to support the development of social skills (Keglon, 2011). The Standley meta-analysis (1996) identified effects of music on educational-social outcomes, such as staying on task, positive interactions, and attention. Schmidt, Franklin, and ­Edwards (1976) demonstrated how music improves social skills that can be applied in other settings. Socialization was linked to engagement in several studies, with children demonstrating ­increased peer-to-peer contact and participation in class. Movement and dance activities were shown to engage children with autism (Harbin, 2012; Lee, Kim, Lee, & Lee, 2002). However, more exploration is needed as it is not clear if the movement aspect of dance, the inherent social dimensions of dance, or some combination of factors is the primary agent. Like many aspects of this review, the context, instructional characteristics, and definition of outcomes—in this case, socialization and engagement—make it difficult to generalize. But the results do point toward continued study.

Communication and Language Besides socialization, the most common broad outcome category pertains to communication skills in verbal, nonverbal, physical, and artistic domains. The most salient school application of the research, besides achievement in the arts, may be the connection to language development and its application, both verbal and written. According to the research by De La Cruz (1995), creative drama was found to have an impact on oral expressive language skills, perhaps via the clusters of social-emotional skills he identified. It is likely that using language in a context that engages children provides more opportunities for its authentic use. Contextualized language, with a purpose and personal meaning, coupled with meaningful engagement, provides a theoretical rationale for how drama supports communication skills and language development for children with disabilities (Crockett et al., 2015). When examining the effects of program drama on students with disabilities, Anderson (2012) found significant gains in both contextualized and decontextualized written language, with a mediating effect from the contextualized experience that reflected a personal experience. Crockett’s and ­A nderson’s analysis is consistent with emerging research on the ArtsConnection Developing English Language Literacy Through the Arts (DELLTA) program (Horowitz, 2014), which found that language acquisition and its application improved through the authentic use of English in a context that children cared about and in which they could express themselves about something they valued. Anderson (2015) suggested that arts integration “supports students’ increased linguistic engagement because it offers a range of supports in the immediate environment that conventional decontextualized activities do not offer (e.g., book reading or lecture)” (p. 67).

336

Educating Students in & through the Arts

There are similar implications for an effect from music on communication and language skills. Music therapy has long worked in this area and has been found to be effective, particularly with autism spectrum disorders (Khetrapal, 2009). Additional randomized controlled trials, with larger samples, should provide additional insight into how and why students are helped through music, particularly when improvisatory and interactive pedagogy is employed (Geretsegger, Holck, & Gold, 2012). Edgerton (1994) found significant improvement in communication skills through improvisatory music therapy. Direct influence on literacy development, such as word recognition and pre-writing skills, is attributed to music (Colwell, 1994; Register, 2001). There are demonstrated connections between song rehearsals and text accuracy, singing, and speech and memory for songs and vocabulary (Berger, 2002; Braithwaite & Sigafoos, 1998). Mason, Thormann, and Steedly (2004) pointed to perhaps the unique capacity of the arts to express content relevant to children’s experiences and feelings: “The arts also helped students find appropriate ways to­communicate. The arts were able to help students with major disabilities express anger, frustration, fear, confusion, and unhappiness” (p. 9). While this review of literature is far from comprehensive, several conclusions stand out: 1 The arts have multiple benefits for the development of children with disabilities, with the most salient outcomes in communication, socialization, and language skills; 2 The research studies that support these conclusions tend to use small samples, are often ­practitioner-based, or are case studies or single applications of a program; 3 There are few well-designed RCT or QED studies that would meet WWC criteria or that have findings that could generalize to other populations and settings; 4 There are unanswered definitional questions in the body of work pertaining to learning in each art form and development within each area of disability; 5 The research tends to be disseminated through a variety of disciplines within arts education, general education, psychology, therapy, and other fields, inhibiting cross-referencing and building a network of knowledge that can inform practice, policy, and continued study; 6 Despite these limitations, there are consistent implications that the arts have a unique capacity to engage children with disabilities and that this engagement may lead to improved communication, social skills, and language development. It has been particularly difficult to conduct large-scale impact studies in arts and special education, in part because of the divisions between different fields and because by its very nature, special education is an individual process, with children having their own IEPs, based upon their particular needs. However, a recently completed large-scale study in New York City’s District 75 examined the effects of arts instructional strategies on children’s communication, socialization, and literacy skills. The study included a variety of methods necessary for exploring effects across varied instructional contexts and addressed several of the issues discussed in this section.

Impact of Arts Activities on Children with Disabilities: New York City District 75 The Everyday Arts for Special Education (EASE) program was implemented in New York City’s special education district, District 75, for five years, beginning in 2010. It was funded through an i3 grant from the US Department of Education. The program was implemented in 37 sites, within 10 District 75 schools across all five New York City boroughs. (Each EASE school was composed of multiple sites.) The program served 300 teachers and 5,334 students (K-5) over the five years of the grant. Students’ disabilities included autism spectrum disorders, cognitive disabilities, emotional disturbance, and multiple disabilities. The students required highly specialized educational

337

Rob Horowitz

programs and support systems. The program contained four key components: (a) extensive professional development (PD) in using arts strategies to address the IEP goals of students, particularly in communication and socialization skills; (b) collaborative classroom modeling by visiting teaching artists (TAs); (c) on-site PD and mentoring by TAs; and (d) classroom instruction by teachers and TAs (Horowitz, in press).

Impact on Reading and SEL The evaluation design included two impact studies, a mixed-method and student assessment study, an implementation study, and case studies. The impact of the program on reading and math achievement and social-emotional learning (SEL) was investigated through a QED, using the New York State Alternative Assessment (NYSAA) for reading and math scores and the Student Annual Needs Determination Inventory (SANDI) for SEL. The impact studies employed a cluster (site) quasi-experimental design. The mixed-method study included weekly student assessments, observations, surveys, and interviews. The treatment sample for academic achievement was 83 fourth-grade students after two years of exposure, and the treatment sample for SEL was 190 second-, third-, and fourth-grade students after two years of exposure. Baseline equivalence between the treatment and comparison groups was confirmed for each impact study, using a modified version of the impact model with the pretest as the dependent variable and the inclusion of two independent variables: (a) a treatment indicator and (b) a cohort (block) indicator. Analysis of the impact studies indicated a program effect on reading achievement and SEL. There was a substantively meaningful effect of the intervention on students’ reading skills (­Effect Size = .42) as measured by NYSAA. There was a modest but significant effect on students’ SEL (Effect Size = .18) as measured by SANDI. No program effect was detected on math scores (Horowitz, 2016).

Development of Communication and Socialization Skills All participating teachers rated each of their students on a 3-point scale on communication, ­socialization, time on task, and engagement through a weekly online survey. Teachers were expected to use their own knowledge of their students and their professional judgment when rating student progress. Teachers received PD in developing their own criteria for the ratings and were expected to submit descriptions of student behavior as illustration of their assessment. The teacher ratings were submitted weekly for 23 weeks during the school year. In the same survey, the ­teachers identified an IEP goal in communication or socialization that they addressed through EASE and the specific instructional strategies, learned through PD, that they used. In the fourth year of the program 19,689 assessment surveys were submitted by participating teachers. Analysis of ratings from the beginning to the end of the school year showed significant (p < .001) increases in communication skills (1.64 to 2.05), socialization (1.66 to 2.08), time on task (1.67 to 2.09), and engagement (1.78 to 2.17). These findings were consistent with classroom ­observations (n = 293 over the five years), in which field researchers described improvement in ­similar areas as well as in observational skills, recall, focused listening, and following sequences of steps. According to teacher interviews and survey responses, students began to interact ­successfully with their peers for the first time, increasingly made eye contact, successfully took turns, and demonstrated increased focus and expressive abilities. The teachers reported that students felt safe when trying out the arts activities and that they provided a unique means for self-expression that they otherwise would not have had. Some teachers attributed the students’ increased engagement to the physical, kinesthetic dimensions of the instruction (Horowitz, in press).

338

Educating Students in & through the Arts

Continued analysis of the EASE data will explore the effects of varied arts activities, within different arts disciplines, related to specific disabilities. Additional analysis of the qualitative data from classroom observations and teacher assessments can identify behaviors that define the constructs of engagement, socialization, and communication skills in order to develop additional assessment instruments and further studies. Despite the positive findings in this study, there is still much to learn about which arts disciplines (and how these are taught) have an effect within each area of disability.

Looking Forward There is a need for more basic, foundational research on the intersection between arts education and special education. Research that is untethered to the success of a specific program is more likely to add objective knowledge on how we learn and how our individual differences affect our learning. However, there has instead been an increasing emphasis on program ­evaluation—to find out “what works” so it can be replicated somewhere else—potentially skewing the available research literature to circumstances not easily reproduced and with results perhaps not ­generalizable to other populations. Program evaluation is certainly very important. We need to understand which programs are effective and why. But, in addition, one can hope and expect that foundations and government agencies will support research disengaged from the interests of specific program stakeholders. In the meantime, applied researchers can embed focused research questions in their evaluations and publish, present, and continue to grow this new research field. We can also expect breakthroughs from related fields, such as neuroscience, psychology, and cognitive science, that will inform our understanding and point to new studies that include our expertise in arts learning. In summary, continued research can explore these areas: • • • • • • • • •

Social development, Communication skills, including nonverbal, artistic, physical, verbal, and written expression, Literacy, including language acquisition and application, including speaking, reading, and writing, Engagement, including participation, focus, attention, and differences among contextualized, decontextualized, and authentic experiences, Instructional content, including the varied effects of different arts disciplines, Teaching context, including how the arts are taught, by whom, in what classroom settings, and whether for instrumental, inherent, or therapeutic outcomes, Conceptions of arts integration, considering the level of integration and collaboration among instructors and subject areas, Theoretical frameworks for how the arts can support therapeutic, expressive, social, communicative, and academic outcomes, Development or selection of valid and reliable assessment instrumentation for application in causal studies and program evaluation.

As Anderson (2015) suggested, engagement may be the overarching dimension that facilitates much of the learning explored in this chapter: “engagement has considerable potential as a multidimensional construct that unites the three components [cognitive, behavioral, and emotional] in a meaningful way. In this sense, engagement can be thought of as a ‘meta’ construct” (p. 61). A close examination of potential sub-factors within the meta-construct of engagement through the arts may shed considerable insight on how and why the arts are beneficial for children with disabilities.

339

Rob Horowitz

References Advertisement. (1898, October). Mentally deficient children: Their treatment and training by G. E. ­Shuttleworth. London: H. K. Lewis. Journal of Mental Science, 44(187), i. Agrotou, A. (1988). A case study: Lara. British Journal of Music Therapy, 2(1), 17–23. American Music Therapy Association. (2017). Retrieved February 9, 2017, from www.musictherapy.org/ research/factsheets/ Anderson, A. (2012). The influence of process drama on elementary students’ written language. Urban ­Education, 47(5), 959–982. Anderson, A. (2015). Understanding how and why arts integration engages learners. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 157–187). New York, NY: Routledge. Arts Education Partnership. (2017). ArtsEdSearch Home. Retrieved February 9, 2017, from www. artsedsearch.org/ Berger, D. S. (2002). Music therapy, sensory integration, and the autistic child. London, UK and New York, NY: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Braithwaite, M., & Sigafoos, J. (1998). Effects of social versus musical antecedents on communication ­responsiveness in five children with developmental disabilities. Journal of Music Therapy, 35(2), 88–104. Burton, J., Horowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (2000). Learning in and through the arts: The question of transfer. Studies in Art Education, 41(3), 228–257. Catterall, J. S. (2002). Contributions to the field: The effects of creative drama on the social and oral ­language skills of children with learning disabilities. In R. J. Deasy (Ed.), Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development (pp. 20–21). Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. Catterall, J. S. (2015). Where are we going: Trajectories for research on the arts and special education. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 188–194). New York, NY: Routledge. Colwell, C. M. (1994). Therapeutic applications of music in the whole language kindergarten. Journal of Music Therapy, 31(4), 238–247. Crockett, J. B., Berry, K., & Anderson, A. (2015). Where are we now: The research on arts integration and special education. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 157–187). New York, NY: Routledge. Deasy, R. J. (Ed.). (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. ­Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. De la Cruz, R. E. (1995). The effects of creative drama on the social and oral language skills of children with learning disabilities (Doctoral dissertation). Illinois State University, Bloomington, IL. Derby, J. (2012). Art Education and disability studies. Disability Studies Quarterly, 32(1). doi:10.18061/dsq. v32i1 Edgerton, C. (1994). The effect of improvisational music therapy on the communicative behaviors of autistic children. Journal of Music Therapy, 21(1), 31–62. Eisner, E. W. (1998). Does experience in the arts boost academic achievement? Art Education, 51(1), 7–15. Geretsegger, M., Holck, U., & Gold, C. (2012). Randomised controlled trial of improvisational music therapy’s effectiveness for children with autism spectrum disorders (TIME-A): Study protocol. BMC Pediatrics, 12, 2. Harbin, S. G. (2012). The effects of indoor movement activities on engagement in young children with autism (­Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Washington. ­ nglish lanHorowitz, R. (2014, November). PD-DELLTA NYSESLAT analysis: Does PD-DELLTA support E guage acquisition? Retrieved from http://artsconnection.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/­N YSESLATanalysis11-2014.pdf Horowitz, R. (2016). Everyday Arts for Special Education Impact Evaluation (Rep.). New York, NY: ArtsResearch. Horowitz R., (in press), Everyday Arts for Special Education: Impact on student learning and teacher ­development. In R. S. Rajan & I. Chand O’Neal (Eds.). Arts evaluation: Measuring impact in schools and communities. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. Horowitz, R., & Webb-Dempsey, J. (2002). Promising signs of positive effects: Lessons from the multi-arts studies. In R. J. Deasy (Ed.), Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development (pp. 98–100). Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Public Law 108–446, 20 U.S.C. § 1401 et seq. (2004). Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Home Page, a part of the US Department of Education. (n.d.). ­Retrieved February 09, 2017, from https://ies.ed.gov/ Jindal-Snape D., & Vettraino, E. (2007). Drama techniques for the enhancement of social-emotional development in people with special needs: Review of research. International Journal of Special Education, 22(1), 107–117.

340

Educating Students in & through the Arts Keglon, J. (2011). Taking flight with dance and physical education. JOPERD: The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 82(2), 32–38. Kern P., Wolery M., and Aldridge D. (2007). Use of songs to promote independence in morning greeting routines for young children with autism. Journal of Autism Development Disorder. (37) 1264–1271. Khetrapal, N. (2009). Why does music therapy help in autism? Empirical Musicology Review 4(1), 11–18. Lee, S., Kim, J., Lee, S., & Lee, H. (2002). Encouraging social skills through dance: An inclusion program in Korea. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(5), 40–44. Loughlin, S. M., & Anderson, A. (2015). A historical view of arts integration research and practice. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 5–30). New York: Routledge. Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special ­education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. Mason, C., Thormann, M., & Steedly, K. (2004). How students with disabilities learn in and through the arts: An investigation of educator perceptions. Report available at https://www.kennedy-center.org/ education/vsa/resources/arpfinaldraft.pdf Mason, C.Y., Steedly, K. M., & Thormann, M.S. (2008). Impact of arts integration on voice, choice, and access. Teacher Education and Special Education, 31(1), 36–46. Miller, S. B., & Toca, J. M. (1979). Adapted melodic intonation therapy: A case study of an experimental language program for an autistic child. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 40, 201–203. Register, D. (2001). The effects of an early intervention music curriculum on pre-reading/ writing. Journal of Music Therapy, 38(3), 239–248. Rényi, J. (1993). Going public: schooling for a diverse democracy. New York: New Press. Riddoch, J., & Waugh, R. (2003). Teaching students with severe intellectual disabilities nonrepresentational art using a new pictorial and musical programme. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 28(2), 145–162. Schmidt, D. C., Franklin, R. & Edwards, J. S. (1976). Reinforcement of autistic children’s responses to ­music. Psychological Reports, 39(2), 571–577. Shuttleworth, G. E. (1895). Mentally deficient children: Their treatment and training. London: H. K. Lewis. Solomon, A. L. (1980). Music in special education before 1930: Hearing and speech development. Journal of Research in Music Education, 28(4), 236–242. Spackman, M. P., Fujiki, M., Brinton, B., Nelson, D., & Allen, J. (2005). The ability of children with language impairment to recognize emotion conveyed by facial expression and music. Communication Disorders Quarterly, 26(3), 131–143. Standley, J.M. (1996). A meta-analysis on the effects of music as reinforcement for education/therapy ­objectives. Journal of Research in Music Education. 44(2), 105–133. The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Office of VSA. (2012, November). Bibliography of arts education and disabilities. Retrieved from http://education.kennedy-center.org/education/vsa/­ resources/ArtEdandSpecialEdbibliography2012.pdf Waugh, R., & Riddoch, J. (2007). The effect of classical music on painting quality and classroom behaviour for students with severe intellectual disabilities in special schools. International Journal of Special Education, 22(3), 2–13. Whipple, J. (2004). Music in intervention for children and adolescents with autism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Music Therapy, 41(2), 90–106.

341

22 Trends and Issues Influencing Arts Education for Students with Disabilities Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

Teachers and students must participate fully and jointly in activities where they can exercise the ­creative practices to imagine, investigate, construct, and reflect as unique beings committed to giving meaning to their experiences. In our increasingly multi-media age… these meta-cognitive ­activities are critical to student learning and achievement across the arts and other academic disciplines. (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards, 2016, p. 17)

All students in the 21st century should have the opportunity to benefit from a meaningful arts education that allows them to explore and experience what it means to be an artist. The attribute most assigned to artists is the possession of a talent or a gift, but perhaps a more important attribute is the desire or motivation to create. When young people have genuine opportunities to develop their creative capabilities, certain conditions are met that facilitate intrinsically motivated personal expression. This, in turn, can direct them toward selecting activities that help to develop their potentials, capacities, and talents (Malley, Dattilo, & Gast, 2002). Traditionally, students with disabilities have not only been denied opportunities to make choices in their lives but have been denied the full understanding of their potential to be personally expressive. Students can encounter barriers to personal expressiveness when experiencing negative social pressures and limiting environments as well as by becoming distracted or dissuaded when tasks are perceived as too difficult (Malley et al., 2002). When educators give all students, including students with disabilities, arts experiences that transcend barriers to personal expression, they are engaging in practices that can enrich their students’ lives in the present and the future. The purpose of this chapter is to explore trends with the potential to reshape the future and stimulate thoughtful action at the intersection of arts education and special education. ­Conversations with distinguished scholars and practitioners enhanced the writing of this chapter. We drew on the perspectives of leaders in arts education, special education, and disability culture to identify and comment on trends and issues likely to impact progress toward equitable access to high-­quality arts education for all students, especially those with disabilities. Learning from these trends and issues can help pave the way toward a common vision and a more promising future for students, schools, and communities (Marx, 2014).

342

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

Pursuing a Common Vision for Equitable and High-Quality Arts Education Paramount to securing high-quality arts education for all students, and in particular for students with disabilities, is the identification of a common vision. We use the term arts education to refer to the role of the arts as an academic subject and a component integrated with other subjects to improve student learning and school improvement efforts (Arts Education Partnership, 2017). We also use the term to include the five disciplines for which there are voluntary national core arts standards: dance, media arts, music, theater, and visual arts.

Defining Artistic Literacy The vision of artistic literacy for all youth forms the underlying tenet of the National Core Arts Standards (NCAS) and the central aspiration of a high-quality arts education. Artistic literacy is defined in the standards as the elements students should know and understand to participate ­authentically in the arts (NCCAS, 2016): Fluency in the language(s) of the arts is the ability to create, perform/ produce/ present, ­respond, and connect through symbolic and metaphoric forms that are unique to the arts. It is embodied in specific philosophical foundations and lifelong goals that enable an artistically literate person to transfer arts knowledge, skills, and capacities to other subjects, settings, and contexts. (p. 17) The goal of cultivating artistic literacy is to enable young people, through arts education, to possess historical perspectives, learn the language of arts and art-making, identify areas to focus on in the arts, develop an artistic sensibility, and better understand the value of the arts in their lives. Artistic literacy is especially important because innovations in technology and almost universal access to an array of tools on personal computers and other devices have made the consumption of art and art-making widespread in everyday culture. “When art is so prevalent, it offers opportunities for rich experiences, but it can also be taken for granted. Lacking is the ability to discuss, investigate, and understand the arts, to fully appreciate how they can influence people’s lives” (Personal communication with M. McCaffrey, December 10, 2017).

An Agenda for the Future Acting on the belief that “all students need and deserve the chance to reach their fullest learning potential in and through the arts, to leave high school as an artistically literate citizen, and to be comprehensively prepared to succeed in college, career and life” (AEP, 2017, p. 2), the Arts Education Partnership developed an action agenda to expand access to quality arts learning ­opportunities across all schools and communities by the year 2020. This agenda situates advocacy for arts education within the broader context of improving schools through a set of four priorities: addressing student success and achievement, supporting effective teachers and leaders, transforming teaching and learning environments, and building leadership capacity and knowledge (AEP, 2017). Although educating students with disabilities is not explicitly addressed, the action agenda’s priority of ensuring access to high-quality arts education for all students intersects with the ­complementary priority of special education to include students with disabilities appropriately in all aspects of school life (Hehir, 2012).

343

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

These priorities coalesce in the context of accountability and school improvement supported by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 2004), which ensures appropriate opportunities for students with disabilities to make progress in meeting challenging content standards. Toward the goal of enhancing students’ learning and life outcomes, special education and arts education have been described as complementary disciplines. Working in tandem, these disciplines hold the potential to cultivate students’ full participation, self-determination, and personal and artistic competencies as well as their motivation to be successful in postsecondary education, careers, and community living (Adamek & Darrow, 2012; Crockett, Berry, & Anderson, 2015). To pursue the objective of designing better systems for ensuring access to inclusive and high-quality learning opportunities in the arts, we sought answers to several questions: What vision of arts education—and of young people with disabilities—should guide the work of ­educational stakeholders? What trends and issues should be considered in creating this vision? What are the implications of these trends, and what needs to change? Trends have been defined in various ways as indicators of direction or movement, even as “the vibrations of society to guide us in what we do and how we do it” (Marx, 2014, p. 8). Understanding trends is important in the process of planning for the future, and so we sought to conduct an environmental scan of movements within the fields of arts education and special education.

Examining Trends and Issues with Distinguished Leaders Mindful that leaders keep “an eye on the horizon” (Bennis & Goldsmith, 2008, pp. 8–9), we ­invited eight leading scholars and practitioners to share their perspectives about various trends and courses of action. (See Appendix A for a list of participants.) In recorded telephone conversations that lasted approximately 60 minutes, we asked each person to reflect on influential trends and developments influencing policy and practice in their respective fields. Based on their assumptions, we also asked them to describe a future scenario encompassing their vision for providing access to high-quality learning opportunities in the arts for all students. The same questions were asked of all participants, and the topics were kept broad in scope to allow responses to reflect their particular knowledge and experience. A content analysis of the written transcripts of these conversations revealed five overlapping demographic, educational, and social trends, including (a) growth in the population of individuals living with some form of disability, (b) personalization of learning, (c) emphasis on innovation, (d) an ongoing need to clarify the scope of arts education, and (e) appreciation of the values of well-being and personal meaning in a fast-paced society. We examined these trends and considered the ways in which they align with the 2020 Action Agenda for Advancing the Arts in E ­ ducation (AEP, 2017). These trends and issues are discussed in the following section, with ­reference to ­professional literature and the commentary provided by our distinguished participants.

Demographic Trend: Diversity and Disability An important demographic trend is the identification of individuals with disabilities as the largest and fastest growing minority group in society. People with disabilities comprise 15 percent of the world’s population (The World Bank, 2017) and are considered “an untapped source of talent, revenue generation and innovation” (Vogel, 2015). With the aging population, and the impact of scientific and medical advances on survival and quality of life, this group can be expected to grow as an economic and cultural force as disability is increasingly viewed as a natural part of life (Lee, 2016). Complex issues of inclusion and exclusion are relevant to this trend, as is managing diversity so that it enriches rather than divides society (Marx, 2014).

344

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

Ways of Thinking about Disability Issues of disability, identity, and culture are complex, and many people live with the contradiction that “disability is a legal designation that provides necessary resources to those labeled as such, as well as a social designation of stigma” (Keifer-Boyd, 2018). Similarly, the education of special education students is influenced by the use of different models of disability for the purposes of public policy or cultural expression (Turnbull & Stowe, 2001). In synthesizing various ways of thinking about disability, Turnbull and Stowe (2001) viewed special education and its relationship to equity as most closely aligned with the model of ­human capacity studies comprising the sciences of human development and learning. With regard to ­education, this model is dedicated to antidiscrimination and holds that everyone can learn; there is no such person as one who is ineducable; and that, accordingly, all people, who are of school age have a right to attend school if even one such person has the right to attend school. (Turnbull & Stowe, 2001, p. 201) This model is associated with concepts of integration, personalization, productivity, contribution to society, and independence. As governed by the IDEA, special education is also associated with the model of public studies, which links multiple disciplines, including law and social services, ­concerned with governmental responses to individuals with disabilities. In contrast, the model of cultural studies considers how individuals with disabilities and their families are viewed within society. Unlike special education, this model does not address mitigating the effects of disability through specific interventions but instead advances equity by addressing “how disability is ­expressed or portrayed through the various modes of expression available to a culture or a group of people” (Turnbull & Stowe, 2001, p. 204). This model is associated with concepts of liberty and cultural responsiveness. Different ways of thinking about disability are evident throughout this discussion of trends and issues. Each perspective is influential in affecting the education of students with disabilities in the arts and the expression of disability through the arts.

Disability Expressed through the Arts For professor and performing artist Carrie Sandhal, disability art and culture represents a growing community of artists with disabilities and their allies, who are working to create new forms and content from their life experiences. She described this community, comprised of individuals who self-identify as disability artists, as ready to embrace emerging young artists with disabilities. For Sandhal, disability art is an expression of culture and the self: In conducting a research study with Carol Gil for the National Endowment for the Arts… we interviewed artists from all over the country and asked them about their thoughts on the idea of disability culture. Some people weren’t really aware of it, but those who were found that being involved with disability culture was a huge motivator; it gave them a huge aesthetic leap in their work. For similar reasons, Eisenhauer (2007) advocated for disability art and culture to be recognized as a form of diversity and multiculturalism. When individual artists with disabilities feel separate as the “only” person with a disability working in their particular art form, they struggle to tell their stories in authentic ways. Others without disabilities can place preconceived expectations on

345

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

them for which their bodies, minds, and senses might not be equipped. Once the individual artist becomes part of a larger community of artists with disabilities, there is a feeling of acceptance that provides a means for greater expression of their true experiences. In this way, artists with ­d isabilities provide support and role models for each other. Referring to an artist residency program in which she participates, Sandahl described how artists with disabilities express the need to congregate at times, working away from the gaze of societal expectations: “There are times when we need to be together as disabled people without non-disabled people telling us what to do.” In this venue, these artists can share their own esthetic and creative issues derived from their unique experiences and serve as mentors for each other. In doing so, they jettison the conventional notions of inclusion, accommodations, and adaptations. Instead, they want disability to be at the center of their creative experiences, so they can interface with art forms through their unique capabilities rather than through accommodations that alter their true self-expressions. Sandhal would like teachers to engage students in learning about the disability art and culture movement, providing students with community role models when possible; facilitating self-­expression; and allowing novel approaches, based on their individual ways of knowing and engaging with the world. However, a challenge to growing this movement, said Sandhal, is the inability to track student artists with disabilities. Policies meant to protect privacy can hinder data gathering, undermining opportunities to demonstrate growth and influence future policies and funding. In addition, she noted, individual stories of successful artists with disabilities are seldom captured. Without this information, it is difficult to demonstrate the possibilities for aspiring artists who self-identify as having a disability.

Educational Trend: Personalization Given the range of talents and aspirations in a diverse society, and in response to the constraints of standardization, it will be increasingly accepted that one size does not fit all (Marx, 2014). The trend to design teaching and learning around students’ personal strengths, interests, and academic and social/emotional needs has entered the K-12 mainstream (Bushweller, 2016). This trend, often but not solely associated with technology, represents an area in which arts educators and special educators can claim accumulated expertise. In our conversations, art education leaders expressed the need for both teachers and administrators to understand the constructs of “well-rounded” and “whole child,” so they might facilitate a school-wide learning progression for each student. Those from the field of special education emphasized the need for teachers and administrators to recognize and respond to students’ unique and often impressive individual learning differences as they engage in meaningful and exciting work.

Educating the “Whole Child” The perspective of arts education naturally tends toward addressing the whole child within the context of a well-rounded education. A personalized approach best facilitates a well-rounded education, and practices in arts education meet that expectation for two reasons: (a) Engagement in the arts takes place within the realm of creative pursuits particular to each individual, and (b) arts education pedagogy encourages creating, presenting, responding, and making connections in ways that are unique for each student (NCCAS, 2016). However, noted Dennis Inhulsen of the National Art Education Association, personalization has both positive and negative implications: Although individualized learning for all students is becoming more appealing, the negative side relates to how well personalization is monitored and whether students will have access to the same opportunities. In the arts we are concerned about equity and access. 346

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

The arts disciplines continue to be challenged by those who fail to consider seriously the congressional requirement of the Every Student Succeeds Act (2015) that a well-rounded e­ ducation include the arts. Resources are not provided at adequate levels, and school personnel lack expertise; as a result, the arts continue to be undervalued, and students continue to be ­u nderserved. Marilyn Friend, speaking as a teacher educator, remarked that even after 50 years of school reform, schools are still not accepting of a wide range of individual learning differences: I still come to schools where students aren’t allowed to miss any of their core academics, so therefore, they can’t take art—or because they are scheduled for special education services during art. But it’s all so archaic. Why are we not accepting of a range of learners and how can we design schools so that every student has the opportunity to benefit?

Social/Emotional Learning Investing in students’ social and emotional learning has also gained new momentum, although approaches across schools remain diffuse and ill-defined (Jones et al., 2017). Several participants referred to the heightened anxiety some students bring to the classroom as a disturbing national issue. Speaking from both a state and national perspective, McCaffrey attributed the increase to the stress of the current opioid addiction on families and the constant connection to electronic devices’ leaving few opportunities for personal reflection (see Thomas & McGee, 2012). In many cases, students who struggle academically or who have experienced trauma also display behavioral problems. Special education advocate Beverly Johns emphasized that creating through the arts provides a positive path for these students to express feelings that might otherwise be manifested in unhealthy ways and noted the important part the arts can play for students who need emotional and behavioral support: People often focus on what students can’t do instead of what they can do because of their ­behavior. If we truly look at our students’ interests, we see that some individuals have talent in the arts and we need to build on that. Some students are motivated to stay in school because they’re motivated by the arts and better able to express themselves by showing their feelings through art rather than acting out. The arts help deliver services because they help to keep students in school.

Specially Designed Instruction for Students with Disabilities Personalization in the form of an Individualized Education Program (IEP) is the signature of special education because the students eligible to receive services are those with disabilities for whom traditional instruction has not been effective (Lane & Carter, 2015). Johns emphasized that students who experience severe and persistent academic and behavior difficulties are among the most difficult to teach and require intensive and specially designed instruction, which many schools fail to provide (see Fuchs & Fuchs, 2015). Specially designed instruction is required by the IDEA and means adapting the content, methodology, or delivery of instruction to meet a student’s disabilityrelated needs and ensure access to the general curriculum and school activities (Crockett, 2018). Friend noted a growing awareness among school personnel that students with disabilities need specially designed instruction, whether in a general class, such as an arts studio, or a special education setting. “I think this is a positive direction,” said Friend. “There is almost an awakening of the realization of students’ unique needs and their reliance on specific evidence-based practices.”

Educational Trend: Innovation The role of engendering ingenuity and stimulating creativity, prompted by technology and the need for innovation, is likely to become a primary responsibility of education (Marx, 2014). This 347

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

trend is less about the acquisition than the creation of knowledge, and breakthrough thinking. With regard to students with disabilities, creativity through the arts transcends differences. We all have the capacity to create, no matter what our circumstances, and the products of our creations are often the most potent forms of communication. “A person cannot be creative in a domain to which he or she is not exposed” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996, p. 29), however, and this statement holds relevance to the importance of including the arts in a well-rounded education. It also helps in making the case for including students with disabilities in arts education and taking advantage of their natural desires to create.

Teaching for Creativity “Arts teachers should teach for creativity as a principle of their instruction,” said arts researcher Gail Burnaford. The arts are synonymous with creativity as the act of art-making is a creative endeavor. Csikszentmihalyi (1996) defined creativity as “any act, idea, or product that changes an existing domain, or that transforms an existing domain into a new one… [the] domain cannot be changed without the implicit or explicit consent of a field responsible for it” (p. 28). Whether a person produces something that is considered creative is not determined by the personal trait of creativity. Rather, creativity occurs when a novel product is accepted within its domain and can be the result of perseverance, chance, or other factors. Having a trait of creativity may influence the success of creating a novel, domain-changing product, but other conditions are necessary, such as the facilitation of the experience and exploration of creativity, which most often occurs when teachers are themselves engaged creatively ( Jeffrey & Craft, 2004). The principles of teaching for creativity for any educator include (a) encouraging students to believe in their creative identities, (b) identifying students’ creative abilities, and (c) developing students’ creative capacities by ­fostering curiosity, providing opportunities to be creative, and using hands-on approaches ( Jeffrey & Craft, 2004).

Innovation and Technology Pockets of innovation around the country are currently embracing the maker movement, which expands opportunities for students by combining increased access to new technological ­m aterials and collaborative experiential learning, supporting students’ natural desires to create. These opportunities occur across disciplines, bringing together arts, humanities, engineering, and science (Stager, 2014). Dennis Inhulsen referred to the maker movement as a stimulating trend as “students are creating things with their hands, minds, and hearts together across content areas and across disciplines.” He described centers that enable students to work on projects using various media and tools, ranging from 3-D printers and film editing ­software to sewing machines and handheld woodworking tools. From his perspective, “­m aking art, building, responding, and connecting to it, is important and every child is ­c apable of positively experiencing that.” The maker movement allows arts educators to have equal significance with other content teachers, upholding what is innately important to all students. Challenges include the logistics of bringing together teachers from various disciplines to create experiences for students using an array of media and monitoring mechanisms, and ensuring equity and access. Another challenge, said Inhulsen, is educating parents on the values of multidisciplinary approaches that require ­shifting thinking away from traditional education models and building trust that their children will receive a worthwhile education. The rewards, however, are manifested in highly engaged, active, and enthusiastic students.

348

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

Educational Trend: Clarifying the Scope and Purpose of Arts Education Arts discipline-based and arts-integrated curricula will increasingly be leveraged with effective leadership, pedagogy, and community support to address student-centered success and achievement. This trend addresses the need to continually clarify the purposes of curriculum, instruction, and assessment in arts education in response to rapidly changing times.

Depth and Breadth of the Arts Curriculum The President’s Commission on the Arts and Humanities (PCAH; Dwyer, 2011) called for unity of purpose in expanding access to the arts in a well-rounded K-12 education appropriate for all students. Rather than engage in internal debates about the modes of delivering arts education, the PCAH encouraged collaboration across arts specialists, classroom teachers trained in arts integration, and project-based teaching artists “to address the more pressing issues of equitable access and infusing more schools with a creativity-rich environment” (p. vii).

Discipline-Based Arts Education “Arts are a part of a well-rounded education,” said McCaffrey, “and there is a need for studying the arts for art’s sake.” However, noted music education professor Timothy Brophy, the value of arts education can depend on support from local communities and school leaders. When little priority is placed on specialized arts education, there are fewer options for scheduling arts classes across grade levels. When arts instruction is available, some school administrators might regard it as an adjunct to “real” learning that can be skipped when tutoring in other subjects is needed. Communities that value the arts tend to support schools that place a high value on arts instruction for all students (see Jacobson, 2011). In an ideal world, said Brophy, school principals would be prepared not only to see reading, mathematics, and science as important but to have a vision for supporting the arts and humanities. Exemplary schools supporting high-quality arts education honor the integrity of the arts by providing studios with appropriate resources for each discipline. McCaffrey advocated for changing the language from “the art room and music room,” for example, to “the art studio, music studio, dance studio,” elevating arts education within schools to the formalized categories of arts disciplines that lead to professional practice. As there are science labs, libraries, gymnasiums, and football fields, the spaces where specialized arts instruction and engagement take place should reflect their real-world counterparts. In some schools, there are also areas designated specifically to display student work, and Brophy recommended that all schools have a museum or gallery space for that purpose.

Arts Integration The role of arts integration (AI) as a pedagogical practice, said Gail Burnaford, once considered a trend, now resides alongside arts-specific instruction in schools “but with very uneven quality.” AI, which links learning in and through the arts to nonart domains, occurs in multiple contexts and is defined in various ways in the literature (see Anderson & Berry, 2018). Conversations with participants in the field of special education revealed positive views of AI, and there is evidence to suggest that students with disabilities benefit from AI in association with language learning, higher-order thinking skills, and meeting other academic and social/emotional goals (Loughlin & Anderson, 2015). Several participants noted that arts integration allows for greater parity among educators, with arts classes less isolated and prescriptive. Craig Dunn, whose work

349

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

engages teaching artists and special education students in AI activities, remarked that typically, students lack exposure to arts education after elementary school, and integrating the arts in the higher grades could potentially affect achievement in multiple domains. Friend, in describing her scenario for the future, would like to see classrooms where art is integrated into instruction as the model rather than the exception: “I’m not saying there’s no place for courses, but if we had better, more knowledgeable integration of the arts as tools for learning, that would probably enhance the learning of many students including those with disabilities.” When AI is designed properly, students are taught subject matter in two disciplines—the academic lesson and the art form. Incorporating arts integration places arts specialists at the forefront of lesson planning and delivery, with classroom teachers and arts specialists constantly informing each other in a collaborative effort. As Burnaford explained, In Chicago when we worked with AI for so many years, we always said the important principle (that I often see getting lost) is that one needs to maintain the integrity of the art form. When we’re teaching mathematics through song, it’s not just a matter of teaching mathematics; we also want to teach students about the song cycle, or other musical components. In schools that pride themselves on being AI schools, the art specialists are key. They are constantly planning with other teachers, constantly informing and being informed by the curriculum in the non-arts domain. Burnaford remarked on the need to assess the outcomes of AI as well as the need to evaluate its collective impact by synthesizing information across multiple studies (see Lee, Patall, Cawthon, & Steingut, 2015; Loughlin & Anderson, 2015), saying, “We’re now being held to a higher standard by our stakeholders and I think that’s good.”

Collaborative Instruction The future for ensuring equitable access to high-quality arts education for all learners was viewed by participants as resting on the shoulders of teachers and school leaders. Arts teachers and special educators work together in the third space created by the intersection of their fields (Crockett & Blakeslee, 2018), and their roles are intended to be complementary in supporting student learning. Reflecting on Shulman’s (2005) concept of signature pedagogies unique to preparation in different professions (e.g. medical rounds and legal argumentation unique to preparing p­ hysicians and lawyers), Burnaford remarked, “I think there is something to learn from the signature pedagogies we use in the arts and how they interface with the signature pedagogies in other fields.” Arts teachers, said Burnaford, are best equipped for their collaborative roles when they are experts in their art disciplines, continuing to refine their areas of expertise, pedagogical understandings, and practices, and making connections among themes and principles. Viewed from the complementary perspective, special education teachers are best equipped for their collaborative roles when they are prepared “to teach specific skills and strategies to enhance students’ effectiveness as learners” (Deshler, 2005, p. 123) in the general curriculum. The role of teachers across the general curriculum is to use their subject matter expertise to select and organize essential information so that a wide range of students will find it easier to learn and, in the process, to prompt students with disabilities to use the learning strategies special educators have taught them (Deshler, 2005).

Support for Collaboration Collaboration is central to the intersection of arts education and special education (Dorff, 2012). Without it, “I don’t think anything can or will happen,” said Friend, an internationally recognized

350

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

expert on collaborative practices. For students with disabilities to be included successfully in arts education, a school culture grounded in collaboration, with clear communication and constructive problem-solving strategies, is essential. Friend noted that high-quality collaboration requires that teachers pursue coursework or professional development in strategies for working with other adults: “It’s very difficult to imagine high quality collaboration and what it can bring if we don’t prepare teachers for it.” Time limitations and scheduling logistics are issues central to teacher collaboration. Burnaford and McCaffrey referred to formalizing adequate time in school schedules for teachers to engage in strategic planning and the sharing of information about their students and lessons plans. Working collaboratively, noted Inhulsen, is also at the heart of the maker movement and other educational innovations, and teachers in cross-disciplinary settings need supports and time to plan together.

Support for Community Partnerships Partnerships with community arts groups are another form of collaboration, noted Dunn, but these are becoming less feasible, given teachers’ full schedules and lack of time to develop relationships with visiting artists. Community arts programming tends to occur beyond the school day, when transportation becomes a barrier in particular for students with disabilities. Other students typically have more flexibility and independence to stay after school or travel to another location, but students with disabilities are often hampered by logistics from participating in these opportunities (see Hourigan & Hammel, 2018). To provide appropriate supports and services in educational settings, said Burnaford, arts organizations have had to become educated about school culture, standards, and assessments, so they can provide professional development to teaching artists responsive to systems in place within schools. In her scenario for the future, “arts organizations would raise consciousness and systematic funds from government and private entities devoted to building school partnerships and building long-term relationships integral to school communities.”

Arts Assessment and Student Outcomes Assessing Arts Education As leaders of national arts organizations, McCaffrey and Inhulsen referred to the benefits and challenges of evaluating learning opportunities in the arts. “Technology is a real game-changer for arts assessment,” said McCaffrey because it provides a repository for digital recordings of student work in the visual and performing arts. Looking to the future, she asked, “How can we leverage new technology to promote best practices in arts assessment?” Inhulsen noted that many arts teachers are not trained in formative strategies, which makes it “a challenge to help them understand that assessment strategies are not a bad thing.” He also referred to the helpful participation of arts teachers in developing the Model Cornerstone Assessments (MCA) used to evaluate student progress on the National Core Arts Standards. “These assessments have helped us to understand what teachers are experiencing, and they are helping teachers become more fully aware of their students’ learning.” (With the support of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, inclusion strategies for assessing students with disabilities on the MCA were developed by arts and special educators, using the principles of Universal Design for Learning [UDL]. These strategies are available at www.nationalartsstandards. org/content/inclusion.) “The goal of reform is always to use data to bring about change,” said Brophy, who is recognized internationally for his expertise in the assessment of arts education. “The question is

351

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

how do you go about getting the data, and what data are appropriate for the arts?” Challenges to assessment include the lack of consistency in content and pedagogy used by arts educators, what they gather as achievement data, and the validity and reliability of assessment instruments in a ­performance-based field (see Horowitz, 2018). Another challenge to assessment in the arts is the difficulty in standardizing what is essentially a form of personal expression. Brophy described several innovative approaches to critique and consensus moderation (see Sadler, 2013) but noted the challenge of the “edginess” in the assessment of artistic work as it intersects with the way that federal and state policy makers look at assessment policy: “They want things that can be measured and analyzed psychometrically.” Perhaps the greatest challenge to assessing the quality of arts education, said Brophy, is the lack of consistency in opportunities for students to learn: “You can have one district with 50 schools and access to art education could be different across every one of those schools because principals have been given the autonomy to select the teachers they think are important.” For him, the leadership of the principal is critical to enabling the whole school environment to grow through arts engagement: The school leader would need to be a person who acknowledges that everyone has a ­contribution to make to the arts and he or she would enable this process of education in and through the arts. It really is the leadership of the school that is critical. I’ve seen it make a huge difference. Equitable access, instruction, and assessment start with policy makers who decide that the arts are valued enough for instruction in the arts to be available to all students.

Preparing Students for College and Careers in the Arts The focus on college and career readiness was viewed by participants as a persistent issue, and it was noted that students lack the supports needed to develop their interests and plans for careers in the arts. When students are in high school, encouragement is often on college readiness from the broader perspective of 21st-century skills, and little value is placed on a student’s interests and accomplishments in arts disciplines. “If you’re a senior in high school and you want a career in the arts, you’re really on your own,” said Brophy. For students with disabilities, postsecondary transition to an arts career requires an intentional focus from a policy perspective at the federal, state, and local levels (see Harvey & Kemp, 2018). Johns expressed concern that the talents of students with disabilities who are gifted in the arts are not often identified. Even when the designation of being “twice-exceptional” is recognized, she noted, these students are not as likely as their typical gifted peers to receive e­ ncouragement and direction in the arts fields that hold their interests and passions. Sandahl, as a person with a disability, spoke of being dissuaded from pursuing a career in the arts by her parents, who expected her to pursue a profession in law or medicine and regarded her undergraduate arts studies as something she needed to do until she “figured things out.” “Pursuing an arts career is considered unfeasible for most people, and it is certainly not considered viable for people with disabilities,” said Sandahl. However, noted Dunn, different career options in the arts are available for students with ­d isabilities, and not all require exceptional talent. In Dunn’s future scenario, educators would make sure the arts are included in discussions with these students about the transition to postsecondary education, employment, and independent living, with links to coordinated state services, especially in rural settings.

352

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

Well-Being Trend: Personal Meaning and Self-Expression In response to the challenges of an intense and fast-paced society, more people are likely to seek personal meaning in their lives (Marx, 2014). This trend addresses the struggle to balance the drive toward personal accomplishment with the need for self-expression. Unlike most other subject areas, art education has been described as a discipline with the capacity to help students build a unique skill set that includes the ability to “envision, express, and find a personal vision” (Sabol, 2013, p. 34). Nevertheless, art education has long been targeted “as a peripheral subject in a comprehensive education” (Sabol, 2013, p. 34). This final trend underscores the potential contribution of the arts to the creation of a meaningful and balanced life, and the importance of advocating for improved educational systems that support the life-enhancing value of the arts for all youth in schools and communities.

Making the Arts a Part of Life Young artists with disabilities, like most artists, are trying to express personal meaning and figure out how to fit what they love into their lives. As an art activist and parent of special education students, Sandahl noted that students with disabilities require not only academic and behavioral interventions but also ample opportunities through the arts to express their thoughts and ­feelings. “Students with disabilities should have the same opportunities as other students for personal ­expression,” said Sandahl. “Disability should not just be equated with service provision; there also has to be art for artistry.” Students with disabilities might approach the creative process differently than their typical classmates, interpreting assignments and responding to directions and materials in unexpected ways. Students who are not neurotypical, in particular, might generate unique ideas and products within arts education settings. Their work, said Sandahl, is a manifestation of the disability experience and requires that arts teachers remain flexible and open to innovative approaches in response to curricula and assessments. Too often, however, the arts are not viewed as a natural means of communication or expression in schools, noted Burnaford. “Students will go home and write poetry, or write a song, or keep a journal, but it’s typically disengaged from their schooling. They wouldn’t dream of sharing that at school.” When schools foster the expectation that the arts are indeed part of “doing business as usual,” she noted, students are likely to be more confident in their self-expression and making the arts a part of their lives. Several participants remarked that teachers and school administrators who understand the ­language of learning in the arts and special education can help to shape school cultures in which the arts contribute to students’ personal growth. Teachers can be vocal advocates, said Inhulsen, “not just by saying ‘save the arts,’ but by exploring how rich arts environments contribute to ­human development for students of different ages.” Regarding special education, Friend and Johns pointed out that teachers can also influence change by supporting students who are twice e­ xceptional and strengthening, not diluting, what makes special education unique by providing the appropriately intensive education that students with disabilities require. Brophy said that meaningful and deep change can occur in schools when principals are well prepared as k­ nowledgeable leaders of a wellrounded education for all learners, including those with disabilities: “If principals understand, then anything is possible.”

Advocating for the Arts in a Well-Rounded Education There is a pressing need for advocacy to ensure the arts are recognized as part of a well-rounded education, noted McCaffrey, and much rests on federal budget allocations under Title IV, Part

353

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

A of ESSA, the federal K-12 education law. Title IV authorizes Student Support and Academic Enrichments Grants, which are designed to fund activities through block grants to states in three broad areas, the first of which is providing students with a well-rounded education that includes the arts (ESSA, 2015). “When funding gets tight we don’t always provide children with what we should,” said veteran advocate Johns: When we don’t have dedicated money, we don’t have services. Local control means dealing with fiscal priorities, and when the going gets tough, there go the arts and special services for talented youth. Mandates are needed and they need to be funded. Multiple stakeholders are dedicated to creating opportunities for students with disabilities to learn in and through the arts, and they include a wide array of professionals across the educational system (Malley & Silverstein, 2014). Dedicated stakeholders also include artists, such as members of the disability art and culture community, who mentor and guide young artists. Arts education advocacy, however, has traditionally remained in a separate category from the broader issue of educational reform or social services, posing a challenge to those seeking to advocate for arts education for students with disabilities (Dwyer, 2011; Hourigan, 2014). At the state and national levels, having a unified message regarding the benefits of arts education for students with disabilities could influence policy and funding. The Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education (DARTS) of the Council for Exceptional ­Children (CEC), formed in 2015, is one professional group addressing the need for unified ­advocacy. DARTS is CEC’s newest division and is unique in bringing together stakeholders from all areas of special education and all the arts disciplines. The unified mission of these stakeholders is to advance arts experiences for young people with exceptionalities, promote a professional community across disciplines, encourage research and disseminate information, and foster collaboration among individuals and organizations (http://community.cec.sped.org/darts/home). Beverly ­Gerber, the driving force behind the establishment of DARTS, described the organization’s goal as one of “empowering young people with disabilities through the arts”—a message that aligns arts education and special education with trends toward enhanced well-being.

Implications and Conclusions In this chapter, we drew on expert perspectives to discuss trends that suggest a course of action toward equitable access to high-quality education in and through the arts for all students, especially those with disabilities. The resulting trends were not intended to be extensive but to represent a small sampling of multiple trends and issues with the potential to influence policy and practice. The common vision emerging from these expert perspectives is one of commitment to ensuring education in the arts for all students, regardless of where they live or go to school. This vision aligns with the commitment of the Arts Education Partnership (AEP, 2017) “to ensuring that every young person in America has an opportunity to create, perform, experience and learn about the arts in all their many forms” (p. 2). In concluding this discussion, we consider the implications of these trends and issues in light of the Partnership’s 2020 Action Agenda for Advancing the Arts in Education (AEP, 2017). Raising student achievement and success by positioning the arts as essential in the definition and implementation of college and career readiness standards and comprehensive assessment and accountability systems is the first item on AEP’s 2020 action agenda. The need for adequate and appropriate assessments in the arts disciplines, as well as in arts integration, underscores the urgency to develop effective frameworks, models, and designs for classroom and large-scale assessments of student learning; arts programs; and the ways in which arts educators use assessment

354

Trends and Issues Influencing Education

practices to improve teaching and learning (Brophy, 2009). Among the complexities to be addressed in the process is the effective implementation of inclusive assessment strategies that build on the principles of UDL and allow students of varying abilities to demonstrate artistic literacy (Malley, 2014). The focus on college and careers as a persistent trend suggests the need to consider postsecondary transition planning that addresses the potential for a range of career opportunities in the arts for students with disabilities (Harvey & Kemp, 2018). Strengthening the role and contribution of the arts in the preparation and support of teachers and school principals is the second item on the 2020 action agenda. Discussion of collaborative instruction highlighted the necessity of preparing arts and special education teachers with the complementary knowledge and skills needed for working together to advance arts learning for students with disabilities (Burnaford, Aprill, & Weiss, 2009; Deshler, 2005). Ongoing professional learning is also needed to help teachers and teaching artists build the skills for collaboration, make connections among ideas, and recognize and respond appropriately to students’ learning differences (Friend & Cook, 2017). An important course of action includes preparing and supporting principals, so they might improve their schools by understanding more fully their leadership responsibilities in inclusive schools and the value of the arts in a well-rounded education for all learners (Hehir, 2012). Transforming the teaching and learning environment by leveraging educational innovations with arts-based and arts-integrated teaching and learning strategies that meet student needs comprises the third action agenda item. Trends in personalization and innovation reflect hallmarks of practice both in arts education and special education (Malley, 2014). As personalization gains attention in the K-12 mainstream, arts and special educators are in good positions to draw on the accumulated research and expertise in their respective fields to provide specially designed instruction for students with disabilities (Fuchs & Fuchs, 2015), build on students’ strengths, and strengthen their weaknesses as they advance education in the arts. Creativity and flexibility are essential ­elements of both arts education and special education, with the potential to transform the teaching and learning environment. Schools that stimulate ingenuity are likely to also generate greater need, interest, and willingness among educators to understand difference and learn skills for the appropriate inclusion of special education students across the arts disciplines (see Glass, 2017). Equipping “state, national and local arts and education leaders with the knowledge, skills and capabilities to effectively incorporate the arts as an integral component in education improvement efforts” (AEP, 2017, p. 9) is the fourth and final action agenda item. The social trend toward cultivating well-being and personal growth has the potential to enhance the value of the arts in schools and communities. The arts and arts education play essential roles in the nation’s economy (Dwyer, 2011; Sabol, 2013) and in the development of self-determination and opportunities for quality of life for youth with disabilities (Adamek & Darrow, 2012). Efforts to improve education should address establishing the arts as a way of “doing business as usual” in and out of school and increasing stakeholders’ understandings of the life-enhancing value of arts education in the lives of students with and at risk of developing disabilities. Although not aligned with a specific action agenda item, the demographic trend provided the broader context for discussing issues related to diversity, disability, and the arts. In considering implications related to the growing number of people with disabilities in society, it is likely that their lived experiences will be expressed increasingly through the arts. This expression should encourage the next generation of young artists with disabilities “to imagine, investigate, construct, and reflect as unique beings committed to giving meaning to their experiences” (NCCAS, 2016, p. 17). With educational systems becoming increasingly culturally and linguistically diverse, and inclusive of differing abilities, arts education is also likely to become more culturally responsive to student’s varied life experiences, empowering them to engage in creative practices critical to their personal growth and learning across the arts and other academic disciplines.

355

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley

Appendix A Distinguished Participants Timothy Brophy. Director of Institutional Assessment and Professor of Music Education at the University of Florida. Gail Burnaford. Former Director of Research and Evaluation in Education at The John F. ­Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Craig Dunn. Executive Director of VSA Minnesota. Marilyn Friend. Professor Emerita of Education in the Department of Specialized Education Services at the University of North Carolina, Greensboro. Past President of CEC and Charter Member of CEC’s Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education. Dennis Inhulsen. Chief Learning Officer and Past President of the National Art Education ­A ssociation. Former School Administrator and Art Educator. Beverly Johns. Learning and Behavior Consultant and Professional Fellow at MacMurray ­College, Illinois. Former School Administrator and Special Education Teacher. Recipient of the 2000 Outstanding Leadership Award from CEC and Charter Member of CEC’s Division of ­Visual and Performing Arts Education. Marcia McCaffrey. Arts Education Consultant, New Hampshire Department of Education, President of the State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education (SEADAE) and member of the National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS) Leadership Team, which revised the national voluntary arts standards. Carrie Sandahl. Associate Professor, Director of the Disability, Arts, Culture, and Humanities Program, Department of Disability and Human Development, University of Illinois, Chicago. In addition, Beverly Gerber, Professor Emerita of Southern Connecticut State University, ­provided information on the new Division of Visual and Performing Arts Education, CEC.

References Adamek, M., Darrow, A. A. (2012). Music participation as a means to facilitate self-determination and ­t ransition to community life for students with disabilities. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), Intersection of arts education and special education (pp. 101–112). Washington, DC: John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Anderson, A., & Berry, K. A. (2018). Arts integration and special education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 196–215). New York, NY: Routledge. Arts Education Partnership. (2017). The arts leading the way to student success: A 2020 action agenda for advancing the arts in education. Retrieved from www.aep-arts.org/wp-content/uploads/AEP-ActionAgenda-Web-version.pdf Bennis, W., & Goldsmith, J. (2008). Learning to lead. Cambridge, MA: Basic Books. Brophy, T. (2009). The practice of assessment in music education: Frameworks, models, and designs. Chicago, IL: GIA Publications. Burnaford, G., Aprill, A., & Weiss, C. (with CAPE, the Chicago Arts Partnership in Education). (2009). Renaissance in the classroom: Arts integration and meaning ful learning. New York, NY: Routledge. Bushweller, K. (Ed.). (2016). Personalized learning: The next generation. Education Week, [Special Issue] 26(9), 1–33. Crockett, J. B. (2018). Legal aspects of teaching students with disabilities in the arts. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 59–71). New York, NY: Routledge. Crockett, J. B., Berry, K., & Anderson, A. (2015). Where are we now: The research on arts integration and special education. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education (pp. 157–188). New York, NY: Routledge.

356

Trends and Issues Influencing Education Crockett, J. B., & Blakeslee, M. (2018). The changing landscape of arts education and special education. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 3–15). New York, NY: Routledge. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York, NY: HarperCollins. Deshler, D. D. (2005). Adolescents with learning disabilities: Unique challenges and reasons for hope. ­L earning Disability Quarterly, 28, 122–124. Dorff, J. B. (2012). The importance of collaboration in art classrooms for success of students with special needs. In S. M. Malley (Ed.), The intersection of arts education and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches (pp. 10–18). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Dwyer, M. C. (2011). Reinvesting in arts education: Winning America’s future through creative schools. Washington, DC: President’s Committee on the Arts and the Humanities. Eisenhauer, J. (2007). Just looking and staring back: Challenging ableism through disability performance art. Studies in Art Education, 49(1), 7–22. Every Student Succeeds Act, PL 114–95, 20 U.S.C. § 6301 et. seq. (2015). Friend, M., & Cook, L. (2017). Interactions: Collaborative skills for school professionals. Boston, MA: Pearson. Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L. S. (2015). Rethinking service delivery for students with significant learning p­ roblems: Developing and implementing intensive instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 36(2), 105–111. Glass, D. (2017). Welcoming, inclusive, and supportive arts learning for everyone: Designing for access and learning variability. In J. Burnette (Ed.), VSA intersections: Arts and special education: Exemplary programs and approaches professional papers series (Volume 3) (pp. 7–21). Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. Harvey, M. W., & Kemp, J. D. (2018). Career and workforce development in the arts for youth with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 278–297). New York: Routledge. Hehir, T. (with Katzman, L.). (2012). Effective inclusive schools: Designing successful schoolwide programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hourigan, R. M. (2014). Intersections between school reform, the arts, and special education: The children left behind. Arts Education Policy Review, 115(2), 35–38. Hourigan, R. M., & Hammel, A. M. (2018). Family perspectives on access to arts education for students with disabilities. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. Malley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 267–277). New York, NY: Routledge. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, 20 U.S.C. §1401 et. seq. (2004). Jacobson, M. K. (2011). Community support for visual arts programs: Artist-in-residence in a K-6 elementary school (Master’s thesis). Dominican University of California, San Rafael, CA. Retrieved from http://files.eric. ed.gov/fulltext/ED521152.pdf Jeffrey, B., & Craft, A. (2004). Teaching creatively and teaching for creativity: Distinctions and relationships. Educational Studies, 30(1), 77–87. Jones, S., Brush, K., Bailey, R., Brion-Meisels, G., McIntyre, J., Kahn, J., … & Stickle, L. (2017). Navigating SEL from the inside out. Looking inside & across 25 leading SEL programs: A practical resource for schools and OST providers (elementary school focus). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/Documents/Navigating-Social-and-EmotionalLearning-from-the-Inside-Out.pdf Keifer-Boyd, K. (2018). Creativity, disability, diversity, and inclusion. In J. B. Crockett & S. M. M ­ alley (Eds.), Handbook of arts education and special education (pp. 45–55). New York, NY: Routledge. Lane, K. L., & Carter, E. W. (2015). Framing the future: Visions from senior scholars committed to issues involving the education of persons for whom typical instruction is not effective. Remedial and Special Education, 36(1), 3-4. Lee, B. Y. (2016). An overlooked and growing market: People with disabilities. Forbes Magazine, November 2. Retrieved from www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2016/11/02/an-overlooked-and-growing-market-people-withdisabilities/#62c614dd2ab0 Lee, B. K., Patall, E. A., Cawthon, S. W., & Steingut, R. R. (2015). The effect of drama-based pedagogy on preK-16 outcomes: A meta-analysis of research from 1985–2012. Review of Educational Research, 85(1), 3–49. Loughlin, S. M., & Anderson, A. (2015). A historical review of arts integration research and practice. In A. A. Anderson (Ed.), Arts integration and special education: An inclusive theory of action for student engagement (pp. 5–30). New York, NY: Routledge. Malley, S. M. (2014). Students with disabilities and the Core Arts Standards: Guiding principles for teachers. ­Washington, DC: The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.

357

Jean B. Crockett and Sharon M. Malley Malley, S. M., Dattilo, J., & Gast, D. (2002). Effects of visual arts instruction on the mental health of adults with mental retardation and mental illness. Mental Retardation, 40(4), 278–296. Malley, S. M., & Silverstein, L. B. (2014). Examining the intersection of arts education and special ­education. Arts Education Policy Review, 115, 39–43. Marx, G. (2014). Twenty-one trends for the 21st century. Bethesda, MD: Education Week Press. National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS). (2016). National Core Arts Standards: A conceptual framework for arts learning. Dover, DE: State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education. Retrieved from www.nationalartsstandards.org/sites/default/files/Conceptual%20Framework%2007-21-16.pdf Sabol, F. R. (2013). Seismic shifts in the education landscape: What do they mean for arts education and arts education policy? Arts Education Policy Review, 114, 33–45. Sadler, D. R. (2013). Assuring academic achievement standards: From moderation to calibration. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 20(1), 5–19. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2012.714742 Shulman, L. (2005). Signature pedagogies in the professions. Daedalus, 134(3), 52–59. Stager, G. (2014, Winter). What’s the maker movement and why should I care? Scholastic Administrator ­Magazine. Retrieved from www.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=3758336 The World Bank. (2017). Disability: Overview. Retrieved from www.worldbank.org/en/topic/disability/ overview Thomas, K. M., & McGee, C. D. (2012). The only thing we have to fear is…120 characters. TechTrends, 56(1), 19–33. Turnbull, H. R., & Stowe, M. J. (2001). Five models for thinking about disability: Implications for policy responses. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 12(3), 198–205. Vogel, N. (2015). Persons with disabilities: A worldwide underutilized resource. Disability MBA, May 27. Retrieved from http://diversitymbamagazine.com/persons-with-disabilities-a-worldwide-underutilizedresource

358

Index

AATA (American Art Therapy Association) 216–217 ableism 6, 52 accessibility: of the arts 236–237; to arts education 7–8; of arts education 269–270; of community arts 236–237; equal access and barriers 281; high-quality arts instruction, equity of access to 11–12; to instruction 10–11; of people with disabilities to the arts 259–260; to quality arts education 8–9 accommodations for students 63 accountability movement 134 Activity, Growth, and Recovery (Erikson, 1976) 26 ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) 46, 60, 62–63 Adamek, Mary 129, 130 adaptations for effective training: differentiated instruction 99–100; evidence-based practices 100; UDL 98–99 ADHD (attention deficit hyperactivity disorder), Adichie, Chimamanda Ngozi 48 Adler, Alfred 28 administrative supports, need for 118–119 administrator’s responsibilities for ensuring successful collaboration 42 ADTA (American Dance Therapy Association) 27 Advanced Preparation Standards 38 advocacy: parental advocacy 59–60; in third space, need for 12–13 AEP (Arts Education Partnership) 311; action agenda 343–344 aesthetic education 7 agency 49; impact of dance on 168 Americans with Disabilities Act 16, 25 anchor standards 35, 137 Anderson, Alida 130 Anderson, Francis 27 Andrus, Lucy 136

approaches to instruction for students with disabilities 157–158 art therapy 216; defining 216–217; development in schools 217; in late 20th century America 26–27; M-DCPS (Miami-Dade County Public Schools) 218; models of in schools 217; origins of 21; research reviews 220–221; students with ASD, research on 220; students with emotional and behavioral problems, research on 218–219; visual art therapy 27; youth at risk for school problems, research on 219 artistic identity 250–251 artistic literacy, defining 343 artistic processes 9 arts education 4, 6–7, 132, 252–253; in 19th century America 17; accessibility 7–8; accessibility of 269–270; AEP action agenda 343–344; availability of instruction 10–11; contemporary practice in arts teacher preparation 92–93; curriculum 136–137; deconstructing disabling narratives 48; in early 20th century America 19; EASE 172–174; find cards 140; fostering peer acceptance, social interaction, and inclusion 117–118; high-quality arts instruction, equity of access to 11–12; historic perspective of arts teacher preparation 91–92; infusion approach 95–97; lack of collaboration with paraeducators 109; in late 20th century America 23–24; National Core Arts Standards 7; paraeducators 96–97, 105–107; research 332, 339; standards, philosophy and knowledge bases informing 34–35; student art exhibition 139–140; for students with disabilities in early 20th century public schools 21–22; teacher preparation for the 21st century 94; third space 7; see also music education; visual arts education

359

Index Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools 1999–2000 and 2009–2010 10–11 arts educators 2; advocacy, need for 12–13; collaboration with special educators 32–33, 40; co-teaching 42 arts integration 200, 335; conceptual frameworks 209; confirmatory approach to arts integration research 199; defining 197; exploratory approach to arts integration research 198–199; historical background 196–197; intervention research findings 201; language development, facilitating 209; policy recommendations 208; recommendations for practice 210–211; reports 208; research in 197–198; social communication, facilitating 209; summary of research in 201– 207, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206; trends 208 arts integrative approach to collaboration 42 Artistic Literacy 1, 4, 7, 34, 39, 43, 69, 343, 355 arts literacy 8–9 Arts Skills Map 34 arts therapy: in 19th century America 18–19; community arts therapies 28; dance/movement therapy 27; in early 20th century America 20 the arts: accessibility 236–237; accessibility of people disabilities with to 259–260; assistive technology 315–317; career paths in the arts for people with disabilities 254–255; collaborative engagement through 298–299; communication and language, effect on 336–337; defining 235–236; development of communication and socialization skills, impact on 338–339; EASE program 337–338; employment in 284–285; perspectives of young artists with disabilities 255–256; reading and SEL, effect on 338; recommendations for supporting young artists with disabilities 292–293; and selfdetermination 271–272; social capital 260–261; social dimensions 336; and social support 270; technology and 254; Young People with Disabilities and the Arts 255 ASD (autism spectrum disorder): art therapy research 220; Burkhart Transition Center for Autism 146; Dance Movement Therapy research 223; EBPs 77–81; improving understanding through deep questioning 85–86; increasing positive social interactions students with ASD 84–85; music therapy research 226–227; National Professional Development Center on ASD 81; SCIP 188–189 assessment: assessing the music learning of students with disabilities 159–160; Binet-Simon intelligence test 20; formative assessment, examples of 138; functional behavioral assessment 79; information sharing 139; lowtech 158–159; MCAs 35, 137; in music education 158–159; NAEP 9; Stanford-Binet intelligence test 20; summative assessments, examples of 138–139; for visual arts education 138

assistive technology 141, 313–315; and the arts 315–317; categories of devices 321, 325–329; collaborating among stakeholders 321–322; for dance education 320–321; GoTalk augmentative communication devices 302; high-tech 159; for media arts 322–324; mid-tech 159; for music education 315–317; resources 148–149; for theater education 320; use 314; for visual arts education 317–319 Association for Dramatherapists 28 asylums 18 Austin Riggs Center 26 autism see ASD (autism spectrum disorder) availability, of instruction 10–11 awareness of dance education, expanding 169–170 Bailey, Sally 130 Ballard, Joseph 61 ballet: accessible ballet 170; d’Ambois, Jacques 170; Di Marco, Gianni 170; NYCB 166; tendu devant 172; translation 171–172 Barbato, Lewis 27–28 Barrier-Free Theatre 191–192 barriers, overcoming 135–136, 281 Bartlett, David Ely 153 behavioral interventions 78 Berry, Katherine 130 Bertrand, Abijah 306 best practices, for dance education 167 Bien Aime, Gertrude 299–303 Binet-Simon intelligence test 20 Blakeslee, Michael 1 Blandy, Douglas 141 Bollinger, John 144 Boston Ballet 170 Brophy, Timothy 356 Brown v. Board of Education 134 building partnerships 69 Burnaford, Gail 356 CAEP (Council for Accreditation of Educator Preparation) 38 career paths in the arts for people with disabilities 254–255, 262; effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291 Carrol, Diane 58 case studies: clarifying expectations in dance 116; fostering independence 116; fostering peer acceptance, social interaction, and inclusion 117–118; highly talented students 274; importance of community arts 268; intellectually gifted students 273 Cassella, Michelina 170 CCSS (Common Core State Standards) 36 CEC (Council for Exceptional Children), Current Practice Alerts 83 certified dance teachers 167 Chace, Marian 27

360

Index child-find provision 65 choice-making 144 Chopra, Ritu 58 clarifying: expectations in dance 116; roles and responsibilities of paraeducators 111–113 classifying effectiveness of EBPs 76 classroom, identity in 251–252 classroom aides 96–97; see also paraeducators Clerc, Laurent 18 cognitive behavioral intervention package 78, 79 Coleman, Kathy 47 collaboration 96; administrator’s responsibilities 42; between arts and special educators 32–33, 39–40; arts integrative approach 42; building partnerships 69; in community arts 242–243; engagement through the arts 298–299; engaging in 111; evidence-based practices 41; with families 97; for inclusion for all 142; maintaining high expectations 40; with paraeducators 105; with paraeducators, lack of 109; pre-collaboration discussion statements for teachers 124; principles of UDL 41; promoting communicative competence 40–41; selecting appropriate accommodations for students 41; using formative indicators 41–42 Colonial America, educational opportunities 17 Common Core State Standards 34 communication: arts education impact on 338–339; Dynavox communication device 314; functional communication training 79; and language 336–337; social communication, facilitating 209 communitcative competence, promoting 40–41 communities of practice 211 community arts 28, 253; accessibility 236–237; collaborative process 242–243; defining 235–236; future directions 243–244; importance of, case study 268; meaningful engagement 241– 242; mutual benefits of 239–240; philosophical foundations 236–238; resilience, fostering 240–241; for youth with disabilities 238–239 competence, presuming in students 115 comprehensive behavioral treatment for young children 78 compulsory education 20 computer access aids 326 Conceptual Framework for Arts Education 34 conceptual frameworks for arts integration 209 conferences and organizations for visual arts education 149 confirmatory approach to arts integration research 199 considerations for students in the arts education standards 35–36 contemporary practice in arts teacher preparation 92–93 Cook, Bryan 57 Cook, Lysandra 57 core cultural values 280–281

Cosho, Marilyn 131 co-teaching 42 Council for Exceptional Children 12, 25, 37; Current Practice Alerts 83; professonal standards, developing 38 creative arts therapy 4, 28 creativity 19; and students’ potentials and expressiveness 29; disability as a site of 45; in disabling narratives 48; as an essential element in arts education and special education 355; engagement in 355 creativity aids 326 Crip justice 46 crip theory 2, 45–47; DACP 47; deconstructing disabling narratives 48; disenabling narratives 50 criteria for services under IDEA 64 Crockett, Jean 1, 57, 312 Current Practice Alerts 83 curriculum: for arts education 136–137; availability of instruction 10–11; for “crippled” children 21; IEPs 5–6; standardization of 19; for theater education 188–193; for visual arts education 136–137 D2ART project 254 DACP (Disability Art and Culture Project) 47 daily living aids 326 d’Ambois, Jacques 170 dance companies: Axis Dance Company 168; Dancing WheelsDance Company 168; integrated dance companies 168 dance education: assistive technology 320–321; best practices 167; certified dance teachers 167; d’Ambois, Jacques 170; EASE 172–174; expanding awareness of 169–170; form-based teaching 171; history of 167; Holger, Hilde 168; in late 20th century America 23; marginalization of 167–168; NCAS 175; principle-based instruction 171; procedures for teaching to diverse learners 176–177; resources for teaching in special education 174–175; standards-based practices for inclusion 172–174; tendu devant 172; translation 171–172; UDL 176; Verdi-Fletcher, Mary 168 Dance Movement Therapy 168; Chase Approach 222; defining 221; developments in 221–222; individuals suffering from trauma and depression, research on 222–223; students with ASD, research on 223 dance/movement therapy 27 Danchig-Waring, Adrian 166 Dancing Wheels Dance Company 168 Darrow, Alice-Ann 129, 130 Darwin, Charles 133 databases: for arts integration research 200–201; NTLS-2 7–8; SEELS 7–8 Davis, Leonard 52–53

361

Index defining: art therapy 216–217; artistic literacy 343; arts integration 197; community arts 235–236; Dance Movement Therapy 221; music therapy 223–224 demographic trends of individuals with disabilities 344–346 depression, Dance Movement Therapy research 222–223 design careers for individuals with disabilities 290, 294 developing: identity through technology 261; NCAS 34; plans for students 113 development of music therapy 224–225 developments in Dance Movement Therapy 221–222 DeVito, Donald 234 Dewey, John 19 Di Marco, Gianni 170 difference, including 52–53, 141 dignity for all, ensuring 69–70; treating students with dignity and respect 114–115 dimensions of engagement 185–186 Disabilities Studies theory 48–49 disability 135, 248; accessibility of people with to the arts 259–260; accommodations for students 63; ADA 46; approaches to instruction for students with disabilities 157–158; assessing the music learning of students with disabilities 159–160; barriers, overcoming 135–136; career paths in the arts for people with 262; categories of 5–6; community arts, defining 235–236; content in music curricula and activities 156; crip theory 46, 47; DACP 47; dance companies 51; deconstructing disabling narratives 48; demographic trends of individuals with 344–346; discrimination 62–63; disenabling narratives 50; EBPs for secondary students with transition-related disabilities 81; educational trends of individuals with 346–352; educator’s role in facilitating transition of students with disabilities from school to community life 161; effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291; employment data for individuals with 282; equal access and barriers 281; as human variation 94–95; impact on stress in the family 267–268; inclusion 6; inclusion of students with disabilities in music education 155; learning needs of students with disabilities 74; literature on 156; media representation of 46, 47; misconceptions about 50; the normate body 50–51; oppression 51–52; perspectives of young artists with disabilities 255–256; portrayals of 145; post-oppositional work 52; preparing visual arts educators for inclusion 146–147; public policy 285; recommendations for supporting young artists with disabilities 292–293; selfrepresentation through art 145–146; signifiers of 52; social model of 237–238; social support and

the arts 270; stereotypes 50; in visual culture 144–145; well-being trends of individuals with 353–354; Young People with Disabilities and the Arts 255 Disability Culture, and the workplace 280–281 disability identity: identity formation 249; social capital 249–250; views on identity 258–259 disability rights movement 24–25 disability studies 143–144 “The Disability Visibility Project” 50 discrete trial teaching 79 discrimination 6, 50; ableism 6; protecting students with disabilities from 62–63 disenabling narratives 50 diversity 2, 50, 52 Dobbs, Harrison Allen 20 Dorff, Juliann 58 drama education: Act It Out 190; Barrier-Free Theatre 191–192; curricula 188–193; HHM 190–191; in late 20th century America 23; Navigating the Social World 190; Process Reflective Enactment Approach 189–190; SCIP 188–189; sculpting 191; UT 192–193 Draper and Jellison research study 154–155 Dunn, Craig 356 Dynavox communication device 314 early 20th century America: arts education 19; arts education for students with disabilities in public schools 21–22; arts therapies 20; educating students with disabilities 20 EASE (Everyday Arts for Special Education) 172–174, 337–338 EBPs (evidence-based practices) 58, 72, 76–77; classifying effectiveness of 76; identifying 76–77; meta-analyses 83–84; need for 72–73; practice reviews 83; research-to-practice gap 73–74; in reviews published in professional journals 81–83, 82; for secondary students with transitionrelated disabilities 81; trustworthy EBPs 77–81 “ecological perspective” 141 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 5, 16, 25, 61, 154 educational trends of individuals with disabilities 346–352 effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291 Ehrli, Hannah 304 Eisner, Eliot 47 eligibility for special education 64 Emerson, artist profile 257 emotional learning 186; interpersonal skills 186–187; intrapersonal emotional skills 187–188 empathy 48 emphasizing: human variations 95; the student 97–98 employment: data for individuals with disabilites 282; design career strategies 294; Disability

362

Index Culture and the workplace 280–281; effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291; transition models 288–289; workforce development policy 285–287; see also transition programs empowerment visualization 49 engagement: collaborative engagement through 298–299; dimensions of 185–186; meaningful engagement 241–242; parental support for arts engagement 260; psychological needs relating to 184–185 engaging in collaboration 111 ensuring a free and appropriate education 63; childfind provision 65; IEPs 65–66; least restrictive environment 66; nondiscriminatory evaluation 65; parental participation 66–67; procedural safeguards 66; zero-reject 65 environmental aids 327 equal access and barriers 281 equity of access to high-quality arts education 11–12 ergonomic equipment 327 Erikson, Joan 26–27 ESPs (education support professionals), paraeducators 105 ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) 4, 34, 57, 60–61; improving outcomes for all learners 62; MTSS 67–68; parent engagement mandate 67; eugenic policies 52–53 Everelles, Nirmala 46 Every Student Succeeds Act 24 evidence-based practices 41, 74–76; implementing 75; increasing positive social interactions students with ASD 84–85; need for 72–73; research-to-practice gap 73–74 evolution of arts integration research 197–198 expanding awareness of dance education 169–170 expectations for implementation of arts education standards 36 experimental research 73 exploratory approach to arts integration research 198–199 facilitating language development 209 families: collaboration with 97; resilience 270–271; stress, impact of disability on 267–268 FAPE (Free Appropriate Public Education) 66; child-find provision 65; ensuring 63–67; IEPs 65–66; nondiscriminatory evaluation 65; procedural safeguards 66; zero-reject 65 Ferguson, Erik 47 findings: of music in special education research study 154–155; young people with disabilities in the arts research study 256 formal education in 19th century America 17 formation of identity 249 formative assessment: examples of 138; find cards 140; self-reflection 140–141

formative indicators 41–42 fostering: independence, creativity, and authenticity 115–117; resilience 240–241 Foucault, Michel 19 Fraser, Mat 48 Freud, Sigmund 21 Friend, Marilyn 356 functional behavioral assessment 79 functional communication training 79 future directions of community arts 243–244 future needs for creative arts therapies in schools 227–228 Gallaudet, Thomas 18 Garland-Thomson, Rosemarie 50 Garlock, Rose 28 general education in early 20th century America 19 Genzlinger, Niel 59 Gerber, Beverly 356 giftedness 16; highly talented students 274–275; intellectually gifted students 272–274 Goals 2000: Educate America Act 23, 33 GoTalk augmentative communication devices 302 Great Depression: impact on arts curricula 19; impact on special education 20 Green, Cheryl 47–48 Haggerty School 91 Haiselden, Dr Harry J. 144 Haiti, inclusive arts education in: developing inclusion and special education teacher training 305; expanding affiliations 302–305; Haitian Center for Inclusive Music Education 308; replicating the global professional development approach 308; trips to Notre Maison orphanage 301–302, 306–307 Hall, G. Stanley 19 Hammel, Alice 233 Harris, Jacqueline 181 Harvey, Michael 234 hearing and listening aids 328 Heise, Donalyn 233 HHM (Hunter Heartbeat Method) 190–191 high expectations, maintaining 40 highly talented students 274–275 high-quality arts instruction, equity of access to 11–12 high-tech assistive devices 159, 314 historic perspective of arts teacher preparation 91–92 history: of arts integration 196–197; of dance education 167 Hodsell, Frank 33 Holger, Hilde 168 Hoppe, Erin 233 Horace Mann School for the Deaf 133 Horowitz, Rob 311 Hourigan, Ryan 233

363

Index Howe, Samuel Gridley 18 human capital theory 133 IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) 5, 26, 57, 60, 60–61, 105, 132, 279, 333; beyond K-12 146; child-find provision 65; criteria for services under 64; FAPE 64–65; IEPs 65–66; least restrictive environment 66; Least Restrictive Environment provisions 5; nondiscriminatory evaluation 65; parental participation 66–67; procedural safeguards 66; RTI 67; zero-reject 65 identifying EBPs 76–77 identity 248–249; artistic identity 250–251; in the classroom 251–252; developing through technology 261; formation of 249; in popular culture 251; queer identity 250; recommendations for developing and exploring 263; views on identity 258–259 IEPs (individualized education programs) 5–6, 27, 64, 65–66, 110; summary example 127–128; transition IEP 279 implementing: evidence-based practices 75; “promising practices” 77 implications of developments in visual arts and special education 134–135 improving: outcomes for all learners 62; understanding through deep questioning 85–86 inclusion 5, 6, 25–26, 52–53; ableism 6; dance education, standards-based practices for 172–174; deconstructing disabling narratives 48; difference, including 141; Disabilities Studies theory 48–49; disability studies 143–144; diversity 50; fostering 117–118; guidelines for arts educators 6; Haggerty School 91; NTLS-2 7–8; preparing visual arts educators for 146–147; resources for inclusive arts instruction and teaching strategies 148; SEELS 7–8; of students with disabilities in music education 155 increasing positive social interactions students with ASD 84–85 independence, fostering 116 individualized education 134–135; visual arts education 137–138 information sharing 139 infusion approach to arts education 95–97; collaboration 96; emphasizing the student 97–98; families, collaboration with 97; intervention 96; paraeducators 96–97; teacher preparation programs 92 Inhulsen, Dennis 356 Initial Preparation Standards 38 initiating the development of inclusive arts education in Haiti 299–308; developing inclusion and special education teacher training 305; expanding affiliations 302–305; Haitian Center for Inclusive Music Education 308; replicating the global professional development

approach 308; trips to Notre Maison orphanage 301–302, 306–307 insight 19 institutions, deinstitutionalization movement 24 instruction, availability 10–11 insufficient supervision for paraeducators 108 integrated dance companies 168 intellectually gifted students 272–274 intelligence: Binet-Simon intelligence test 20; intellectually gifted students 272–274; IQ tests 133; Stanford-Binet intelligence test 20 interdependency, post-oppositional work 52 international perspectives, initiating the development of inclusive arts education in Haiti 299–308 interpersonal skills 186–187 interventions 96; antecedent-based interventions 79; behavioral interventions 78; cognitive behavioral intervention package 78; educational interventions 200; emerging interventions 81; findings on research 201; parent-implemented 79; PBIS 68; peer-mediated instruction and intervention 80, 84–85; story-based interventions 79; technology-aided instruction and intervention 80 intrapersonal emotional skills 187–188 Itard, Jean-Marc-Gaspard 18, 153 John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts’ Office of VSA 136–137 Johns, Beverly 356 Journal of Dance Education 169 Journal of Music Therapy 155 K-12 education, accessibility of people disabilities with to the arts 259 Keating, Analouise 52 Keifer-Boyd, Karen 2; find cards 140 Kemp, John 234, 278 Kennedy, John F. 25 Kilpatrick, W. H. 19 Kirkbride’s model 18 knowledge bases: for arts education standards 34–35; for special education standards 38 Kraft, Michelle 129 Kunc, Norman 94–95 lack of training for paraeducators 107–108 Landesman, Rocco 3 language development 336–337; facilitating 209 late 20th century America: arts education advocacy 23–24; arts therapies 26–27; community arts therapies 28; dance education 23; dance/movement therapy 27; deinstitutionalization movement 24; drama education 23; drama therapy 27–28; music education 22; music education for students with disabilities 26–27; theater education 23; visual arts education 22

364

Index learning needs of students with disabilities 74 legislation: ADA 46, 60, 62–63; Americans with Disabilities Act 16; Education for All Handicapped Children Act 5, 16, 61, 154; Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 25; ESSA 4, 57; ESSA (Every Student Succeeds Act) 60–61; Every Student Succeeds Act 24; Goals 2000: Educate America Act 23; IDEA 5, 57, 60, 60–61, 333; NCLB 61, 134; Rehabilitation Act 16, 24–25, 60–61; Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act 313; WIOA 279–280 LEP (limited English proficiency) 10 Lowenfeld, Viktor 22, 134 low-tech assistive devices 158–159, 314 LRE (least restrictive environment) 66, 131, 140, 142 Ludi: artist profile 257; views on identity 258 MAC (Media Arts Committee) 34 Mace, Ron 278 maintaining high expectations 40 Malley, Sharon 1–2, 311, 312 managing student behavior 117 Manjack, Sharon 58 marginalization of dance education 167–168 math education aids 327 Mattlin, Ben 145–146 MCAs (model cornerstone assessments) 35, 137 McCaffrey, Marcia 356 McCord, Kim 311 McHale, Kevin 251 McNiff, Shaun 27 McTighe, Jay 136–137 MDAA (Muscular Dystrophy Association of America) 145 M-DCPS (Miami-Dade County Public Schools), Art Therapy program 218 meaningful engagement 241–242 media arts: assistive technology 322–323, 324; research in 323–324 media representation of disability 46, 47 medical models 95 medicine, evidence-based medicine 75 memory and organization aids 328 meta-analyses 83–84 meta-analyses of research in arts integration 201–207, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206 mid-tech assistive devices 159 minimizing ableism 6 misconceptions about disability 50 mission statement of DACP 47 mobility, positioning, and transportation aids 328 Model Cornerstone Assessments 8–9 modeling 78; medical models 95; video modeling 80 Montgomery, Dani 46 Moreno, Jacob 27–28 Morgan, artist profile 257

movement 23; translation 171–172 MTSS (multi-tiered systems of support) 37, 67–68 Mullins, Aimee 50–51 multimodal ways of knowing 137 Music, disability and society (Lubet, 2011) 156 music education 153; ability awareness 156; academic preparation 156–157; approaches to instruction for students with disabilities 157–158; assessing the music learning of students with disabilities 159–160; assistive technology 158–159, 315–317; contemporary practice in teacher preparation 93–94; disability content 156; educator’s role in facilitating transition of students with disabilities from school to community life 161; future directions 162; history of 153; inclusion of students with disabilities 155; Itard, Jean-Marc-Gaspard 153; in late 20th century America 22; role models 156; student achievement 9–10; for students with disabilities 26–27; Tanglewood Symposium 22; teacher in-service 156 music in special education, research on 154–155 music literacy 8–9 music therapy: defining 223–224; development of 224–225; district-wide model 225–226; neurological research 227; origins of 21; related services model 225; students with ASD, research on 226–227 musical ensembles 154 mutual benefits of community arts 239–240 NADTA (North American Drama Therapy Association) 28 NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) 9; 2008 NAEP 10; 2016 NAEP 10; availability of instruction 10–11 NAfME (National Association for Music Education) 157 NASP (National Association of School Psychologists) 67 National Art Therapy Association 27 National Association for Music Therapy 21, 26 National Children’s Theater Conference 23 National Core Arts Standards 7, 8–9, 12, 23 National Education Standards and Improvements Council 33 National Endowment for the Humanities 23 National Professional Development Center on ASD 81 National Standards for Arts Education 33 National Technical Assistance Center on Transition, EBPs for secondary students with transition-related disabilities 81 Naumberg, Margaret 21, 27 Navigating the Social World 190 NCAH (National Committee on Arts for the Handicapped) 28 NCAS (2014 National Core Arts Standards) 33, 136; artistic literacy 343; considerations

365

Index for inclusion of students with disabilities 35–36; for dance education 175; developing 34; expectations for implementation of 36; structure of the arts education standards 35 NCATE (National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education) 37 NCCAS (National Coalition for Core Arts Standards) 34, 136–137 NCLB (No Child Left Behind) 11, 23, 37, 61, 134 NDEO (National Dance Education Organization) 169 NDI (National Dance Institute) 170 NEA (National Endowment for the Arts) 23; report on status of arts education 33 NELS (National Educational Longitudinal Study) 132 Neuber, Margaret 20 neurological research in music therapy 227 neuroplasticity 162 Nirje, Bengt 24 NLTS2 post-school outcomes data 282–285; employment in the arts 284–285; employment outcomes 283–284; postsecondary education participation 283 nondiscriminatory evaluation 65 Nordoff, Paul 26 “normality” 95 normalization principle 24 Novick, Jonathan 46 NTLS-2 (National Longitudinal Transition Study-2) 7–8 NYCB (New York City Ballet) 166 occupational therapy 21 Ockelford, Dr Adam 302–303 Office of Civil Rights 61 Opportunity-to-Learn Standards 12 oppositional work 51–52 oppression 51–52 origin: of art therapy 21; of music therapy 21; of special education 25 outsider art 22 overcoming barriers 135–136 overreliance on paraeducators 109–110 Palombo, aleXsandro 51 paraeducators 96–97, 105; clarifying classroom and instructional expectations 116–117; clarifying roles and responsibilities 111–113; consequences of overreliance on paraeducators 109–110; developing a plan for the student 113; fostering independence, creativity, and authenticity 115– 117; fostering peer acceptance, social interaction, and inclusion 117–118; insufficient supervision for 108; lack of collaboration 109; lack of training for 107–108; managing student behavior 117; overreliance on 109–110; plan tailored for visual art education 125–126; planning with

114; preparing 114; role of 105–107; strategies for effective use of 110–118; student-specific information, learning 115; treating students with dignity and respect 114–115 Paraprofessional Resource and Research Center 58 parent engagement mandate (ESSA) 67 parent training package 78 parental advocacy 59–60 parental participation 66–67 parental support for arts engagement 260 participation: parent engagement mandate (ESSA) 67; parental participation 66–67; Partnership for 21st Century Skills 34 partnerships, building 69 PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports) 68 peer acceptance, fostering 117–118 Peer Assisted Learning Strategies 81 peer training package 78 peer-mediated instruction and intervention 80, 84–85 performance standards 35 performances, Sins Invalid 48 perspectives of young artists with disabilities 255–256 Petner, James 91 philosophical foundations of community arts: accessibility 236–237; social model of disability 237–238; strengths paradigm 238 philosophy and knowledge bases: for arts education standards 34–35; for special educator standards 38 Picture Exchange Communication System 80 PMII (Peer Mediated Instruction and Intervention) 84–85 policy: arts integration, recommendations for 208; disability policy 285; Education for All Handicapped Children Act 61; ESSA 4; IDEA 61, 279, 333; students with disabilities education 60–61; WIOA 279–280; workforce development 285–287 popular culture, identity in 251 portfolios 139 postsecondary education, accessibility of people disabilities with to the arts 259–260 Potter, Lauren Elizabeth 251 poverty, impact on services for people with disabilities 269 practice reviews for EBPs 83 pre-collaboration discussion statements for teachers 124 preparing paraeducators 114 President’s Panel on Mental Retardation 25 presuming students’ competence 115 principle-based dance education 171 principles of UDL 98–99 Prinzhorn, Hans 22 procedural safeguards 66

366

Index procedures for teaching dance to diverse learners 176–182; centering practice and call to class 177–178; classroom structure 177; concept introduction and exploration 179; cooldown 180; floor work 180; improvisation/creative problem-solving 180; locomotor exercises 180; pre-class 177; preparation and planning 176–177; repetition of skills 179–180; reverence 181; welcome/introduction/warm-up 178–179 Process Reflective Enactment Approach 189–190 professional preparation standards 38 professional standards: for CEC, developing 38; for special education 36, 37 professonal ethical principles and practice standards 38 profiles of artists: Alex 256; Connor 257; Emerson 257; Jamie 256–257; Jessie 256; Ludi 257; Morgan 257; Robin 257; Zayne 257 Progressive Movement 19 Projects for Haiti, Inc. 303 “promising practices” 81; implementing 77 promoting communicative competence 40–41 prompting 80 protecting students with disabilities from discrimination 62–63 psychoanalysis 21, 134 psychodrama 27–28 psychological needs relating to engagement 184–185 psychology, Gestalt theory 19 public education: in 19th century America 17; arts education for students with disabilities in 21–22; arts for students with disabilities in 21–22; free and appropriate education, ensuring 63–67 public policy see policy quality arts education, accessibility to 8–9 queer identity 250 Ramey, Jody 47 reading and SEL, effect of arts education on 338 recommendations: for arts integration policy 208; for arts integration practice 210–211; for exploring and developing identity 263; for supporting young artists with disabilities 292–293 recreation and leisure aids 328 reform: educational reform in the 1970s 37; educational reform in the 1980s 37 Rehabilitation Act of 1973 16, 24–25, 60–61; see also Section 504 REI (Regular Education Initiative) 25–26 reinforcement 80 related services model 225 reports: Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools 1999–2000 and 2009–2010 10–11; on arts integration 208; NEA report on status of arts education 33

research: in arts education 332, 339; in arts integration 197–198; conceptual frameworks for arts integration 209; confirmatory approach to arts integration research 199; experimental research 73; exploratory approach to arts integration research 198–199; individuals suffering from trauma and depression, Dance/ Movement Therapy research 222–223; in media arts and assistive technology 323–324; metaanalyses 83–84; meta-analyses of research in arts integration 201–207, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206; on music in special education 154–155; neurological research in music therapy 227; on neuroplasticity 162; NLTS2 post-school outcomes data 282–285; reviews on art therapy research 220–221; students with ASD, art therapy research 220; students with ASD, Dance/Movement Therapy research 223; students with ASD, music therapy research 226–227; students with emotional and behavioral problems, art therapy research 218–219; youth at risk for school problems, art therapy research 219 research-to-practice gap 73–74 residential institutions 18; deinstitutionalization movement 24 resilience, in families of disabled persons 270–271 resilience, fostering 240–241 resources: for assistive technologies 148–149; for inclusive arts instruction and teaching stategies 148; for teaching dance education in special education 174–175; for visual arts standards 147 responsibilties of paraeducators, clarifying 111 results of Arts Education in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools 1999–2000 and 2009–2010 10–11 reviews 81–83; on art therapy research 220–221 reviews published in professional journals, EBPs identified in 82 revising standards 32; NCAS 33 Robbins, Clive 26 Roberts, Edward 24 Robin, artist profile 257 role models 156–157 role of paraeducators 105–107; clarifying 111 RTI (Response to Intervention) 67 rural education in early 20th century America 19, 20 Sandahl, Carrie 356 schools: in 19th century America 17; arts education 252–253; developments of art therapy in 217; future needs for creative arts therapies in 227–228; Haggerty School 91; Horace Mann School for the Deaf 133; IDEA beyond K-12 146; identity in the classroom 251–252; marginalization of dance education in 167–168; models of art therapy in 217; scientific management 133; Walden School 21

367

Index science, experimental research 73 scientific management 133 SCIP (Social Competence Intervention Program) 188–189 scripting 78, 80 sculpting 191 SWD (students with disabilities) 10; arts education for students with disabilities in early 20th century public schools 21–22; considerations for students in the arts education standards 35–36; educating students with disabilities through the 19th century 17–18; education policy 60–61; education students with disabilities in early 20th century 20; music education 26–27; NCAH 28; visual arts education 27 Section 504 62–63 SEELS (Special Education Elementary Longitudinal Study) 7–8 Seguin, Eduoard 18 Seham, Jenny 129 SEL (social and emotional learning) 186; impact of arts education on 338; interpersonal skills 186–187; intrapersonal emotional skills 187–188 selecting accommodations for students 41 self-determination 24; and the arts 271–272; through choice-making 144 self-knowing 144 self-management 79 self-reflection 140–141 self-representation through art 145–146 Sidney Lanier music program 298 “sight-saving” classes 21 signifiers of disability 52 Simon, Paul-Max 19 Simpson-Steele, Jamie 57 Sins Invalid 48 Smith, Jean Kennedy 28 social capital 249–250, 260–261 social communication, facilitating 209 social Darwinism 133, 134–135 social interaction fostering 117–118 social learning 186; interpersonal skills 186–187; intrapersonal emotional skills 187–188 social model of disability 237–238 social narratives 80 social skills package 79 social support and the arts 270 socialization 336; arts education impact on 338–339 socioeconomic status, impact on services for people with disabilities 269 special education 6–7, 334; in 18th century 132–133; in 20th and 21st centuries 133–134; ASD, EBPs for 77–81; assistive technology 141; barriers, overcoming 135–136; classifying effectiveness of EBPs 76; collaboration 142; developments in 134–135; in early 20th century America 20; EASE 172–174; EBPs 72; eligibility for 64; ensuring a free and appropriate education 63–67; improving outcomes for all learners 62;

lack of collaboration with paraeducators 109; in late 19th century 133; music in, research 154–155; origins of 25; overreliance on paraeducators 109–110; parental advocacy 59–60; policy governing educating students with disabilities 60–61; professional standards 36; psychological needs relating to engagement 184–185; reform 20; research-to-practice gap 73–74; resources for teaching dance education 174–175; summaries of research on 335; third space 7; trustworthy EBPs 77–81; UDL 141–142; “well-rounded education” 62; see also arts integration; special educators special educators 2; advocacy, need for 12–13; collaboration with arts educator 32–33; collaboration with arts educators 39–40; co-teaching 42; expectations for implementation of standards 39; philosophy and knowledge bases informing standards 38 specially designed instruction 64 speech/language aids 325 SPPA (2012 Survey of Public Participation in the Arts) 236–237 standardization of curricula 19 standards: Advanced Preparation Standards 38; anchor standards 35, 137; CCSS 36; considerations for students in the arts education standards 35–36; expectations for implementation of arts education standards 36; for inclusive dance education 172–174; Initial Preparation Standards 38; National Education Standards and Improvements Council 33; National Standards for Arts Education 33; NCAS 33; performance standards 35; philosophy and knowledge bases informing arts education standards 34–35; professional ethical principles and practice standards 38; professional preparation standards 38; professional standards for special education 36; resources for visual arts standards 147; structure of the arts education standards 35; for teaching professions 32; of visual arts education 136–137 Stanford-Binet intelligence test 20 Stange, Wolfgang 168 State Education Agency Directors of Arts Education 23, 34 STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics 278–279 STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) 278–279 stereotypes of disability 50 story-based interventions 79 story-telling 48 strategies for effective training: differentiated instruction 99–100; evidence-based practices 100; UDL 98–99 strategies for effective use of paraeducators: clarifying classroom and instructional expectations 116–117; clarifying roles and

368

Index responsibilities 111–113; developing a plan for the student 113; engaging in collaboration 111; fostering independence, creativity, and authenticity 115–117; fostering peer acceptance, social interaction, and inclusion 117–118; learning student-specifice information 115; managing student behavior 117; planning with the paraeducator 114; presuming competence 115 strengths paradigm 238 stress, impact of disability on within families 267–268 structure: of the arts education standards 35; of the special education standards 38 structured play group 80 student art exhibition 139–140 students: accessibility to arts education 7–8; behavior, managing 117; presuming competence 115; treating with dignity and respect 114–115 student-specific information, learning 115 suggested texts and video for pre-service education 104 summary of research: in arts integration 201–207, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206; in special education 335 summative assessments: examples of 138–139; find cards 140; self-reflection 140–141 supervision of paraeducators 108 support, systemic supports, need for 118–119 supporting role of paraeducators 106–107 surveys: SPPA survey 236–237; Young People with Disabilities and the Arts 255 systemic supports, need for 118–119

Approach 189–190; SCIP 188–189; sculpting 191; SEL 186–188; UT 192–193 therapy: art therapy 216; community arts therapies 28; dance/movement therapy 27; drama therapy 27–28; future needs for creative arts therapies in schools 227–228; occupational therapy 21; see also art therapy; music therapy third space 7; advocacy, need for 12–13 time for instruction 10–11 Title II of the Educate America Act 33 training for paraeducators 107–108 transition programs: design career strategies 294; Disability Culture and the workplace 280–281; educator’s role in facilitating transition of students with disabilities from school to community life 161; effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291; employment data for individuals with disabilites 282; models 288–289; in visual arts education 146; workforce development policy 285–287 translation in dance education 171–172 trauma Dance Movement Therapy research 222–223 treating students with dignity and respect 114–115 trends: in arts integration 208; demographic trends of individuals with disabilities 344–346; educational trends of individuals with disabilities 346–352; well-being trends of individuals with disabilities 353–354 trustworthy EBPs 77–81 Turner, William Wolcott 153

Tanglewood Symposium 22 targeting instruction 41–42 task analysis 80 teacher aides see paraeducators teacher preparation programs 91; arts teacher preparation for the 21st century 94; contemporary practice in arts teacher preparation 92–93; differentiated instruction 99–100; evidence-based practices 100; historic perspective of arts teacher preparation 91–92; infusion approach 95–97; instilling confidence 101; UDL 98–99; see also training teaching, discrete trial teaching 79 technology: and the arts 254; assistive technology 313–315; as resource for identity development 261 technology-aided instruction and intervention 80; assistive technology 141; GoTalk augmentative communication devices 302 Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act 313 theater education: Act It Out 190; assistive technology 320; Barrier-Free Theatre 191–192; curricula 188–193; HHM 190–191; in late 20th century America 23; Navigating the Social World 190; Process Reflective Enactment

UDL (universal design for learning) 6, 68–69, 98–99, 137, 141–142; for collaboration 41; for dance education 176; differentiated instruction 99–100; evidence-based practices 100 Understanding by Design© Framework 35 unifying theories of action 209 Universal Design 278 unlimited access 51 upstander behavior 48, 49 UT (Unified Theater) 192–193 Valladares, Gloria 306 Verdi-Fletcher, Mary 168 video modeling 80 views on identity 258–259 vignettes: Alex 256; Connor 257; Emerson 257; increasing positive social interactions students with ASD 84–85; Jamie 256–257; Jessie 256; Ludi 257; Morgan 257; Robin 257; using deep questioning to improve understanding 85–86; Zayne 257 Viscardi, Henry 3 vision aids 329 visual arts education 131, 132; in 19th century America 17; in 20th and 21st centuries 133–134; assessing for inclusion 138; assistive technology

369

Index 141, 317–319; barriers, overcoming 135–136; collaboration 142; conferences and organizations 149; considerations for curriculum 136–137; contemporary practice in teacher preparation 93–94; developments in 134–135; find cards 140; individualizing 137–138; in late 19th century 133; in late 20th century America 22; paraeducator plan for 125–126; portfolios 139; preparing educators to include disability 146–147; resources for standards 147; standards 136–137; student art exhibition 139–140; for students with disabilities 27; teacher preparation 92; transition programs 146; UDL 141–142 visual culture, examining disability in 144–145 VSA (Very Special Arts) 28, 154 Walden School 21 Ward, Winifred 23 Watson, Goodwin 20 well-being trends of individuals with disabilities 353–354

“well-rounded education” 34, 62, 287–288; impact and implications for practice 291–292; see also employment; transition programs What Works Clearinghouse 100, 334 Wiggins, Grant 136–137 Williams, Tennessee 59 WIOA (Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act) 279–280 Wolfensberger, Wolf 24 Wong, Alice 50 workforce development policy 285–287 workplace: Disability Culture and 280–281; effective career development strategies for the arts 289–291; employment data for individuals with disabilites 282; transition models 288–289; workforce development policy 285–287 writing and spelling aids 325–326 WWC (What Works Clearinghouse) 334 Zayne, views on identity 258 zero-reject 65

370