AA-AAAS Bibliography: Search

Search Filters

Keywords

Search Results

1144 results.

  • Dymond, S. K., Renzaglia, A., Gilson, C. L., & Slagor, M. T. (2007). Defining access to the general curriculum for high school students with significant disabilities. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 32(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.2511/rpsd.32.1.1

  • Dynia, J. M., Walton, K. M., Sagester, G. M., Schmidt, E. K., & Tanner, K. J. (2023). Addressing sensory needs for children with autism spectrum disorder in the classroom. Intervention in School and Clinic, 58(4), 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/10534512221093786

  • Eckhout, T. J., Plake, B. S., Smith, D. L., & Larsen, A. (2007). Aligning a state’s alternative standards to regular core content standards in reading and mathematics: A case study. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(1), 79–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340709336731

  • El Zein, F., Solis, M., Vaughn, S., & McCulley, L. (2014). Reading comprehension interventions for students with autism spectrum disorders: A synthesis of research. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(6), 1303–1322. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-013-1989-2

  • Elbaum, B. (2020). Developmental outcomes of preschool special education. Infants and Young Children, 33(1), 3–20. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000155

  • Elledge, A., Le Floch, K. C., Taylor, J., & Anderson, L. (2009). State and local implementation of the No Child Left Behind Act: Volume V - Implementation of the 1 percent rule and 1 percent interim policy options (“A Report from the Study of State Implementation of Accountability and Teacher Quality Under No Child Left Behind (SSI-NCLB), U.S. Department of Education”). U. S. Department of Education. http://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/disadv/nclb-disab/nclb-disab-highlights.pdf

  • Elliott, S. N. (2009). Key issues in the use of alternate assessments: Closing comments to open more discussion and exploration of solutions. In W. D. Schafer & R. W. Lissitz (Eds.), Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards: Policy, practice, and potential (pp. 335–340). Paul H. Brookes.

  • Elliott, S. N. (2009). Understanding the construct to be assessed. In W. D. Schafer & R. W. Lissitz (Eds.), Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards: Policy, practice, and potential (pp. 23–32). Paul H. Brookes.

  • Elliott, S. N., & Roach, A. T. (2007). Alternate assessments of students with significant disabilities: Alternative approaches, common technical challenges. Applied Measurement in Education, 20(3), 301–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/08957340701431385

  • Elliott, S. N., Braden, J. P., & White, J. L. (2001). Assessing one and all: Educational accountability for students with disabilities. Council for Exceptional Children (CEC).

  • Elliott, S. N., Compton, E., & Roach, A. T. (2007). Building validity evidence for scores on a state-wide alternate assessment: A contrasting groups, multimethod approach. Applied Measurement in Education, 26(2), 30–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3992.2007.00092.x

  • Elliott, S. N., Roach, A. T., Kaase, K. J., & Kettler, R. (2009). The Mississippi alternate assessment of extended curriculum frameworks: Purpose, procedures, and validity evidence summary. In W. D. Schafer & R. W. Lissitz (Eds.), Alternate assessments based on alternate achievement standards: Policy, practice, and potential (pp. 239–274). Paul H. Brookes.

  • Engevik, L. I., Næss, K.-A. B., & Hagtvet, B. E. (2016). Cognitive stimulation of pupils with Down syndrome: A study of inferential talk during book-sharing. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 55, 287–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2016.05.004

  • Erdem, R. (2017). Students with special educational needs and assistive technologies: A literature review. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 16(1), 128–146. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

  • Erickson, K. A., & Geist, L. A. (2016). The profiles of students with significant cognitive disabilities and complex communication needs. Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 32(3), 187–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/07434618.2016.1213312

  • Erickson, K. A., & Koppenhaver, D. A. (2020). Comprehensive literacy for all: Teaching students with significant disabilities to read and write. Brookes.

  • Erickson, K. A., Hatch, P., & Clendon, S. (2010). Literacy, assistive technology, and students with significant disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 42(5), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.17161/foec.v42i5.6904

  • Erickson, K., & Quick, N. (2017). The profiles of students with significant cognitive disabilities and known hearing loss. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 22(1), 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enw052

  • Erickson, K., Hanser, G., Hatch, P., & Sanders, E. (2009). Research-based practices for creating access to the general curriculum in reading and literacy for students with significant intellectual disabilities. Center for Literacy and Disability Studies, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. https://ccsso.org/resource-library/topic/topics?

  • Erickson, R. N., & Thurlow, M. (1997). 1997 state special education outcomes: A report on state activities during educational reform. University of Minnesota, National Center on Educational Outcomes. https://nceo.umn.edu/docs/OnlinePubs/archive/StateSpecEducOutcomes1997.pdf