Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Meeting 3: Learning Disabilities (de Boer, A., Pijl, S. J., Post, W., &…

- - - - Type of disability is no indicator for peers to accept/not accept a girl
- - - - academic
      - general
    - - Some research indicates that LD kids have higher in reguLar classrooms (RC) than these kids in resource rooms (RR) or self-contained classrooms (SC)
      - Social comparison perspective
      - Stigmatisation perspective
  - - - placements, frade level, domain of self concept, whether in RR
    - - kids with LD in special schools had higher self-concepts than students in self-contained classrooms in regular school
      - No assoc found betw study outcomes and the time period; no assoc betw effect size variation and publication status
    - - there is no systematic assoc between the self-concept of kids with LD and their educational placement
- - - - improved educational outcomes for LD students
      - One study: students in regular schools scored better at language and mathematics than kids in spec education
      - students receiving additional support in inclusive classes were 76% more likely to obtain formal qualifications than students receiving education in special classes
    - - One study: 4 out of 5 students showed a decrease in performance after their reading lessons were switched to the inclusive setting
      - 80% of the students with learning disabilities stated that they preferred to attend the special classes
  - - - seemed to score better on the different measures than children in special education
    - - low-achieving students (with/without assistance) in regular education proved to have lower self-confidence
      - Students in special education proved to have more self-confidence than low-achieving children with additional help in regular education
      - Average to high-achieving students were assessed more positively than all groups of low-achieving students
    - - a lot of studies didn't find a difference
      - Empathic children with behavioural problems were better accepted by their classmates than less empathic children with behavioural problems
  - - - proved to achieve better than children in non-inclusive classes
        
        non-disabled students profit from the additional support available in inclusive classrooms
      - Mean progress proved to be higher in inclusive schools
    - - schools with a higher level of inclusion, student achievements were on average lower, even when the background variables were taken into account
    - - The inclusive curriculum seemed to benefit the low-achieving students
  - - - slightly positive effect of inclusion on the social outcomes of the other children in the class
    - - inclusive settings showed an increased acceptance, understanding and tolerance of individual differences
      - some children stated that communication difficulties were a barrier that interfered with their relationships with disabled peers
- - - - 75% of LD students received lower social skills ratings than their non-LD peers
      - Teachers rate LD kids as having academic deficits and less frequent social interactions
      - parents report fewer social deficits than teachers
      - peers respond through rejection
      - 80% LD kids reported deficiencies in their nonverbal communication and social problem solving
      - implications
        
        lower social skills- teachers have to give more support, frequent monitoring
    - - multidimensional
      - LD students’ self-concept might be negatively influenced by lower academic performance
      - academis self-concept of LD kids has low scores , but accurate self-appraisal
      - social self-concept, not everyone shows difficulties
      - global self-concept is high
      - implications
        
        setting is important
        
        type of students with whom students with LD compare themselves significantly influences their self-concept
        
        Social comparison theory-
    - - better predictor of general self-worth and peer acceptance correlates better with social self-perceptions
      - 96% of LD ppl have at least one friend, 67%- 6 or more
      - implications
        
        more likely to occur between ppl sharing common characteristics/interests, so classroom activities emphasizing the similarities rather than the difference
    - - 49% of the students with disabilities affiliated in groups that were neither prosocial nor antisocial, 21% affiliated in antisocial groups, 11% affiliated in prosocial groups, and 19% were isolated
      - implication
        
        inclusion affords students with LD the opportunity to build reciprocal friendships with peers without disabilities and perceive themselves as full members of the regular learning community