International journal of special education Impact Factor & Information

Journal description

The International Journal of Special Education publishes original articles concerning special education. Experimental as well as theoretical articles are sought. Potential contributors are encouraged to submit reviews of research, historical, and philosophical studies, case studies and content analyses in addition to experimental correlation studies, surveys and reports of the effectiveness of innovative programs.

Current impact factor: 0.00

Impact Factor Rankings

Additional details

5-year impact 0.00
Cited half-life 0.00
Immediacy index 0.00
Eigenfactor 0.00
Article influence 0.00
Website International Journal of Special Education website
Other titles International journal of special education (Online)
ISSN 0827-3383
OCLC 53314469
Material type Periodical, Internet resource
Document type Internet Resource, Journal / Magazine / Newspaper

Publications in this journal

  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 15(2):63-73.
  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 29(3):93-100.
  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 29(3):126-133.
  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 29(3):4-15.
  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 29:134-144.
  • International journal of special education 01/2014; 29(3):38-39.
  • International journal of special education 10/2013; 28(1).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In the Italian education system, pupils with special education needs (SEN) are fully included in mainstream education and receive extra support from special education teachers (SET). Starting from this point, it is reasonable to expect some degree of difference between special education teachers (SETs) and general education teachers (GETs) in term of occupational stress stemming from job demands as well as students' challenging behaviours. The study explored the connection between "students' challenging behaviours" and "teachers' occupational stress" in a sample of Italian inservice primary teachers (N = 306). Data from the Italian version of the "Challenging Students Standard Questionnaire" were analysed to understand the impact of six different categories of "challenging students' behaviours" on eliciting "occupational stress" responses in SETs and GETs. Descriptive, comparative t-test analyses and effect sizes for all measures were reported. Results were consistent with the idea that SETs and GETs experience different degrees of occupational stress as a result of experiencing different "challenging students' behaviours." Recommendations for planning more targeted in-service training for primary teachers are discussed.
    International journal of special education 06/2013; 28(1).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: ADHD in India is culturally viewed as a school specific condition. Parents perceive accessing child psychiatric services as stigmatizing and prefer educational interventions for ADHD. There is a crucial need for research that restructures information and intervention paradigms about ADHD within a school context. The objectives of the present study were to understand teacher perspectives in relation to ADHD behaviours as they present in mainstream elementary classrooms. Located in Bangalore Urban district, India, the purposive sample consisted of teachers and students from the elementary section of 5 regular schools. Data was obtained through in-depth interviews, classroom observations and responses to vignettes. Responses were qualitatively analysed for themes and main concepts. Results indicate that teachers use a framework model to locate the construct of ADHD in a developmental context. ADHD behaviours are attributed to parent disciplining styles and environmental factors such as over exposure to electronic media. Teachers respond to classroom challenging behaviours using directive and heuristic strategies. The study highlights the need to recognize cultural complexities in understanding the ADHD construct.
    International journal of special education 01/2013; 2.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study is to explore the differences in personality traits amongst adults with blindness, adults with low vision and sighted adults. Moreover, the relationship between the four scales of Eysenck’s personality questionnaire and the demographic characteristics of participants with visual impairments was examined. Τhere are no statistically significant differences amongst the three groups in scales P, N and E. However, the sighted adults have a lower score on the L scale. Τhe older individuals with visual impairment reveal less extraversion and greater neuroticism. Moreover, the women with visual impairments show greater neuroticism than the men with visual impairments.
    International journal of special education 01/2013; 28(3):1-7.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: THE APPLICABILITY OF CURRICULUM-BASED-MEASUREMENT IN MATH COMPUTATION IN JORDAN The proper assessment of math computational skills is essential for monitoring progress, predicting achievement, and identifying students with disabilities. The current study extends previous research on assessment of curriculum-based measurement in mathematics(M-CBM) . The purpose of this research was to examine the effects of the M-CBM computation assessment on improving third-grade math achievement. This paper presents a comparison study of two classrooms; one used a M-CBM computation in addition to the summative assessment and one used summative assessment only. Each class consisted of 35 students; three who had a Specific Learning Disability in math. The results of a 15-week CBM process demonstrated the effectiveness of using the M-CBM with third- grade students. Furthermore, when compared to the traditional way of assessment, the use of the M-CBM produced significant gains in students’ achievement, specifically, for the students who were struggling with math. The Applicability of the Curriculum-Based-Measurement in Math Computation in Jordan Identifying appropriate ways for teachers to assess students’ skills in the critical areas of reading, spelling, and math is an important goal in helping all students succeed in school. Unfortunately, some assessments that teachers typically use (e.g., informal inventories, teacher-made tests) lack reliability and validity (Spear-Swerling & Sternberg, 1998), and many (e.g., norm-referenced tests) may lack treatment validity. Treatment validity is important because it indicates that the results of a test can be used to guide instruction and improve student performance (Hosp & Hosp, 2003). Summative evaluation is important as a measure of accountability (i.e., to what degree are students meeting established standards), but does not offer the feedback teachers need to make day-to-day adjustments in their teaching. Unlike summative evaluation approaches where student performance is often evaluated only at one point in time during the academic year, the formative approach to assessment provides an opportunity for teachers to catch problems early and monitor progress throughout the school year (Hosp, Hosp, & Howell, 2007). Researchers have recommended curriculum-based-measurements (CBM) as an alternative assessment procedure for monitoring progress and guiding the selection of interventions (Deno, 2003; Hosp et al., 2007). CBM’s validity and reliability are well established (National Center on Response to Intervention, 2012). The CBM is considered to be a type of formative assessment. Formative assessment is not a test per se, but instead a process by which teachers use test-elicited evidence to revise instruction for students and help students adjust their own learning strategies (Popham, 2009). The CBM has been used by teachers and school psychologists for over three decades and has been shown to provide reliable and valid indicators of students’ achievement in reading, writing, and mathematics (for reviews, see Deno, 1985; Deno, Fuchs, Marston, & Shin, 2001). The CBM lays the foundation for profiling specific child strengths and weaknesses and for mapping and evaluating the academic skills rather than the common way of assessing (Bagnato, 2007). Teachers can design interventions that can be proactive and can prevent learning problems from occurring. The CBM used in conjunction with a problem-solving model can be used to target scarce intervention resources to those who need it the most. Moreover, the formative approach using the CBM allows for the on-going evaluation of interventions. Thus, ineffective interventions can be discarded in favor of more effective ones. The CBM and problem-solving teams are proving to be an effective and efficient way to design student interventions and to monitor student's academic progress (Hosp et al., 2007). As compared to reading, not as much is known about the use of the CBM and math performance (Monuteaux, Faraone, Herzig, Navsaria, & Biederman, 2005). Reading and literacy are often considered the most important skills taught in schools; however, many argue that math is similarly important for life success. Just as the other CBMs, the math CBMs (M-CBMs) provide a reliable and valid way to identify students who are at risk for failure; not making adequate progress given the instruction they are receiving; need additional diagnostic evaluations; or determination of instructional levels (Hosp et al., 2007). The M-CBMs have been developed for three areas: early numeracy, computation, and concepts and applications. Computation has been the traditional standard of the M-CBM and therefore, has the most research to support its use (Deno, 2003). The computation CBMs were developed to provide a quick and easy method to measure computation performance that would be reliable and relate to outcomes measures. For the rest of the study, when we refer to math CBM (M-CBM), we will be talking about computation only. An overview of the M-CBM use in both general and special education is presented next.
    International journal of special education 01/2013; 28(1).