Push in - Pull out

(Lvl 3) (Watt, 2018)

• Participants prefer providing push-in services, even though they do not meet the needs of all children. 

• Frequent barriers for push-in include lack of practitioner training, limited school support, high caseloads, and variable classroom and practitioner schedules.

• Common themes from the study include; a sense of practitioner positivity, students’ needs, education and training, school environment, relationships and attitudes, and workload. 

(Lvl 5) (Layne, 2024)

• Pull out programs can be beneficial for students who need targeted support while simultaneously having drawbacks. 

• The pros of pull-out programs include; enhanced specialized instruction, targeted intervention, smaller class sizes, peer interaction and support, flexibility in curriculum, opportunity for differentiated instruction, reduced disruption in regular classroom, increased parent involvement, specialized resources and materials, tailored transitions and reintegration. 

• The cons of pull-out programs include; disruption of regular classroom routine, limited interaction with peers, logistical challenges, increased stigma or labeling, missed instructional time, limited exposure to heterogeneous classroom environment, teacher workload and coordination, possible loss of continuity in instruction, limited generalization of skills, resource allocation. 

• If pull-out programs are not a method that will work there are other alternatives that can be chosen, present and future benefits need to be considered.

• This article contains helpful frequently asked questions to discuss areas of concern from parents/guardians. 

(Lvl 4) (Barton, 2016)

• Barton interviewed teachers (special education, general education, and music), parents, and students to discover the best place for educating students with special needs. 

• According to Barton, the least restrictive environment (LRE) is dependent on where the student learns best. 

• Students do best when the lesson is co taught by the general and special education teacher

(Lvl 4) (Howe & Mercer, 2007)

• Howe and Mercer completed a survey study that interviewed children (varied ages) during completing various activities.

• This study considered the perspectives of Piaget and Vygotsky, and the results were consistent. 

• Children learn important communication skills with peers that cannot be replicated with adults. 

• Children’s social histories affect engagement in collaborative learning activities. 

• Children may not understand full potential unless provided with structured guidance.