Elizabeth B Kozleski
I have been working to theorize and investigate systems change for equity and justice in inclusive education in classrooms, schools, school systems and with state education agencies. I continue to explore systems change in education, how teachers learn in practice in complex, diverse school settings, as well how educational practices improve student learning. Recognitions include the Budig Award for Teaching Excellence in Special Education at the University of Kansas, the Boeing-Allan Visiting Endowed Chair at Seattle University, the University of Kansas Woman of Distinction award, the Scholar of the Century award from the University of Northern Colorado, the TED-Merrill award for leadership in special education teacher education, and the UNESCO Chair in Inclusive International Research.
A number of my articles focus on the design and development of teacher education programs that involve extensive clinical practice in general education settings. I have led the development of such programs in three universities, and continue to do research and development work in teacher education. I have focused my work in teacher education and inclusive education on uncovering the intersectional nature of race, ability, language, gender, and sexuality and the ways in which educators and the systems that surround them perpetuate raced notions of what counts as learning, the design of curriculum, and the roles of teachers and learners in classrooms. Much of my work stems from an socio/cultural perspective on learning.
I serve on the Board of Editors for the book series Inclusive Education and Partnerships, an international book series produced by Deep University. My books include Ability, Equity, and Culture (with co-author Kathleen King Thorius) published by Teachers College Press in ‘14 and Equity on Five Continents (with Alfredo Artiles and Federico Waitoller) published in ‘11 by Harvard Education Press.
I received an undergraduate degree in early childhood education and a master's degree in special education from George Mason University and then worked as a public school, special education teacher for seven years. My dissertation at the University of Northern Colorado was chaired by Lee Swanson, now at the University of New Mexico.
I work with my colleagues at Stanford to continue to offer high quality doctoral and master's programs in special and inclusive education.
Phone: 3038848482
Address: 485 Lasuen Mall
Graduate School of Education
A number of my articles focus on the design and development of teacher education programs that involve extensive clinical practice in general education settings. I have led the development of such programs in three universities, and continue to do research and development work in teacher education. I have focused my work in teacher education and inclusive education on uncovering the intersectional nature of race, ability, language, gender, and sexuality and the ways in which educators and the systems that surround them perpetuate raced notions of what counts as learning, the design of curriculum, and the roles of teachers and learners in classrooms. Much of my work stems from an socio/cultural perspective on learning.
I serve on the Board of Editors for the book series Inclusive Education and Partnerships, an international book series produced by Deep University. My books include Ability, Equity, and Culture (with co-author Kathleen King Thorius) published by Teachers College Press in ‘14 and Equity on Five Continents (with Alfredo Artiles and Federico Waitoller) published in ‘11 by Harvard Education Press.
I received an undergraduate degree in early childhood education and a master's degree in special education from George Mason University and then worked as a public school, special education teacher for seven years. My dissertation at the University of Northern Colorado was chaired by Lee Swanson, now at the University of New Mexico.
I work with my colleagues at Stanford to continue to offer high quality doctoral and master's programs in special and inclusive education.
Phone: 3038848482
Address: 485 Lasuen Mall
Graduate School of Education
less
Related Authors
InterestsView All (30)
Uploads
2020 - current by Elizabeth B Kozleski
Because school districts broker the purchase and use of learning platforms, technologists rarely get to hear from families and students who use their products daily. While families and children shared the same spaces during COVID for both work and education, there were more opportunities for families to observe the daily learning opportunities and difficulties their children experienced. We hoped that dialogues with students and families would help technologists to consider how educational technology functions in real life contexts to advance learning. We anticipated that the investment in listening to users over time would expand approaches to the design and development of learning platforms, indicating ways to disrupt current online learning inequities.
Using ethnographic methods, we explored the terrain between technologists and end users by addressing three questions: a) how do complex and situated life contexts shape collaboration between families and technologists; b) how families and technologists approach differing assumptions about learners and how they learn; and c) to what degree do their interactions form new learning opportunities for designers, families, and student as well as systemic calls to action. Results of a complex exchange between families and technologists revealed six key points. First, the need for technologists to know more about who and what shapes human learning. Second, the need for active, engaged interaction between technologists and end users, we call this “working the knots.” Three, understand that power asymmetries affect the ability of technologists to learn from families who may lack technical knowledge but know a great deal about the learning contexts and needs of their children. Four, prioritize opportunities to learn from the user’s perspective. Five, respect the end user’s design needs. Finally, six, understand the intersectional needs of users.
social validity research questions focused on (a) the social significance of the intervention goals; (b) the social, logistical, and cultural appropriateness of the intervention procedures; and (c) the importance of the effects of the intervention on social and academic growth and peer and adult attitudes and relationships. The findings from participating general and special educators, principals, and students explored perceptions of the benefits of ELSB for teaching and learning as well as affordances and constraints of the contexts in which ELSB was delivered. Results suggest that ELSB implementation in general education classrooms had high social validity for participants, with some mixed views on educator collaboration from teachers.
Students in the intervention group received Early Literacy Skills Builder (ELSB) instruction,
and students in the “business-as-usual” control group received literacy instruction planned by
special education teachers to address the students’ individualized education program literacy
goals. Literacy assessments were conducted in five waves scheduled across the school year.
Results showed that students receiving ELSB instruction made greater gains in assessed literacy
skills than students in the control group. These findings provide evidence that students with
severe disabilities can benefit from comprehensive emergent literacy instruction when it is
implemented in general education settings
Inclusive Education by Elizabeth B Kozleski
diverse histories, cultures, capacities, and experiences of all their students in mind. Schools that embrace personalization support teachers and students who learn and grow together. This inclusive vision must be grounded in education’s historical roots. Our research, practice, and policy communities must work in concert to achieve thriving, healthy
communities for all.
The purpose of this study is to analyze the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) data that states and U.S. territories report from the Office of Special Education Programs and discuss the status of the most restrictive special education placement settings for students with disabilities. In this analysis, we found that (1) states do not set rigorous improvement goals to reduce restrictive placements; (2) that the percentage of students with disabilities (SWD) placed in restrictive placements have remained essentially unchanged over the past decade; and (3) that students with low-incidence (severe) disabilities are disproportionally placed in restrictive placements. These results suggest that segregated educational experiences continue for thousands of students with disabilities in spite of evidence that shows that opportunities to learn and develop are enhanced in more inclusive educational settings. Factors that contribute to student placement in restrictive settings are discussed.
Because school districts broker the purchase and use of learning platforms, technologists rarely get to hear from families and students who use their products daily. While families and children shared the same spaces during COVID for both work and education, there were more opportunities for families to observe the daily learning opportunities and difficulties their children experienced. We hoped that dialogues with students and families would help technologists to consider how educational technology functions in real life contexts to advance learning. We anticipated that the investment in listening to users over time would expand approaches to the design and development of learning platforms, indicating ways to disrupt current online learning inequities.
Using ethnographic methods, we explored the terrain between technologists and end users by addressing three questions: a) how do complex and situated life contexts shape collaboration between families and technologists; b) how families and technologists approach differing assumptions about learners and how they learn; and c) to what degree do their interactions form new learning opportunities for designers, families, and student as well as systemic calls to action. Results of a complex exchange between families and technologists revealed six key points. First, the need for technologists to know more about who and what shapes human learning. Second, the need for active, engaged interaction between technologists and end users, we call this “working the knots.” Three, understand that power asymmetries affect the ability of technologists to learn from families who may lack technical knowledge but know a great deal about the learning contexts and needs of their children. Four, prioritize opportunities to learn from the user’s perspective. Five, respect the end user’s design needs. Finally, six, understand the intersectional needs of users.
social validity research questions focused on (a) the social significance of the intervention goals; (b) the social, logistical, and cultural appropriateness of the intervention procedures; and (c) the importance of the effects of the intervention on social and academic growth and peer and adult attitudes and relationships. The findings from participating general and special educators, principals, and students explored perceptions of the benefits of ELSB for teaching and learning as well as affordances and constraints of the contexts in which ELSB was delivered. Results suggest that ELSB implementation in general education classrooms had high social validity for participants, with some mixed views on educator collaboration from teachers.
Students in the intervention group received Early Literacy Skills Builder (ELSB) instruction,
and students in the “business-as-usual” control group received literacy instruction planned by
special education teachers to address the students’ individualized education program literacy
goals. Literacy assessments were conducted in five waves scheduled across the school year.
Results showed that students receiving ELSB instruction made greater gains in assessed literacy
skills than students in the control group. These findings provide evidence that students with
severe disabilities can benefit from comprehensive emergent literacy instruction when it is
implemented in general education settings
diverse histories, cultures, capacities, and experiences of all their students in mind. Schools that embrace personalization support teachers and students who learn and grow together. This inclusive vision must be grounded in education’s historical roots. Our research, practice, and policy communities must work in concert to achieve thriving, healthy
communities for all.
The purpose of this study is to analyze the Least Restrictive Environment (LRE) data that states and U.S. territories report from the Office of Special Education Programs and discuss the status of the most restrictive special education placement settings for students with disabilities. In this analysis, we found that (1) states do not set rigorous improvement goals to reduce restrictive placements; (2) that the percentage of students with disabilities (SWD) placed in restrictive placements have remained essentially unchanged over the past decade; and (3) that students with low-incidence (severe) disabilities are disproportionally placed in restrictive placements. These results suggest that segregated educational experiences continue for thousands of students with disabilities in spite of evidence that shows that opportunities to learn and develop are enhanced in more inclusive educational settings. Factors that contribute to student placement in restrictive settings are discussed.
Keywords: special education disproportionality, Activity Theory, formative intervention, systemic transformation, learning lab
Elizabeth B. Kozleski chairs the Special Education program at the University of Kansas. She received the TED-Merrill award for her leadership in special education teacher education in 2011. Kathleen King Thorius is an assistant professor of urban special education in Indiana University’s School of Education at IUPUI. She is principal investigator for the Great Lakes Equity Center, a Regional Equity Assistance Center funded by the U. S. Department of Education.
Contributors: Sue Abplanalp, Cynthia Alexander, Alfredo J. Artiles, David R. Garcia, Dorothy F. Garrison-Wade, JoEtta Gonzales, Taucia Gonzalez, Cristina Santamaría Graff, Donna Hart-Tervalon, Jack C. Jorgensen, Elaine Mulligan, Sheryl Petty, Samantha Paredes Scribner, Amanda L. Sullivan, Anne Smith, Sandra L. Vazquez,Shelley Zion
Audience: School leaders, policymakers, researchers, and advocates; courses in educational change, school reform, educational policy, special education, inclusive education, politics of education, urban education.
Disability, Equity, and Culture Series