limitation of staff and time were too many. The authors developed a technique called meta-analysis used to bring adversity to reviewing the studies. The researchers need to clearly indicate the source and methods used in reviewing a study. Lack of suitable control and comparison is also a problem in properly interpreting studies. This also comes from improper use of terminology making it hard to determine if all participants are part of the same population. Finally only a few studies looked at the link between setting, program and teachers. The article concluded that resources rooms were more effective for observing and dealing with on task behavior. A special school setting was better at managing off task behavior as well. Children with behavior disorders require more attention, and support than can be provided by a teacher in a regular classroom. These children may require on going support that regular school environments cannot provide. However these special school settings do not always provide for a full integration into regular school careers. Therefore it may be hard for a child to enter a normal school after spending some time elsewhere. It was concluded that the least restrictive setting would be best for a child. An integrated school system with resource accessibility would be perfect.I was unaware that there was such difficulty in ascertaining complete and proper information on special education for behavior disorder children. The variables and constants needed to retrieve proper measurements are many. The costs are astronomical. I assumed that children could be given help easily without all the apparent calculation need. I wonder, however, if the resource center in a school can fully deal with the problems a teacher may encounter with a child. The authors failed to mention that some students would not benefit from this type of situation. They did make it clear that this was an overall statement, but stil...
