special education perspectivesaase.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/documents/sep... · students from...

1

SPECIAL EDUCATION PERSPECTIVESVOLUME 21, NUMBER 1, 2012

A Journal of the Australian Association of Special Education Inc.

ContentsEditorial 2

Strategies to support the learning of students with Jenny Lavoipierre 3serious medical conditions in rural areas

The instructional strategies and attitudes of effective Lauren Carlson 7inclusive teachers Brian Hemmings Gerald Wurf Andrea Reupert

Co-researching Best Practice in an Australian special Wendi Beamish 21school: the process of Participatory Action Research Fiona Bryer

The iPad as a pedagogical tool in special education: Therese Cumming 34promises and possibilities Iva Strnadova

Positively Influencing Peter Westwood 47

Special Education Perspectives, Volume 21, Number 1, 2012

2

EDITORIAL

In this issue of Special Education Perspectives we have three refereed papers, one Practically Speaking item and a contribution to our new Positively Influencing section.In our Practically Speaking section, Jenny Lavoipierre reports on her visit to rural and remote communities in the USA last year as a recipient of the Xstrata Rural/Remote Premier’s Teacher’s Scholarship. Her paper; ‘Strategies to Support the Learning of Students with Serious Medical Conditions in Rural Areas’ contains many practical suggestions for classroom teachers.The first of the refereed papers is from Lauren Carlson, Brian Hemmings, Gerald Wurf and Andrea Reupert at Charles Sturt University and explores ‘The instructional strategies and attitudes of effective inclusive teachers’. In their paper, they describe an analysis of the practices and attitudes of six outstanding teachers and observe that while powerful research-based strategies such as feedback, direct instruction and cooperative learning were frequently used, others such as metacognitive instruction and mastery learning were not.In the second paper from Wendi Beamish and Fiona Bryer at Griffith University, entitled ‘Co-researching Best Practice in an Australian Special School: The Process of Participatory Action Research’, the authors report on a two-year collaborative research project involving staff at a special school and their university colleagues. The Participatory Action Research process meant that teachers were able to explore in detail their own practices, identifying effective instruction and contributing to school improvement.The third of the refereed papers is from Therese Cumming at the University of NSW and Iva Strnadova at Sydney

University. In their paper, ‘The iPad as a Pedagogical Tool in Special Education: Promises and Possibilities’, they provide an analysis of the features of this popular device and provide a thoughtful analysis of the evidence base for its use in supporting special educational practice.Finally, the eminent special education researcher, practitioner and educational consultant Associate Professor Peter Westwood tells us about some writing that has positively influenced his professional career – hopefully you’ll be inspired to read it for yourself!

David Paterson, EditorMerran Pearson, Editorial AssistantSpecial Education Perspectives

3

Practically Speaking

STRATEGIES TO SUPPORT THE LEARNING OF STUDENTS WITH SERIOUS MEDICAL

CONDITIONS IN RURAL AREAS

Jenny LavoipierreAll Saints' College Bathurst

As a recipient of an Xstrata Rural/Remote Premier’s Teacher’s Scholarship (2011) I undertook a 5 week Study Tour of the USA, focusing primarily on rural and/or remote districts, including Alaska. The research involved discussion and observations of 3 tiers of stakeholders in the education of medically compromised students: government/administrators, education providers, parents and their advocates.

In the last two decades, for students with serious and chronic medical conditions, medical outcomes have improved along with quality of life. Nevertheless, the seriousness of their illness and medication result in ongoing life challenges. Research indicates that there are significant educational impacts resulting from many illnesses and their treatments. Problems arise from the ‘invisible’ nature of many conditions and the perception that medication is all that is required. Some of the most common (but not only) conditions are: asthma, brain injury, burns, cancers, Crohn’s disease, cystic fibrosis, diabetes, epilepsy and heart conditions, in addition to many others. Difficulties often experienced by students with serious illness include:• delays in developmental skills due to missed experiences• school absenteeism• academic under-achievement• behavioural problems• increased anxiety• attention and concentration problems• reintegration difficulties• specific learning needs

Correspondence: .Jenny Lavoipierre, Coordinator of Independent Learning Centre, All Saints' College, 70 Eglinton Road, Bathurst NSW 2795; email [email protected]; phone 02 6332 7331.

Special Education Perspectives, Volume 21, Number 1, pp.3-6, 2012

4

J. Lavoipierre

• low self esteem[Ronald McDonald House Charities Submission to the NSW Parliament for the Inquiry into transition support for students with additional and/or complex other needs 2011.]

RURAL AND REMOTE CONTEXT (NSW)Students from rural and remote areas face additional issues such as geographic and

social isolation, cultural isolation, unavailability of specialist educators and allied health professionals, high turnover of staff, difficulty providing staff training, lack of technological infrastructure. Distance from medical treatment centres involves absence from school, family and social supports, sometimes for many months. Compromised access to psychosocial supports puts students further at risk, given the emotional challenges of living with a medical condition.

Following is a summary of key support strategies and insights:

STRATEGIES FOR SCHOOLS TO SUPPORT LEARNINGWhat can schools do to help?The key issue is flexibility in schools:• Stagger school re-entry, e.g. just morning attendance.• Modify assessment and learning tasks (outcomes-based education enables this).• Facilitate Special Provisions for tests, e.g., extra time.• Give additional one to one tuition.• Organise a ‘classroom buddy’ for ‘catchup’.• Give online and time opportunities for ‘catchup’.• Appoint a key teacher to liaise collaboratively with teachers, counsellor, health team

and parents.• Educate staff on the precise health issue and its possible educational impacts.• Get signed release of information document from parents to overcome confidentiality

impediments.• Ensure information is passed to all educational staff.• Create an IEP with all stakeholders .• Consider alternative arrangements at higher risk Transition points, e.g., staggered

movement to Years 6-7 or Years 10-11.• Do baseline psychological and education assessments.• Track the student’s performance year by year.• Utilise volunteers to provide extra 1:1 tuition, e.g., peer tutoring, give extra time yourself.• Send home, or to hospital, meaningful, appropriate work.• Pass on information to each new teacher involved at least yearly.• Consider eligibility of referral to Ronald McDonald House Charities (free) Learning

Program for extra tuition – www.rmhc.org.au.• FaciIitate information technology (I.T.) support into home or hospital; allow phone

tutorials, emails, school intranet.

5

Practically Speaking: Learning support strategies in rural areas

• Many cases require only awareness and sensitivity. It depends on the illness and the student.

• Send a journal between home and primary school tracking issues, events, impacts. • For senior students, notify of UAC’s Education Access Scheme.

STRATEGIES FOR SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS• Organise Professional Development (available free via the EDMed program from Ronald

McDonald House Charities; Teachers’ Institute accredited.)• Create a database of students with serious medical issues with auto-alert on class lists

so all teachers receive constant reminders. • Mandate a Liaison teacher to oversee support and communication.• Arrange a site license for online distance delivery systems, e.g., E-lluminate.• Mandate provision of meaningful work.• Take an interest, attend IEP meetings. • Provide release time for teacher/s to accommodate student.• Foster creation of Alert Notice to be given in hard copy to each teacher, detailing impacts

and strategies.• Allow access to Learning Support provision.• Allow allied health support access to school.• Provide communication with Health Providers.• Remain open, communicative and honest with parents.

ADVOCACY STRATEGIES FOR PARENTS• Inform school of medical condition.• Find a key teacher/liaison person (preferably a teacher) to connect with.• Give school a signed letter granting permission to release appropriate information to

teachers.• Provide detailed documentation from Doctor, Health Provider.• Specify precise requests of Educators.• In documentation, detail the likely: physical and functional impacts from the illness;

cognitive impacts, e.g., memory, concentration, executive function, behaviour issues.• Include in documentation, letter from specialist, GP or hospital and/or letter from Hospital

Social Worker.

TIPS FOR PARENTS ON COMMUNICATING WITH SCHOOL• Give all information to school in writing.• Follow up any conversations with written confirmation.• Use email that is single issue focused.• Effective communication is best in bites of small amounts of information.• Keep copies of all school correspondence and information.

6

J. Lavoipierre

ISSUES AND CHALLENGES• Parental fear of ‘labels’.• Teacher or school reluctance to be flexible due to perceived time, workload or regulatory

constraints.• Parental fear of alienating school by demands.• Protective, separate management by health team and educators.• Failure within schools to pass information to all teachers.• Perceived confidentiality barriers within schools.• Parent grief, exhaustion, feeling overwhelmed.

SOME WISE ALASKAN INSIGHTS“If everybody does their job and is compassionate and aware, conflict can be avoided.”“Parents of students with medical disabilities are not asking for anything extra. They’re

just asking for the same as everyone else.”[Disabilities Education Attorney, Alaska. USA.]

* * * * * *

Jenny Lavoipierre is the Coordinator of a Learning Centre for individual educational needs within All Saints’ College, Bathurst. She is the parent of a childhood cancer survivor and is herself a Type 1 Diabetic of 40 years’ duration. She sits on the Parent Advisory Council of Sydney Children’s Hospital, Randwick and is a member of the Committee of Management for the Education Pathways Project for students with Cancer - a joint venture by the 3 Paediatric Oncology Hospitals in NSW and Ronald McDonald House Charities.


7

ABSTRACTThis study considers effective teachers in inclusive classrooms, with a focus on the instructional strategies employed by these teachers and the rationale underpinning their use. Observations were conducted in the classrooms of six principal-nominated effective teachers working in four regional Australian schools with follow up interviews employed to clarify and extend observational data. Analyses were guided by a framework incorporating a range of extensively-researched instructional strategies. Results indicated that effective teachers used a selection of strategies, with the most favoured being feedback, direct instruction, questioning, and cooperative learning. In contrast, reciprocal teaching, metacognitive instruction, mastery learning, and worked examples were rarely observed. Teacher attitudes about inclusion were examined to clarify the practices observed and to identify enablers to inclusive practice. Interview and observational data were integrated into a proposed model of an inclusive educator. This model highlighted how support, collaboration, professional development, and teaching experience

informed what instructional strategies were employed and why they were adopted.

Increasingly, mainstream teachers are encountering greater numbers of students with diverse needs. In 2009, students with diverse needs attending regular classes in New South Wales (NSW) government schools totalled approximately 50 000, 6.6% of the total 750 000 students enrolled (New South Wales Parliament Legislative Council, 2010). The number of students with disabilities being educated in mainstream classes now exceeds the number being educated in segregated settings (Dempsey, 2009). The current study is concerned with how effective teachers employ inclusive education strategies in their day-to-day practice and the rationale behind their use. Given that there is limited research into the inclusive practices of Australian teachers, this study is timely and provides useful information for teacher educators and in-service education providers.There has been much discussion in the literature regarding the term ‘inclusion’, with many definitions arising as a consequence. King (2003) suggests that inclusive education aims for all students

Correspondence: Dr Brian Hemmings, School of Education, Charles Sturt University, Locked Bag 588, Wagga Wagga NSW 2678, Australia; email [email protected].

Refereed PapersRefereed Papers

THE INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES AND ATTITUDES OF EFFECTIVE INCLUSIVE TEACHERS

Lauren Carlson, Brian Hemmings, Gerald WurfCharles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga

Andrea ReupertMonash University, Clayton

8

L. Carlson, B. Hemmings, G. Wurf, A. Reupert

to become a part of the school community, with all students sharing in a sense of belonging to their community. Similar to this, but on an international level, the Special Needs Mission Statement of United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (1994) posits:

Inclusion and participation are essential to human dignity and to the enjoyment and exercise of human rights…all children should learn together wherever possible regardless of difficulties, disabilities or differences (UNESCO, 1994, p. 11, emphasis added)

Determining effective teaching and inclusive practice is a complex issue that has been extensively discussed in the literature. However, according to Ryndak and colleagues (2000), while much has been written in regard to what teachers should do when teaching inclusively, such recommendations are not usually based on classroom-based research. Moreover, Ainscow et al. (2003, p. 228) describe such recommendations as ‘recipe-like suggestions’, serving as teacher ‘bibles’ for practice, without acknowledging the complexities of classrooms. In stark contrast, Hattie (2009) has identified, through a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to student achievement, a substantial number of teaching strategies that have merit. It is important to highlight that Hattie’s (2009) synthesis provides an indication of the interventions that have an impact on student attainment, not whether something will improve student engagement, or other important classroom variables. Many of the strategies identified by Hattie (2009) have been shown to be effective for students with diverse needs. For example, reciprocal teaching has been linked to improved reading, particularly for students with low-level comprehension skills (Slater & Horstman, 2002). Kulik et al. (1990) found that students with lower

ability made strong gains through mastery learning. With respect to peer tutoring, it has been found that students with special needs make gains not only in their academic work but also behaviourally (Spencer et al., 2003). Much of this improvement is attributed to individualised practice. Finally, Johnson and Johnson (2009) reported that cooperative learning experiences lead to positive relationships between students with differing intellectual abilities. While such classroom strategies have been widely advocated, how teachers implement them in inclusive classroom practice can be a major challenge (Angelides, 2007). From interviews with Californian teachers, Villa et al. (2005) identified ‘best inclusive practices’. These practices included collaboration, instructional responsiveness, and expanded authentic assessment, though these were not verified via observation of practice. In another US study, Udvari-Solner (1996), interviewed and observed five primary teachers to examine how theoretical inclusive practices were used by general educators. Udvari-Solner (1996, p. 14) reported that teachers who were willing to try new approaches to learning and could “articulate and translate” inclusive practice theory were more likely to create an inclusive environment. Researching within an Australian context, Pearce (2009) invited educational leaders to develop a profile typifying the inclusive secondary teacher. This profile was characterised by a student-focused and collaborative approach. Flem et al. (2004) explored how one Norwegian teacher created an inclusive classroom in a regular primary setting over a three-month period. Observations of the classroom and interviews with the teacher found that collaborating with stakeholders, differentiating the curriculum, and a positive environment were important aspects of an inclusive classroom. Notwithstanding these studies, the majority of inclusive

9

Refereed paper: Effective inclusive teachers

education research has focused on teacher attitudes towards inclusion and the factors that impede effective inclusive practice, highlighting a lack of support and resources and the inadequacy of teacher training (Downing & Peckham-Hardin, 2007; Forlin et al., 2008). It is evident from the literature discussed above that many studies have been conducted in North American or European settings, focus on teacher attitudes to inclusive practice and/or employ a single research methodology. To this end, Carter et al. (2011, p. 49) argue that there is “a paucity of data on the level of implementation of evidence-based practice and, in particular, a lack of data on Australian special education teachers”. Thus, the present research aimed to identify not what teachers should be doing but instead what they are doing when teaching inclusively. Hence, the current study explored the following research questions:1. What inclusive strategies are employed

by exemplary teachers in regular classroom settings?

2. How and why do these teachers use inclusive practices and strategies?

The ‘what’ involves the identification of specific instructional strategies employed by classroom teachers. The ‘how’ investigates the enablers or facilitators that support inclusive practice, while the ‘why’ refers to why teachers might teach inclusively.

METHOD

DesignThe study employed a multiple case study approach whereby several cases are described and compared to develop a full understanding of what is being studied (Creswell, 2008). Data collection occurred in two phases. Phase 1 involved repeated classroom observations using a structured observational protocol in order to determine

what inclusive strategies were employed. This protocol was developed in three steps: first, a selection of strategies described by the authors/editors of several leading Australasian textbooks (e.g., Ashman & Elkins, 2005; Foreman, 2008) was listed; and second, Hattie’s (2009) work was used to check and validate the list. The third step involved a final selection of strategies based not only on the magnitude of the effect size but gave weight to the prominence given by the authors/editors of leading Australasian textbooks. It was argued that this weighting would reflect pre-service and in-service inclusive education emphases. Ten strategies were selected and these are listed with their respective effect sizes in Table 1.During Phase 2, interviews were conducted with teachers to clarify and supplement the observational data and to ascertain enablers (the how) as well as the rationale for these strategies or practices (the why). The involvement of two sources of data can potentially “contribute to [the] verification and validation of qualitative analysis” (Patton, 1990, p. 464). The two data sets allowed for the comparison of what was actually observed with what people reported in the interviews. This form of triangulation offered an opportunity for deeper insight into the relationship among practice, context, and attitude.

ParticipantsAfter the appropriate ethics approvals had been provided, participants were recruited from 16 regionally located NSW Department of Education and Training schools close to the researchers’ base. Most of the schools were situated within a large regional city, with a population of approximately 60 000. Several smaller towns surrounding the regional centre were also included in the recruitment area. Principals of targeted schools were invited

10

L. Carlson, B. Hemmings, G. Wurf, A. Reupertl

to nominate teaching staff according to the following inclusion criteria:1. teachers they believed to be effective

inclusive educators; and,2. teachers who were currently teaching

in an inclusive classroom, with a range of students, with and without identified needs.

While it has been argued that “teaching excellence… as a concept, lacks precision” due to “the multidimensionality of the concept” (Elton, 1998, p. 6), in this study we invited principals to identify effective teachers. Jacob and Lefgren (2008) found that principals were able to identify effective teachers on the basis of academic achievement and student satisfaction, variables typically valued by parents. Although we acknowledge the problems in identifying ‘effective teachers’, we believe that principal nominations are valid as they provide one indication of what might be considered exemplary inclusive educators. On this basis, six teachers were nominated from four different schools and were invited to participate in the present study. Participant demographics are summarised in Table 2. There were four high school teachers and two primary school teachers, working in schools that drew on both low

and high SES backgrounds, with a sizeable number of Indigenous students at one school. The primary schools’ population averaged about 380 students while the high schools ranged from 550 to 1 100 students. Participants’ classrooms were classified as ‘inclusive classrooms’ conditional on at least one student being formally designated as having behavioural, learning, or intellectual difficulties/disabilities. The classification draws on the relevant NSW government disability criteria but may differ from other definitions/classifications used by other jurisdictions.

MeasuresClassrooms were observed by the first author who took extensive field notes of specific teacher practices. After observations were completed, these notes were then coded according to an observation protocol (table) consisting of the ten strategies in Table 1. Participant interviews were semi-structured using a variety of open-ended questions grouped in two general areas. The first set of questions related to the strategies previously observed, allowing for the verification of the classroom observational notes (as per Ary et al., 2006). The second set of questions related to the teacher’s

Strategy Effect size Reciprocal teaching .74 Feedback .73 Metacognitive instruction .69 Direct instruction .59 Mastery learning .58 Worked examples .57 Peer tutoring .55 Questioning .46 Cooperative learning .41 Audio/visual methods .22

Table 1 Teacher strategies and their effect size (Adapted from Hattie, 2009)

11


attitudes about inclusive education and the enablers to support such practices.

ProcedureIn the first instance, observations were arranged on a one-to-one basis with each teacher via a phone call or email. Two classroom observations, of between 50-60 minutes, were conducted for each participant during which detailed notes were made of the teaching strategies observed. Observations of teacher strategy were later matched to the strategies listed in Table 3.After observations had taken place, individual interviews were conducted with each participant. Interviews lasted between 60-90 minutes and with consent, were audio-taped. Interview data were transcribed and a qualitative content analysis with an inductive approach was applied (Berg, 2004). Individual interview transcripts and identified themes were sent to each participant, with an invitation to add or change information that might be

incorrect or potentially identifiable; this provides a means of enhancing the validity of the study (Kitto et al., 2008).

RESULTS

Observational results As reported in Table 3, all participants employed feedback, elements of direct instruction, questioning, and cooperative learning strategies. However, none of the participants explicitly used reciprocal teaching, metacognitive instruction, mastery learning, or worked examples.

Feedback.Hattie and Timperley (2007) describe feedback as a teacher providing information on a student’s performance or understanding. All of the participants gave praise in their classrooms, using general positive descriptions such as “Looking good” (SM1: 23/05/08) and “Well done!” (SF3: 17/06/08). Typically, feedback moves beyond praise and involves providing

Teacher code

Pseudonym Years of school teaching experience

Current class or grade taught

Highest qualification

PF1 Mrs Taylor 19 Year 2

Graduate Diploma

PF2 Ms Collins 30 Kindergarten

Diploma of Teaching

SF1 Mrs Roberts 26 Year 10 & 11 Drama

Masters degree

SF2 Ms Hall 28 Year 11 English

Graduate Diploma

SF3 Ms Jones 20 Year 10 Visual Arts

Graduate Diploma

SM1 Mr Smith 7 Year 11 Metalwork

Bachelor of Education

Key: P = Primary, S = Secondary, F = Female, M = Male

Table 2 Participant demographics

12


detailed information in response to student progress. Importantly, corrective feedback can assist students’ progress, or prompt students to change their approach, as can be seen below.

Ms Jones approached a student who was complaining to a peer that they didn’t know what to do next. Ms Jones asked, “How’s it going?” In an attempt to encourage the student, Ms Jones also commented, “This part looks good, how about you consider shades of green for this section?” (SF3: 13/05/08)

Many participants used detailed task feedback. For example, PF2 invited individual students to her desk to complete an activity and give feedback (06/05/08). Similarly, Mrs Roberts stated to her Year 11 Drama class:

“I have given feedback about what people did well and what was done poorly, with suggestions on how some work could have been improved. I hope you all find this helpful, particularly for your next assignment”. (SF1: 19/06/08)

Feedback was used by participants to provide information on student progress (i.e. How am I going?) and for the students to know they were ‘heading in the right direction’. According to Hattie and Timperley (2007), effective feedback

addresses “How am I going?” (feed back), “Where am I going?” (feed up) and “Where to next?” (feed forward). These three aspects of the feedback process are apparent in the extract above.

Direct instruction.Hattie (2009) suggests that direct instruction can be characterised by seven main elements: the provision of clear learning outcomes; criteria for success; building engagement; structured presentation; guided practice; lesson closure; and, independent practice. Typically direct and explicit teaching commences with a review of previous learning and finishes with a review at a later date. Many of the elements of this approach were observed and are highlighted below.

Opening the lesson.Most participants began their lessons by recapping what was covered previously and then moving on to provide an overview and explanation of the lesson about to occur:

Mrs Roberts told the students that they would be working on their next assessment task during the lesson, which they had briefly discussed in their last lesson. She then began to outline what the assessment task involved. She read out the marking criteria following the

Table 3 Participant use of instructional strategies

Strategy PF1 PF2 SF1 SF2 SF3 SM1 Total Reciprocal teaching 0 Feedback 6 Metacognitive instruction 0 Direct instruction 6 Mastery learning 0 Worked examples 1 Peer tutoring 3 Questioning 6 Cooperative learning 6 Audio/visual methods 3

13


exact wording on the sheet and then explained these criteria by giving a summary of what was expected. (SF1: 19/06/08)

Review strategies ensured that all students were reminded of conventions and previous discussion in topic areas, no matter whether some students could recall this information on their own accord or not. In addition, the criterion for success was specified.

Modelling.Participants often modelled aspects of how to complete a task, providing a clear example of what to do as well as emphasising what not to do:

Once students were sitting at their desks, Ms Collins told them that the letter they were writing today was ‘b’. She asked students to watch her as she drew a lower case ‘b’, stating the direction that she was taking in order to write the letter; “Down, back up half way and around”. (PF2: 12/05/08)

Similarly, a secondary participant used expression, pauses, exaggeration, and emphasis to model descriptive words:

Ms Hall read the poem aloud to the class, emphasising the descriptive words, pausing between lines and changing the pace/tempo at which she read; “The best place to watch the rain…is from the window of an apartment building – on the third floor – looking across an empty sports field at night…” (SF2: 19/05/08)

Guided practice.Guided practice can be structured in different ways but it is often designed to give students opportunities to practise activities as a whole class and in smaller groups before independent practice is required. An example of guided practice came after participant PF2 modelled the writing of the letter ‘b’:

Ms Collins then asked students to write

this letter in the air with their fingers at the same time as her, repeating the instruction, “Down, back up and around”. Then Ms Collins asked students to start tracing a ‘b’ in their books. (PF2: 12/05/08)

Cues and prompts. Various cues were used to focus student attention and to build engagement. Reminders of how much time students had left to work on a task were verbally announced by several participants. These cues were explicit with exact timeframes given to students and expressed in a manner appropriate to student understanding of time:

“When the big hand is on the six, I want you to have finished your page and have all your things packed away.” (PF2: 06/05/08) “You have fifteen minutes left on this so power on.” (SF1: 19/06/08)

Others used verbal attention grabbers. To exemplify,

Mrs Roberts said, “Ladies and gentlemen.” The students stopped what they were doing and turned to face her. (SF1: 19/06/08)

Cues were also used to focus student attention on particular aspects of the task:

“As we’re reading this, I’d like you to pay attention to the description of the setting, particularly the haystack metaphor.” (SF2: 09/05/08)

Peer tutoring.Informal peer tutoring occurred in half of the classrooms observed, with an example presented below.

The teacher suggested to the whole class that students could help one another. After the announcement she specifically said, “Matthew, can you please help Sarah with that?” (SF2: 13/05/08)

14


Questioning.Although closely related to feedback and direct instruction, teacher questioning has received considerable research attention as a strategy in its own right. All participants used various forms of questioning, which were often embedded within other instructional strategies. At times, teachers asked students surface questions related to the lesson. For example, during a lesson in a primary classroom, PF1 (28/06/08) said:

“Billy kept going, making the snowball bigger and bigger. How did he make the snowball?” The students all enthusiastically replied with, “Bigger and bigger!”

Higher-order questioning was also observed, although less frequently in primary classrooms. During a student news session, for example, one participant guided students through the structure of how they were to present their news:

The first student stood up the front to tell his news and forgot to open with, “Good morning everyone”. Ms Collins quietly asked the student if they forgot to say good morning. The student then corrected himself and said, “These are my dinosaurs”. After a pause, Ms Collins assisted the student to talk more about his news to his classmates by asking, “Can you tell me some more about your dinosaurs?” (PF2: 06/05/08)

In the secondary setting, higher-order questioning was used to assist student progress, as per the example below.

“Now look at what you have here – how are you going to put this on your canvas?” (SF3: 13/05/08)

Cooperative learning.Although multiple examples of group work were observed in all the classrooms, most participants did not employ a structured co-operative procedure such as the jigsaw method (as per Slavin et al., 2009).

Mrs Roberts explained the task to the students and read out their allocated groups. She told students they were allowed to work in any part of the classroom. There was a great deal of excited chatter and students moved to their groups to begin work immediately. The majority of the students appeared to be engaged in the task, with lots of work-related chatter and scribbling of notes. (SF1: 19/06/08)

The classrooms of Ms Collins and Ms Hall were deliberately set up to facilitate social interaction via seating arrangements. Cooperative learning was typically observed through the discussion and clarification that occurred within the small groups. During group work activities the teacher often acted as a facilitator, ensuring that groups remained on task and were cooperating with one another. To exemplify, Mr Smith said:

“OK guys, if you want to ask myself or each other questions about how to complete some of the theory that’s fine. Just make sure you know how to complete the questions by yourself at the end of this lesson because in the exam you won’t be able to ask each other.” (SM1: 24/06/08)

Audio/visual methods.Various technologies, including projectors, a laser pointer, DVD players and computers, were used to engage students and present work. For example, PF1 projected a large and clear book image onto a screen, ensuring that all could read it, including one student with impaired sight. Time on the class computer was used as a reward for completing work on time in PF2’s classroom. In one of the secondary settings, the use of a computer was set aside for one student identified as having special needs.

Interview resultsThe interviews aimed to identify the how and why of the observed practices. Three

15


major themes emerged from the analysis of the interviews: teachers’ attitudes, support systems, professional development and experience.

Teachers’ attitudes.Participants’ understanding of inclusion was typically short and concise:

“It’s about accepting everyone as an individual and treating them with respect and doing the best you can for them”. (PF2: 04/07/08)

Several participants highlighted the significance of accepting and valuing individuals so that all could be involved.

“An inclusive classroom is any classroom that makes every child feel valued... nobody in the classroom feels any less than anyone else because of their ability or lack of ability…everyone feels that they can succeed”. (PF1: 02/07/08)

Additionally, the importance of being equitable was highlighted:

“To me it is the essence of education, and that is the notion that it is the involvement of every person in the room regardless of any aspect of their life or their physicality or their mental state – being an equally important member of the class and being entitled to as much attention as they need…”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

One participant expressed her concerns about the idea of inclusive education in schools, citing the dilemma between her philosophical and pragmatic beliefs:

“It’s really difficult because…you can do all sorts of things on an individual level for anyone of those kids who would be defined as fitting the category of inclusive education. But it’s based on the premise that the rest of the room cooperates so that you can get to them…philosophically I don’t have a problem…pragmatically I have enormous problems because I’m the one that has to make it

happen”. (SF2: 02/07/08) When asked what effective teaching and learning looked like, most participants highlighted the importance of student engagement, with a particular emphasis on a positive atmosphere:

“It is happy, engaged students really, really enjoying what they’re doing, getting excited by it and getting end results that they’re proud of. There is a tangible atmosphere of collective working”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

Good communication was noted as an important element for effective teaching, with reference made to the ability of teachers to be honest with their students:

“If I want my students to feel free to make a mistake in my room, then I have to be free to admit to any that I make. I don’t mind if they gleefully tell me I’m wrong, that’s fine”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

Support systems and collaboration.When participants were asked about what assisted their ability to be an inclusive educator, several types of support were identified, including specialist support:

“The learning support team is useful…when you have your meetings with your parents and your learning support coordinator and the class teacher etc., you map out [the child’s] strengths and weaknesses and areas for development”. (PF1: 02/07/08)

The importance of supportive colleagues was highlighted:

“…we’re lucky here; this is the most amazing environment for teacher reflection. We have no qualms about sharing with our peers when things fail”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

A supportive administration was also given prominence, with many stressing the commitment and dedication of their school principal. Finally, the importance

16


of the parent-teacher relationship was emphasised, especially for parents of children with diverse needs:

“…parents and teachers really have to work together. They have to be on the same page. Parents have to be really honest with you about what they want and why they’ve chosen inclusive education”. (PF1: 02/07/08)

Professional development and experience.Many participants acknowledged the importance of professional development. Two participants reported undertaking professional reading or further study in the area. Participants described the concept of professional development as an ongoing process and the need to be receptive of new ideas:

“The challenge is to make sure you keep trying new things and don’t just sit back on the same ones”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

Teaching experience was another contributing factor to participants’ practice, as illustrated here,

“I get caught out less than I used to because of experience”. (SF1: 26/06/08)

DISCUSSIONThis study identified specific instructional strategies (the ‘what’) alongside various enablers (the ‘how’) and teacher attitudes (the ‘why’) that supported such practices. On this basis, a proposed model of an inclusive educator was developed to represent the major categories that had arisen from the analysis of the observational and interview data sets (see Figure 1). The instructional strategies (the ‘what’) employed are, in the main, consistent with well-evaluated and researched strategies advocated by Hattie (2009). All teachers used feedback, elements of direct instruction, questioning, and cooperative learning strategies. Several instructional strategies were used informally by teachers

such as peer tutoring and cooperative learning. This is consistent with North American research indicating that more than 75% of surveyed teachers use an eclectic approach to instructional strategy use (Snider & Roehl, 2007). Similarly, Smith (2009) found that a move to classroom differentiation has encouraged a greater mix of instructional strategies. Strategies such as reciprocal teaching, mastery learning, worked examples, and metacognitive instruction were not observed or mentioned by participants. It is not possible, from the data collected, to conclude why these strategies were not employed. However, one possible reason is a lack of in-service training or support in these specific strategies.Interviews provided further insight into the ‘how’ or in other words the enablers for inclusive practice, with specific reference to the effective use of support systems, collaborating with others, professional development opportunities, and teaching experience. The findings are consistent with previous studies which underline the importance of collaboration for successful inclusion (Cesar & Santos, 2006; Downing & Peckham-Hardin, 2007; Flem et al., 2004). Collaboration involving staff, specialists, consultants, and parents of students has been regarded as a critical element in the implementation, maintenance, and ongoing development of inclusive educational environments and the data generally support these findings. At the centre of the proposed model of inclusive practice is teacher attitude. All participants spoke positively about inclusive education, and articulated attitudes about the principles of inclusion and equity. While numerous studies have highlighted teacher attitudes as a key contributing factor to building inclusive environments (Angelides, 2007; Downing & Peckham-Hardin, 2007), the teaching practice of these

17


Figu

re 1

Pro

pose

d m

odel

of a

n in

clus

ive

educ

ator

18

are not so readily picked up and perhaps require greater support and/or exposure. The various support systems that teachers find useful, including collaborations and professional development activities, need to be actively encouraged. The results of this study are not necessarily able to be generalised to the wider population, given the limited nature of the participant pool. Additionally, those nominated as effective teachers were identified by only one stakeholder. No explicit criteria were provided to principals as to what an effective inclusive educator might do. Future studies may attempt to address this issue by compiling explicit criteria from the evidence-based literature and/or elicit other stakeholders’ nominations, including students and parents. Further classroom observations would have permitted a more comprehensive and detailed monitoring of the strategies being employed by the participants. Nevertheless, Creswell (2008) acknowledges the difficulty of replicating classroom observations and the fact that observations are dependent on unique contextual factors such as researcher rapport.The three components of the model in Figure 1 represent the interrelated components of the ‘how’, the ‘why’ and the ‘what’ of an inclusive educator. On the basis of the observational and interview data collected here, we propose that teacher attitude is the means by which teachers are motivated to establish inclusive teaching practices when certain support systems are in place. We place attitude at the centre of the model because we believe that it is this quality and passion towards inclusivity that motivates teachers to employ certain strategies. Fertile ground has now been laid for future investigation so that more detailed information about effective teachers in inclusive classrooms can be amassed.

participants was not observed. Thus, the combination of observation and interview data presented here allow us to make some suggestions as to the interrelationship between teacher attitude and practice. The proposed model of an inclusive educator depicts four key features:1. The teacher is central to the practice of

inclusive education, but is also influenced by others and in turn, influences others. More specifically, teachers’ attitudes are at the hub of the model and provide an indication of ‘why’ teachers are motivated to create an inclusive environment.

2. The ‘how’ assists teachers to produce the ‘what’ and shapes teacher attitudes. The ‘how’ refers to the support systems that assist teachers to create an inclusive environment.

3. In turn, the ‘what’ or the instructional strategies employed, is affected by teachers’ attitudes.

4. Collectively, these features impact on student learning.

Even though all the participants were strong advocates for inclusion, some identified challenges when teaching inclusively. This current study confirms that nominated effective teachers acknowledge barriers to inclusion, but they also appear to maintain a strong focus on finding solutions to overcome these barriers. Exploring the effective practices of inclusive educators has the potential to inform the training of both pre-service and classroom teachers. Given that the study identified strategies rooted in the classroom, the data presented here can be usefully applied by pre- and in-service teachers as well as those providing ongoing professional development activities. The study demonstrates that some strategies, such as providing feedback to students and direct instruction, are accessible to teachers, whilst others, namely reciprocal teaching,



19

REFERENCESAinscow, M., Howes, A., Farrell, P., &

Ainscow, M., Howes, A., Farrell, P., & Frankham, J. (2003). Making sense of the development of inclusive practices. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 18(2), 227-242. doi:10.1080/0885625032000079005

Angelides, P. (2007). Patterns of inclusive education through the practice of student teachers. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 12(3), 317-329. doi: 10.1080/13603110601103253

Ary, D., Jacobs, L.C., Razavieh, A., & Sorrensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Ashman, A., & Elkins, J. (Eds). (2005). Educating children with diverse abilities (2nd ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Education.

Berg, B.L. (2004). Qualitative research methods for the social science. Boston, MA: Pearson.

Carter, M., Stephenson, J., & Strnadová, I. (2011). Reported prevalence by Australian special educators of evidence-based instructional practices. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 35(1), 47-60. doi:10.1375/ajse.35.1.47

Cesar, M., & Santos, N. (2006). From exclusion to inclusion: Collaborative work contributions to more inclusive se t t ings . European Journal o f Psychology of Education, 21(3), 333-346. doi:10.1007/BF03173420

Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Dempsey, I. (2009). Characteristics of Australian teachers of young children with special needs and their relationship

with their students. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 33(1), 60-71. doi:10.1375/ajse.33.1.60

Downing, J.E., & Peckham-Hardin, K.D. (2007). Inclusive education: What makes it a good education for students with moderate to severe disabilities? Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 32(1), 16-30. Retrieved from http:// tash.org/about/publications/

Elton, L. (1998). Dimensions of excellence in university teaching, International Journal for Academic Development 3(1), 3–11.

Flem, A., Moen, T., & Gudmunudsdottir, S. (2004). Towards inclusive schools: A study of inclusive education in practice. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 19(1), 85-98. doi:10.1080/10885625032000167160

Foreman, P. (2008). Inclusion in action (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Vic.: Cengage Learning Australia.

Forlin, C., Keen, M., & Barrett, E. (2008). The concerns of mainstream teachers: Coping with inclusivity in an Australian context. International Journal of Disability, Development and Education , 55(3), 251-264. doi:10.1080/1034912080 2268396

Hattie, J.A.C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

Hattie , J.A.C., & Timperley, (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81-112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487

Jacob, B.A., & Lefgren, L. (2008). Can principals identify effective teachers? Evidence on subjective performance evaluation in education. Journal of Labor Economics, 26(1), 101-136. doi:10.1086/522974


20

Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, R. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational R e s e a rc h e r , 3 8 ( 5 ) , 3 6 5 - 3 7 9 . doi:10.3102/0013189X09339057

King, I.C. (2003). Examining middle school inclusion classrooms through the lens of learner-centered principles. Theory into Practice, 42(2), 151-158. doi:10.1207/s1 5430421tip4202_9

Kitto, S.C., Chesters, J., & Grbich, C. (2008). Quality in qualitative research. Medical Journal of Australia, 188(4), 243-246.

Kulik, C., Kulik, J., & Bangert-Drowns, R. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265-306. doi: 10.3102/00346543060002265

New South Wales Parliament Legislative Council (2010). The provision of education to students with a disability or special needs: Final report. Sydney: Author. Retrieved from http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/web/common/nsf/v3home

Patton, M. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Pearce, M. (2009). The inclusive secondary school teacher in Australia. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 5(2), 1-15. Retrieved from http://www.whole schooling. net/Journal_of_Whole_Schooling/IJWSIndex.html

Ryndak, D.L., Jackson, L., & Billingsley, F. (2000). Defining school inclusion for students with moderate to severe disabilities: What do experts say? Except ional i ty , 8 (2) , 101-116. doi:10.1207/S15327035EX0802_2

Slater, W.H., & Horstman, F.R. (2002). Teaching reading and writing to struggling middle school and high school

students: The case for reciprocal teaching. Preventing School Failure, 46(4), 163-166. doi:10.1080/10459880209604416

Slavin, R.E., Lake, C, & Groff, C. (2009). Effective programs in middle and high school mathematics: A best-ev idence synthes is . Review o f Educational Research, 79(2), 839-911. doi:10.3102/0034654308330968

Smith, S.R. (2009). A dynamic ecological framework for differentiating the primary curriculum. Gifted and Talented International, 24(2), 9-20.

Snider, V.E., & Roehl, R. (2007). Teachers’ beliefs about pedagogy and related issues. Psychology in the Schools, 44(8), 873-886. doi:10.1002/pits.20272

Spencer, V.G., Scruggs, T.E., & Mastropieri, M.A. (2003). Content area learning in middle school social studies classrooms and students with emotional or behavioral disorders: A comparison of strategies. Behavioral Disorders, 28(2), 77-93.

Udvari-Solner, A. (1996). Theoretical influences on the establishment of inclusive practices. Cambridge Journal of Education, 26(1), 101-121. doi:10.1080/0305764 960260108

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (1994). Salamanca Statement and Framework for Action on Special Educational Needs. Paris: United Nations.

Villa, R.A., Thousand, J.S, Nevin, A., & Liston, A. (2005). Successful inclusive practices in secondary and middle schools. American Secondary Education, 33(3), 33-50. Retrieved from http://www.ashland.edu/ase


21

Refereed Papers

CO-RESEARCHING BEST PRACTICE IN AN AUSTRALIAN SPECIAL SCHOOL: THE PROCESS

OF PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH

Wendi Beamish and Fiona BryerGriffith University

INTRODUCTIONIn Australia, as in many countries, special schools provide not only a necessary service option within a continuum of government educational provision but also “outward-looking centres of excellence” (Attfield & Williams, 2003, p. 29). While approximately 90% of Australian students with disabilities attend regular primary and secondary schools (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2006), a large proportion of students with complex and significant disabilities receive their education at these segregated special schools. Australian special schools are reported as frequently being very successful in “meeting individual needs and providing a sense of belonging and participation” for their vulnerable student population (Norwich, 2008, p. 136).For over two decades, the special school sector has been increasingly influenced by educational policies and processes related to regular schooling. Although Bailey and Dowrick (2001) reported strong leadership and high staff morale in Australian special schools, follow-up has not been reported. National curriculum frameworks and

ABSTRACTResearch into best practice in special education has concentrated on the identification and description of practice standards against which schools can evaluate their performance and thereby guide collective efforts toward program improvement. A Queensland special school wanted to update an Australian listing of basic indicators of best educational practice for students with significant disabilities (Beamish, 1992) that they has used for over a decade. This paper reports the Participatory Action Research (PAR) process undertaken by this school to develop a contemporary listing in partnership with university colleagues. Two cycles of the process took two years. In the first cycle, staff engaged in a systematic review of the original listing and then generated new teaching practices for their school. In the second cycle, staff refined the emergent listing through internal consultation. Key learnings from this PAR experience were commitment to the reciprocities of PAR process, the value of active administrative support, and the critical leadership role of teachers.

Correspondence: Dr Wendi Beamish, Griffith Institute of Educational Research, Griffith University, 176 Messines Ridge Road, Mount Gravatt Qld 4122; email [email protected]; phone +61-7-3735 5636.

22

W, Beamish & F. Bryer

educational standards, coupled with the press for “relentless school improvement” (Baker, 2009, p. 193), have presented the sector with ongoing challenges. In Australia, as elsewhere, many special schools have developed a culture of self-evaluation and self-improvement while also forging partnership links with other schools and external agencies such as universities in order to secure their future (see, for example, Baker, 2009; Horrocks, 2003; Neil, McEwen, Carlisle, & Knipe, 2001).The inquiry reported here illustrates how one Australian special school community formed a partnership with university staff to meet the challenges posed by these changing times. Staff in this special school had expressed concern about new inclusive pedagogical expectations of the state government with the potential for serious curriculum-student mismatch. For over a decade, the school had used a best practice listing developed for Queensland teachers educating students with high-support needs. The listing comprised basic indicators of educational practice for students with significant disabilities (Beamish, 1992). Staff considered that this listing, with its pedagogical emphasis on practices such as individualised instruction, IEP programming, parent involvement, and respect for students, helped to deliver meaningful educational outcomes for their “difficult-to-teach” students. They believed that an up-to-date listing would continue to ensure both an authentic curriculum tailor-made to meet student needs and a capacity-building approach to enhancing staff performance. Following staff advice and as part of this school’s improvement process, its principal initiated a working partnership with Beamish and her colleague at Griffith University to provide a fresh and contemporary practice listing for the school.

BEST PRACTICE LISTINGSBest practice standards, listings, and indicators have been routinely used in special education for over three decades to improve teacher practice and program quality (Beamish, Meadows, & Davies, 2010; Peters & Heron, 1993). It was assumed that improving guidelines for teacher practice would lead to improved student outcomes. During that time, best practice listings have been used as the basic benchmarking tool in North America and Australia to allow staff to reflect on their everyday practice and to evaluate their program performance against predetermined standards that have been itemised in the listings. Best practice items have commonly included “service delivery patterns, organisational structures, programming principles, and instructional strategies documented as effective and relevant within a specific educational context” (Beamish, 2008, p. 44).Comprehensive practice listings developed by Meyer and colleagues (1985, 1987) and by Fox and colleagues (1986, 1987) initiated a series of North American benchmarking inquiries in the area of significant disabilities (e.g., Atkins, Campbell, & Hartley, 1987; Ayres, Meyer, Erevelles, & Park-Lee, 1994; Eichinger & Downing, 1992; Williams, Fox, Thousand, & Fox, 1990). These foundational lists also provided item content for the development of a number of practice listings in Australia. For example, Beamish (1992) generated a 35-item listing for educating students with severe disabilities in Queensland and then socially validated the listing with 183 special educators working with this student population across the state. Likewise, Chalmers and colleagues (Carter, Chalmers, Clayton, & Hook, 1998; Chalmers, Carter, Clayton, & Hook, 1998) worked with 83 special educators on a 42-item listing for the same student population in New South Wales.

23

Refereed paper: Participatory action research

Hence, research into best practice has involved large scale activities to develop and socially validate lists of practice items. These lists have been typically published for practitioner adoption for use in their own context and adaptation according to contextual demands. However, tracking how schools adopt-and-adapt a list has rarely occurred.

PARTICIPATORY ACTION RESEARCH METHODOLOGYParticipatory Action Research (PAR) has acquired a proven track record of generating contextually-relevant work practices (Crane & O’Regan, 2010; Ho, 2001; Piggott-Irvine, 2010). PAR has engaged local people in multiple cycles of planning (with others), action (with others), observing (with others), and reflecting (with others). In education, this participatory version of action research has helped to change “practitioners’ practices, their understandings of their practices, and the conditions in which they practise” (Kemmis, 2009, p. 463). A major reason for selecting PAR has been to maximise staff involvement across the research process and to promote “joint ownership of the research, collaborative conduct of the research, and immersion of the subjects being studied in every stage of the research, from design to outcome” (Beamish & Bryer, 1999, p. 459). This involvement and ownership, therefore, has allowed staff the opportunity to appraise, collectively and individually, their practice base.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTSThe setting for this best practice inquiry was a large provincial Queensland special school, which had a long history of catering for students with high support needs. At the time of the inquiry, approximately 100 students from preparatory (kindergarten) to late adolescent ages attended the school. A staff of 70, including 20 teachers, provided

adjusted curriculum and pedagogies. Teachers varied considerably in age, training, and experience. A third of these teachers had specialist qualifications from Griffith University. The organisational model for school operations clustered teachers, teaching assistants, and therapists into four chronologically age-based teams (known within the school as “suites” for Years 1-3, 4-6, 7-9, and transition out of school), with teachers as suite leaders of curriculum and problem behaviour.The school and university staff aspired to participate in a strong co-researching partnership (Turnbull, Friesen, & Ramirez, 1998), in which they could share the research decision making and enact their joint approach. Accordingly, it was decided that the “lead team” (Piggot-Irvine, 2010, p. 230) would comprise administrative staff, some suite leaders including Griffith graduates who had studied with Beamish, and the two university academics. The lead team then sought to build collaborative teaming within and across the school community, bringing together practitioner and university perspectives and connecting theory with practice and practice with theory as the school’s best practice listing was refreshed.

JOURNEY THROUGH THE PAR PROCESSThe methodological focus of this paper is to provide a fine-grained documentation of the research journey entailed by this process in a school setting. Although many grassroots inquiries in social planning and health sectors have used this well-established social science methodology, inquiries in education have focused mainly on school-to-work and family-school partnerships (Beamish, 2008). In education, few inquiries have described the PAR process (e.g., Ho, 2001). There has been no Australian example of this participatory version of action research and how it mobilizes a

24

W. Beamish & F. Bryer

Table 1 Overview of PAR Cycles

school community to co-research their own practice. A detailed account of two cycles of PAR will comprise the substance of this report (see Table 1).

CYCLE 1 OF THE RESEARCHIn the first year of the PAR inquiry, a series of meetings was held involving all the co-researchers (i.e., university partners and the school leadership team). Several face-to-face and phone meetings between lead team members took place to plan what needed to be done. Staff meetings were held to engage teachers, therapists, and teaching assistants in the research inquiry. Two full-day activities (the school’s pupil-free days)

involved staff across the whole school in updating the listing.

Planning meetingsThe parameters and design of the co-researching inquiry were negotiated at the first meeting that was held by the school’s request at the university. Four aspects of inquiry design were considered. First, the lead team agreed that the conduct of the inquiry needed to accommodate class-, suite-, and school-wide levels of practice. Next, they acknowledged the importance of broader contextual factors such as the operational routines of the school and the policies and procedures of the state’s

Time Activity Task Outcome

Cycle 1 November

Planning meetings university staff +

school leadership team

Inquiry initiation

Cycle 1 January

Pupil-free day school staff

1st Updating of listing

83 practices

Cycle 1 May

Review university staff +


1st Review

Cycle 1 August

Teleconference university staff +

lead teachers

2nd Updating of listing

Cycle 1 September

Pupil-free day school + university

staff

2nd Review of listing

52 practices

Cycle 2 January


Benchmarking of school practice

using listing

Cycle 2 May



Review of benchmarking data

Cycle 2 August-September


3rd Updating of listing

Cycle 2 October



Final review of listing

42 practices

25


education department. Then, in order to ensure that a reliable and valid tool would be designed to help meet the current needs of the school, they adopted the Beamish (2008) guidelines for documenting best practices; namely, that a best practice should have five features: (a) substantiated by research findings and strong values in the field, (b) measurable or described in quantifiable terms, (c) feasible and targeting an achievable practice, (d) demonstrating contextual relevance, and (e) in order to maintain currency of the list, having time boundaries in place for a restricted period. Finally, the partners identified key activities to be addressed at staff meetings, and the principal committed to invest two pupil-free days in this cycle of action research.The lead team then met at the school to map the content of activities and specific processes for engaging in the developmental inquiry. Accordingly, they decided that staff meetings would be used to encourage informal sharing and self-reflection about current practice in classrooms, within suites, and across the school. A package of readings sought from and provided by the university partners would be used to inform staff discussion, reflection, and action (Beamish, Bryer, & Davies, 2006). Selected materials comprised best practice literature for educating students with high support needs (e.g., Ayres et al., 1994; Chalmers et al., 1999; Dule, Korner, Williams, & Carter, 1999; Eichinger & Downing, 1992; Meyer et al., 1987; Williams et al., 1990) and related literature on Australian teacher leadership in school improvement (e.g., Frost & Durrant, 2003; Laursen, 2003). Finally, the leadership team mapped tentative activities for each of the pupil free days (January and September).

First updating of the listingThe principal led the first pupil-free day in January with 20 teacher participants. He oriented these staff to class-, suite-,

school-, and state-wide best practices with a Powerpoint presentation and introduced a checklist for generating and judging the quality of any particular practice. For each practice, teachers considered questions in relation to levels of (a) feasibility (Does it fit our school context?), (b) importance (Is it important to our school community?), and (c) measurability (Can it be seen to be done?).Later in the morning, the teachers engaged in a sharing phase. They discussed their classroom practices with teacher aides and therapists (where available). Next, teachers from a particular suite joined allied teaching staff to discuss their collective practices in the suite. Staff then combined as a community of co-inquirers to share practices relevant to the school and its context (with almost all of the 70 staff participating at this time). After they broke for lunch, the teachers worked in their own classrooms to identify five practices that they considered as most important to their current teaching. All 20 teachers submitted their practice selection anonymously to the administration at the end of the day for collation and sorting into practice areas. Altogether, 83 practice items were identified, sorted into 11 areas, and forwarded to the university partners for their consideration and to provide constructive feedback.

First review of updated contentAs invited, the university partners initially edited item wording for overlapping content. They took care to retain the practitioners’ intention in the practice content and to avoid adding any new content. Next, they re-sorted items into more compatible areas and scrutinised content for overlap and scope. They identified two concerns that needed to be addressed at the second pupil-free day to further refine the listing while maintaining the integrity of the school’s ownership

26


of the practices. One issue concerned the omission of some specific practices relevant to this school. For example, in the area of positive behavioural support, no practice item pinpointed the need for staff to monitor and manage individual students in a consistent and proactive manner. Staff later explained the omission as a function of its being so fundamental to daily practice that it had become almost taken for granted. Updating the listing was already proving its developmental worth. Another issue concerned the measurability of many practice items. For example, Use

of adaptive technology to assist students to achieve was an important practice for the school, but the statement needed to have observable elements inserted so that it was observable and quantifiable (viz., Students access technologies such as computers and adaptive devices that are associated with their own health care and independence). This jointly negotiated review resulted in the re-arrangement of edited items across nine practice areas (see Table 2).Formatting into practice areas did not occur in the original 35-item list (Beamish, 1992), but the large number of items generated

Table 2 Initial Outcomes: practice areas, numbers of items, and examples

Practice area Number of items

Practice example

1. Program quality 12 The school follows through with outlines, ideologies, and philosophies of best practices.

2. Productive partnerships

16 Meaningful relationships are developed with partners inclusive of parents, therapists, caregivers, and transdisciplinary teams.

3. Collegial support and professional activity

7 All staff need to be able to access varying degrees of support in order to fulfil their role.

4. Valuing students 8 Respect for individual, the individual’s family, and family circumstances is displayed at all times.

5. Technology for learning

4 Students access technologies such as computers and adaptive devices that are associated with their own health care and independence.

6. Positive behavioural support

8 Challenging behaviours are viewed as indicating a need to teach alternative behaviours (e.g., communication skills).

7. Instruction 15 Students are given opportunities to make choices, provide input, and express their preferences and feelings as appropriate for chronological age-grade level expectations.

8. Teaching in natural contexts

8 New skills are taught in the context of naturally occurring activities and daily routines, including interactions with peers and adults in a variety of typical environments.

9. Individual education plans

5 IEP/transition goals are developed in a collaborative manner with parents, therapists, appropriate organisations, and school staff.

27


by the staff warranted clustering into practices areas. The school list contained new practice content. Specifically, collegial support and professional activity, technology for learning, and positive behaviour support were new areas with multiple practices. Moreover, the areas of productive partnerships and valuing students underwent considerable expansion.

Second updating of the listingIn August, prior to the second pupil-free day, the university partners teleconferenced with three suite leaders who had volunteered to lead staff groups to review and refine the practice items. They discussed the need to review the listing as a whole in order to remedy the omission of any other important school practices. They also discussed the need to review each item in order to check its measurability. At that point, they suggested “rules of thumb” to the teacher leaders for writing measurable practice statements and coached them about how to make a practice statement demonstrable (viz., using action-based nouns and verbs). The suite leaders then divided the practice areas to share across their working groups for the forthcoming pupil-free day of staff action. Each group was to review a megacluster of three practices areas: (a) program quality, productive partnerships, and collegial support and professional activity; (b) valuing students, positive behavioural support, and technology for learning; and (c) instruction, teaching in natural context, and individual education plans.In September, on the second pupil-free day, practice items were reviewed, rewritten, and appraised using critical staff discussion and joint reflection. During the morning session, each of the working groups refined existing item content, redistributed content across items, and added content omitted from existing material. They then checked the measurability of each practice statement

to ensure that the key element within a given practice could be explicitly observed over time. At the end of this period, the reworked items were collated for school-wide review and feedback.During the middle session, the staff assembled in one room for individual scrutiny of all practice items. Everyone was invited to use adhesive post-it notes to attach extra ideas to any item. The morning groups then re-assembled to consider additional feedback on their respective contributions and re-edit the material as needed. At the end of this period, the consolidated items formed the pool from which to draw the school listing.During the afternoon session, the staff took part in freewheeling, unstructured discussions about the reworked items and then used a simple voting procedure to identify practice items for school-wide adoption. Initially, all staff and then suite members discussed the relative contribution of each item to best practice within the school. Concurrent with these activities, administration staff formatted the items into a listing so that each staff member could indicate include-not include on each item. Before leaving for the day, individuals independently reviewed a hard copy of the listing, voted according to their own perspective, and completed an anonymous return. The administrative team then collated returns to identify 52 practice items for school use in the following year.

CYCLE 2In the second year of the PAR inquiry, the principal re-engaged staff with the 52- item listing on their return from summer holidays. He allocated vital planning time to benchmark belief in and use of these practices across the school. Outcomes from this benchmarking activity produced mixed results, and further assistance was sought from the university partners. Analysis of

28


these results by the lead team initiated a second cycle of action, which aimed to reduce the number of items in the practice listing.

BenchmarkingOn the first pupil-free day of the second year, the principal told all teaching staff that he wanted to implement school-wide use of the practice listing and then distributed a copy of the 52-item tool to them for individual consideration. In the third week, the principal and his deputy met with each teacher to discuss individual belief in and use of practices in the list. In the fifth week, suite leaders received an electronic version of the revised listing to gather data on day-to-day implementation of practices within the suite. Suites interpreted this request for data collection in different ways. All suites discussed belief in and use of practices, but only three (Years 1-3, 4-6, 7-9) documented their approaches and resulting appraisals.The Years 1-3 suite provided typed comments for each practice (e.g., practice “needs improvement” or “yes within suites…but not across suites”). The Years 4-6 suite used a 3-point scale to rate all practices (e.g., rating of 3 denoting a highly valued and implemented practice) and provided extensive examples of each practice. The Years 7-9 suite provided global comments for each cluster of practices combined with assorted examples of implementation strategies currently used within their suite. The transition suite did not generate any print material, perhaps because their suite leader did not did not take part in the preparation for this review. Taken together, these differences in approaches posed challenges in terms of comparability of the appraisals across suites and perceived relevance of practice items to each suite.

Review of benchmarking dataA review of these data by the lead team pointed to two important conclusions. First, it was very evident that staff co-researchers were strongly committed to re-engage with the listing, share beliefs and current use, and generate examples of practice relevant to their suite. At the same time, it appeared that some suites tended to take different “shortcuts” in appraising practices and documenting their responses. While these shortcuts appeared to save time for these busy teachers, they complicated the expected implementation outcome from this joint action by each suite. The viability of a 52-item tool to rate practice in this school, therefore, came into question.The university partners recommended reducing the items to a number comparable to the original Beamish (1992) set of 35 practices. They recommended that all suites might need to redo practice ratings using a consistent procedure. They also recommended that a catalogue of practices (see the Activities Catalog developed by Wilcox & Bellamy, 1987) could be assembled to share examples of practice embedded in suite activities throughout the school. An unexpected mid-year change of principals at the special school then interrupted the actioning of these recommendations. The lead team, now including the incoming and outgoing principals, agreed that the immediate priority was to achieve a specific and measurable list of items that represented best practice across the school. The team also decided to catalogue examples of these items. An experienced English high school teacher volunteered to coordinate practice editing, and a suite leader agreed to coordinate practice cataloguing.

Third updating of the listingOver several weeks in August and September, the busy staff engaged in

29


concurrent practice editing and catalogue production activities in addition to their regular duties. They used suite meetings, individual time, and a staff meeting to work through an iterative process of discussion, reflection, rewording, and collation. To conclude this activity round, the English teacher presented the final product to the school community and posed the litmus test, “Are you happy to implement these practices in your classroom?”During the same period, the suite leader coordinated the identification and production of important listed practices that could be captured on videotape as snippets. The exemplification process involved three steps. First, criteria for the selection of practice examples were set. In particular, examples of practice needed to represent variations in student age and ability, teacher style and curriculum adjustments, and practice delivery in class, play, and community activities. Second, ethical consent was sought from families and staff, together with ethical clearance from government and university. Third, the video snippets were produced in ad hoc collaborations as time permitted.

Second review of updated contentThe English teacher emailed the revised 42-item listing to the university partners for their review and comment in October. They found that the school’s editing process reduced the list of practices to fewer, more salient, and measurable statements. However, in the opinion of the university partners, eight practices still remained unmeasurable, because the items combined unrelated content. Consequently, the university partners and the leadership team held a telephone meeting to discuss the ineffective practices. These leaders then collaborated informally with other staff to rework these practice items. After two years of updating practice items, the staff celebrated their school’s final listing and

video catalogue at their end-of-year pupil-free day. Participatory inquiry takes time and may involve some misleading turns, but the co-researchers’ sense of ownership may be all the stronger for that.

LIMITATIONSTwo key limitations were associated with this labour- and time-intensive process. First, the focus on a single school provided contextually relevant practices for that setting but lost the generalisability to other settings that characterised the state-wide application of the 1992 best practice listing. Second, this inquiry addressed only the planning phase of practice reform in the school and did not undertake the companion phases of implementation and evaluation (Umbreit, Ferro, Liaupsin, & Lane, 2007). Because these action cycles were halted at the planning process, the issues of practice sustainability and flow-on to student benefits remained untapped. Future inquiries need to fast-track the planning phase, so that time and energy can be committed to the crucial phases of implementation and evaluation. In this inquiry, for example, the sharing of explicitly stated practice criteria among the staff at the beginning of the first cycle would have saved considerable time and effort.

CONCLUSIONOverall, this PAR inquiry was rich in joint action and positive in final output (i.e., school practice list and catalogue of practices). The school and university partners continued their co-researching across two lengthy cycles and worked through busy teaching semesters, time constraints, and leadership transitions. There were important learnings about the reciprocities required for PAR, the value of active administrative support, and the critical leadership role of teachers.The participatory process is reciprocal.

30


The core ingredient of the partnership was the staff’s commitment to collective inquiry to establish best practice in their own workplace. They invested their ongoing actions with intention, effort, and reflection. The university partners added theoretical knowledge and methodological rigour through the feedback loops in the two cycles. This partnership ensured that staff actions produced meaningful and functional outcomes. While the tasks were challenging, the trusting school-university relationships helped to keep the co-researchers focused on the outcome.The participatory process slows and flounders without ongoing administrative support. The first principal committed dedicated time to his staff so they could engage in structured activities over an extended period of time because he expected it to deliver school improvement. In Australian schools, pupil-free days are scarce resources typically used for an assortment of professional development activities. In this case, co-researching as a school community allowed the research activities to promote professional growth. In particular, this type of professional development fostered understanding of and commitment to best practice among new staff, teachers untrained in special education, therapists, and teaching assistants. One unexpected benefit was that the second principal allowed teachers to take the lead in completing tasks in the second cycle. Throughout the participatory process, we came to agree that teachers must be leaders (Ludlow, 2011). In particular, two teachers in this inquiry were not only part of the lead team but also played the primary role in managing staff through the many iterations across both cycles. In a sense, they were “insider action researchers” (Coghlan, 2007, p. 338), who were able to mediate between the co-researchers (university and school) and the staff. When the challenges

multiplied in the second cycle, they used their dual roles to alert leaders to problems while showing staff how to stay “on track.”The present inquiry confirms the potential value of using PAR co-research projects to promote school improvement (James, Milenkiewicz, & Bucknam, 2007; McIntyre; 2008). Few studies of this kind have been published in the last 20 years and especially not in an Australian special school context. This inquiry into co-researching best practice blended on the spot school leadership and staff perseverance with invited university expertise. It served to “connect theory with practice and practice with theory” (Attfield & Williams, 2003, p. 28). The updated practice listing, as a final outcome, may have arisen from a sound theoretical base but was won only with great effort on the ground by all participants. It stands as a tribute to two years of “patient” action research (pAR)!

AUTHOR NOTEWe declare we have no financial or non-financial conflict of interest in the publishing of this research paper.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSincere appreciation is expressed to all staff in this special school who so willingly shared information about their professional work and practice.We also thank Dr C. T. Pat Diamond (Adjunct Professor, Griffith University) for his valued feedback on various manuscripts.

31


REFERENCESAtkins, K., Campbell, R., & Hartley, V.

(1987, October). A comprehensive analysis of Mississippi public school educational programs for school age children and youth with severe handicaps. Paper presented at the 14th Annual Conference of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED294 334)

Attfield, R., & Williams, C. (2003). Leadership and inclusion: A special school perspective. British Journal of Special Education, 30, 28-33.

Australian Institute of Health and Welfare (AIHW). (2006). Disability updates: Children with disabilities. Bulletin No. 42. AIHW cat no. AUS 19. Canberra, Australia: Author.

Ayres, B., Meyer, L., Everelles, N., & Park-Lee, S. (1994). Easy for you to say: Teacher perspectives on implementing most promising practices. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 19, 84-93.

Bailey, J., & Dowrick, M. (2001). Teacher morale in special schools. Special Education Perspectives, 10(1), 15-28.

Baker, J. (2009). Special school headship in times of change: Impossible challenges or golden opportunities. British Journal of Special Education, 36, 191-197.

Beamish, W. (1992). Levels of acceptance and implementation of basic indicators of best educational practice for students with severe handicaps: A Queensland study. Unpublished master’s thesis, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia.

Beamish, W. (2008). Consensus about program quality: An Australian study in early childhood special education. S a a r b r u c k e n , G e r m a n y : V D M Publishers.

Beamish, W., & Bryer, F. (1999). Program

quality in Australian early special education: An example of participatory action research. Child: Care, Health and Development, 25, 457-472.

Beamish, W., Bryer, F., & Davies, M. (2006). Teacher reflections on co-teaching a unit of work. International Journal of Whole Schooling, 2(2), 3-19.

Beamish, W., Meadows, D., & Davies, M. (2012). Benchmarking transition practice for youth with disabilities in Australia. The Journal of Special Education , 45(4), 227-241. doi: 10.1177/0022466910366602

Carter, M., Chalmers, S., Clayton, M., & Hook, J. (1998). Teachers’ perceptions of possible best practices, reported implementation, and training needs for students with high support needs: Comparisons across qualification status and teacher location. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 22, 50-70.

Chalmers, S., Carter, M., Clayton, M., & Hook, J. (1998). Education of students with high support needs: Teachers’ perceptions of possible best practices, reported implementation and training. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 22, 76-94.

Coghlan, D. (2007). Insider action research: Opportunities and challenges. Management Research News, 30, 335-343.

Crane, P., & O’Regan, M. (2010). On PAR: Using participatory action research to improve early intervention. Canberra, ACT: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services, and Indigenous Affairs, Australian Government.

Dule, K., Korner, H., Williams, J., & Carter, M. (1999). Delivering therapy services for students with high support needs: Perceptions of roles, priorities and best practice. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 24, 243-263.

32


Eichinger, J., & Downing, J. (1992). An administrator and teacher perspective on program quality indicators for students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 17, 213-217.

Fox, W., Thousand, J., Williams, W., Fox, T., Towne, P., Reid, R., Conn-Powers, C., & Calcagni, L. (1986). Best educational practices '86: Educating learners with severe handicaps. Burlington, VT: Center for Developmental Disabilities, University of Vermont.

Fox, W., Thousand, J., Williams, W., Fox, T., Towne, P., Reid, R., Conn-Powers, C., & Calcagni, L. (1987). Best practice guidelines for students with intense educational needs. Burlington, VT: Center for Developmental Disabilities, University of Vermont.

Frost, D., & Durrant, J. (2003, January). Bottom up? Top down? Inside out? Joined up? Building capacity for school improvement through teacher leadership. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, Sydney, Australia.

Ho, B. S. (2002). Applicat ion of participatory action research to family-school intervention. School Psychology Review, 31, 106-121.

Horrocks, L. (2003). Partnerships between special schools and units and regular schools in South Australia. Australasian Journal of Special Education, 27, 76-94.

James, E. A., Milenkiewicz, M. T., & Bucknam, A. (2007). Participatory action research for educational leadership: Using data-driven decision making to improve schools. London: Sage.

Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice-based practice. Educational Action Research, 17, 463-474. doi:

10.1080/09650790903093284Laursen, F. (2003, January). From teacher

personality to teachers’ personal competencies. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, Sydney, Australia.

Ludlow, B. (2011). Teacher leadership: Why teachers must be leaders. Teaching Exceptional Children, 43(5), 6-7.

McIntyre, A. (2008). Participatory action research. London: Sage.

Meyer, L. H. (1985). Program quality indicators: A checklist of most promising practices in educational programs for students with severe disabilities. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Division of Special Education and Rehabilitation.

Meyer, L., Eichinger, J., & Park-Lee, S. (1987). A validation of program quality indicators in educational services for students with severe disabilities. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 12, 251-263.

Neil, P., McEwen, A., Carlisle, K., & Knipe, D. (2001). The self-evaluating school – A case study of a special school. British Journal of Special Education, 28, 174-181.

Norwich, B. (2008). What future for special schools and inclusion? Conceptual and professional perspectives. British Journal of Special Education, 35, 136-143.

Peters, M., & Heron, T. (1993). When the best is not good enough: An examination of best practice. Journal of Special Education, 26, 371-385.

Piggott-Irvine, E. (2010). One school’s approach to overcoming resistance and improving appraisal: Organizational learning in action. Educational M a n a g e m e n t A d m i n i s t r a t i o n

33


and Leadership, 38, 229-245. doi: 10.1177/1741143209356363

Turnbull, A. P., Friesen, B. J., & Ramirez, C. (1998). Participatory action research as a model for conducting family research. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 23, 178-188.

Umbreit, J., Ferro, J. B., Liaupsin, C. J., & Lane, K. L. (2007). Factors that affect success: Social validity, treatment integrity, and generalization and maintenance. In Functional behavioural assessment and funct ion-based intervention: An effective, practical approach (pp. 213-231). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Wilcox, B., & Bellamy, G.T. (1987). A comprehensive guide to the activities catalog: An alternative curriculum for youth and adults with severe disabilities. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Williams, W., Fox, T., Thousand, J., & Fox, W. (1990). Level of acceptance and implementation of best practices in the education of students with severe handicaps in Vermont. Education and Training in Mental Retardation, 25, 120–131.


34

Refereed PapersRefereed Papers

THE IPAD AS A PEDAGOGICAL TOOL IN SPECIAL EDUCATION: PROMISES AND POSSIBILITIES

Therese M. Cumming and Iva StrnadovaUniversity of New South Wales

ABSTRACTAlthough it was only introduced in 2010, the iPad is quickly becoming a popular device in schools worldwide. It is also gaining favour as an educational tool for students with special needs, with many parents and teachers touting its capability as an assistive technology tool. This overview of the iPad describes the potential uses of the iPad as a legitimate assistive technology. In order to do this, one must first explore the built-in features of the device itself, and then investigate the educational possibilities provided by the profusion of available applications. To justify the use of the iPad (or any tablet device) as an educational tool, a discussion about the theoretical underpinnings and a need for an evidence base for the use of tablets and their corresponding applications as educational interventions is warranted.

INTRODUCTIONThe use of the iPad tablet device has virtually exploded since its introduction in 2010 (Sutherland, 2011; Michaels, 2011). One of the surprising trends is the almost immediate adoption of the iPad into the classroom, when those in the field of education as a whole have traditionally been late adopters of technology (Carr, 1999). Teachers and parents of students with special needs tout the devices’ strengths as an assistive technology device, citing a wide variety of applications, ranging from portable electronic textbooks to assistance with organization. The device’s portability, accessibility and customizability give it the potential to assist students with disabilities in the areas of communication, fine motor skills, education, and behaviour. Research in this area is in its infancy; therefore most of the existing information on using this form of technology to assist students with special needs is available only through popular media such as blogs, newspaper articles, and educational websites (Abrams, 2011; Des Roches Rosa, 2010; Fox, 2010;

Correspondence: Dr Therese M Cumming, Senior Lecturer, Special Education, School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052; email [email protected]; phone +61 2 9385 1944; fax +61 2 9385 1946. Dr Iva Strnadova, Senior Lecturer, Special Education, School of Education, University of New South Wales, Sydney NSW 2052; email [email protected]; phone +61 2 9385 3736; fax +61 2 9385 1946.

35

Refereed paper: The iPad as a pedagogical tool

Hyatt, 2011; Rothschild, 2011).The iPad is a touch tablet computer developed and distributed by Apple Inc. The first version was released in 2010, and was different from previous tablet computers in that instead of the traditional mouse or stylus, a multi-touch display as well as an onscreen touch keyboard controlled it. There are several similar tablet devices available for purchase from other companies that serve the same purposes. Because the iPad is currently the most widely used tablet, both in and out of the school setting (Sutherland, 2011; Michaels, 2011), this paper will focus on that device and its corresponding applications in particular.The aim of the present paper is to provide an overview of possible utilisation of iPads as assistive technology for students with special educational needs. The authors highlight the advantages of using iPads in relation to different types of disabilities as well as different areas of support. The authors also describe the challenges when adopting iPads as assistive technology.

PEDAGOGICAL BACKGROUND The concept of taking a widely used personal computing device such as an iPad and using it for another purpose such as education or communication has its foundations in Universal Design for Learning Theory (UDL). Universal Design for Learning is an educational framework based on research in the learning sciences that guides the development of flexible learning environments The theory of Universal Design for Learning is defined as:

a set of principles for curriculum development that give all individuals equal opportunities to learn. UDL provides a blueprint for creating instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments that work for everyone--not a single, one-size-fits-all solution

but rather flexible approaches that can be customized and adjusted for individual needs. (CAST, 2011a)

CAST (2011b) describes the three principals that guide UDL: (a) Provide multiple means of representation; (b) Provide multiple means of action and expression; and (c) Provide multiple means of engagement. These three principles, and the Universal Design for Learning Model are now widely accepted and recommended as part of different teaching models, including the popular Differentiated Instruction model (Tomlinson, 2008).Use of the iPad and its associated educational applications fit in nicely with all three of these principles. In other words, students of all abilities should be given every opportunity to learn, in the style that works best for them, in both educational and community settings; the iPad is one viable way to accomplish this.Over the last ten years, Universal Design for Learning has received global attention as the realization that good design for people with disabilities benefits everyone. Curb cuts and ramps, for example, were initiated for citizens with limited mobility, but have benefited people with prams, wheeled baggage, shopping trolleys, and the like. Edyburn (2010) describes three phases of a developmental cycle experienced by both individuals and organizations during the UDL change process: (a) advocacy, which brings awareness to the need to make environments accessible to all; (b) accommodation, which involves making modifications to inaccessible environments and materials in order to make them available to the individual with a disability; and (c) accessibility, where access is provided to everyone at the same time. UDL involves planning the environments and materials in such a way that they are accessible to all individuals in the first place. Accessibility is preferred over

36

T.M. Cumming and I. Strnadova

accommodation because accommodation is usually triggered by a request, which can take time. It may also require extra effort in the form of time and resources, or moving to a special location, which is exclusionary.Tablet devices, such as the iPad, and their corresponding applications have the potential to increase the accessibility of educational materials, such as text, enhance the presentation of concepts, as well as giving students a way to express themselves in different modalities. The devices are also widely recognized and used by students of all ages, making them more readily adopted by students with disabilities and their peers. Many schools are already widely employing the devices, making it a matter of just adding the right applications to make classroom instruction more accessible to all students.

BUILT-IN ACCESSIBILITY FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIESThe main principle of UDL is accessibility, and tablet computers have out-of-the box accessibility options. These options allow special education teachers to adapt the iPad to the needs of their students. These options make the device more accessible for those users with vision, hearing, or physical and motor impairments. The iPad’s design especially lends itself to the latter, as it is thin and light, making it easy to hold and carry. It works in both portrait and landscape orientations, and automatically senses when orientation has changed and adjusts the screen to suit. The iPad has a nearly full size on screen QWERTY keyboard with predictive text, auto capitalization, and auto correction. External Bluetooth keyboards are also an option for those who require them. Some of the included options are especially suited to individuals with vision and hearing impairments. Vision. For individuals with vision impairments, the built-in screen reader

VoiceOver offers the user the ability to physically interact with items on the screen using gestures. Touching the screen allows the user to hear an item’s description, allowing the understanding of each object’s location and context. Dragging one’s finger around the screen results in auditory messages, describing each item, therefore giving the user a sense of relationship and context. The speaking rate is adjustable, and background sounds and music are automatically lowered when VoiceOver is talking. All functions are controlled with a set of different simple gestures. When typing, each character is echoed as you type it, then again to confirm your selection. The cursor can be set to move through text character-by-character or word-by-word. The screen can also be zoomed from 100%-500% with the touch of three fingers, or changed to display white on black for higher contrast.Hearing. The iPad provides those students with hearing impairments a variety of features to make it easier to use as well as communicate with others. The iPad supports the playback of open captions, closed captions, and subtitles. Therefore, captioned movies and videos can be easily watched on the device. There is also a variety of applications available that allow the students to create captioned movies/videos on the iPad. The iPad also comes with a video chat program, Face Time, which allows users to see each other clearly, making it very easy to communicate using sign language. Face Time can also be used to place and receive video relay and text relay calls. The tablet’s headphone jack is compatible with speakers, earphones, earbuds, and amplified speaker systems. The iPad supports Bluetooth technology and works with wireless headsets, as well as possessing the ability to route both right- and left- channel audio source material into both earbuds, allowing those with hearing loss

37


in one ear to hear both channels in the other ear. The iPad also delivers visual alerts and statuses for time of day, connectivity, battery level, and calendar invitations.

DESIGNING LEARNING ACTIVITIES FOR SPECIAL EDUCATIONThe usefulness of tablet computers as teaching and learning tools for students with special needs lies in the applications that have been designed for the devices. An online search for educational applications for tablet computers returns a profusion of options, as does a search on Apple’s App Store, which is actually a downloadable application itself (Apple, 2011). The App Store has a section of applications that are devoted to students with special needs, under the category of “special education.” These applications are geared to the whole gamut of students’ needs, from toddlers to adults and represent nearly every discipline. Although they can cost up to hundreds of dollars, most applications are available for under $5.00, and many of them are free, or have free “lite” versions.Due to the myriad of available educational applications, one of the issues that teachers continue to encounter is determining which applications to purchase for their students. One method of identifying apps with desired outcomes is to use a framework based on Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy. This method is not only useful when planning instruction for an individual student, but also when differentiating instruction for an entire class. Table 1 provides an example of questions to ask when evaluating applications for specific types of tasks.Rothschild (2011) proposed that through the use of applications, the iPad is somewhat of a “digital education prescription pad” and the ability to customize a popular device to suit the needs of each individual student is motivating because it gives students

with special needs something mainstream that is still engaging and interactive for them. Des Roches Rosa (2010) found that when choosing an application for her son, who has autism, the following factors are important: (a) kid appeal (is the app fun? Will he want to use it?); (b) error-free learning (no penalties for wrong answers, cues and prompts, only lets users put things in the right places); (c) simplicity (few steps, powerful but simple interfaces); (d) visually distinctive interface (better for non-readers who can still recognize visual patterns); and (e) flexible content management (application has more value for kids if it is easy for parents and/or teachers to navigate through and manage the content).Although most applications are relatively inexpensive, the sheer number of applications available for students with disabilities can be overwhelming to a parent or teacher. Seeking the opinions of others who have been using the iPad with their students is a good place to start. A search of the World Wide Web reveals a plethora of websites and blogs devoted to iPads and their applications. Many of these sites contain reviews of applications and/or explain how they were used effectively with specific students with special needs. Another method is to preview applications before purchasing them by doing a search on YouTube. There are many videos available that demonstrate different applications with narration (See Table 1). These can also be useful as tutorials once an application is purchased. An additional resource is the website, Apps for Children with Special Needs (2011), which boasts an extensive library of video demos of applications. There are also many Facebook communities dedicated to the use of iPads and applications as assistive technology.Of course, the main barometer of whether or not an application will be of any use is to have the child it is intended for try it. If the

38


Stage Questions to Ask Does the app help the student:

Remembering (recall or recognition of specific information)

Memorize facts or ideas? Describe information? List details? Label items? Locate information? Recite information? Identify facts?

Understanding (Understanding given information)

Interpret relationships? Summarize facts or ideas? Infer information? Paraphrase written text? Retell stories? Compare and contrast concepts? Predict consequences? Sort/classify items? Explain what is happening

Applying (Using Strategies, concepts, principles, and theories in new situations)

Illustrate an idea? Demonstrate a concept? Judge the effects? Tell what would happen? Tell how, when where why? Identify the results of? Experience authentic practice through simulations?

Analysing (Breaking down into component elements)

Determine the function? Differentiate between fact and opinion? Make assumptions? Come to conclusions? Find the theme? Identify the main idea? Distinguish between relevant and irrelevant information?

Evaluating (Judging the value of ideas, materials, and methods by developing and applying standards and criteria)

Appraise material for fallacies, consistencies, and inconsistencies? Judge which is more important, moral, better, logical, appropriate? Defend a position? Critically evaluate an idea, theory, philosophy, or piece of work?

Creating (Combining elements to develop an original idea)

Choose a method to test _____? Propose an alternative ____? Reflect through journaling? Design something? Create a film, story, project, plan, song, work of art? Invent something to solve a problem?

Table 1 Using Blooms Revised Taxonomy to choose applications

39


child doesn’t engage with an application, it will likely be of no educational use to the student. If the child is actively engaged in using the application, and it is improving a skill or assisting the child to participate more fully in an inclusive environment, then it may be considered an effective application.

EXAMPLES OF APPLICATIONSDescriptions of the types of applications that have potential for students with special needs and their descriptions follow below; see Table 2 for a categorized list. Autism. A large number of applications have been created to assist students with autism and/or their teachers and parents. These applications range from the simple, such as a visual timer, to the complex, such as an application used to teach students with autism the “hidden curriculum”. Other applications are available that use Discrete Trial Training for learning numbers, letters, colours and shapes. The video capabilities of the iPad make applications for teaching social skills very realistic and there are many varied applications available for this purpose. There is a wide variety of applications with different skills and settings to choose from. The screen resolution lends itself to applications that teach students how to read the emotions on people’s faces. There are several applications that do this, and the iPad also has the capability for the user to take their own pictures and videos for these purposes.Behaviour. Applications have been created to assist both students and teachers with taking data on and improving classroom behaviour. Many of these applications are not only useful for students with disabilities, but also for any students that are learning a new behaviour. As mentioned above, there are many social skills training applications designed to assist students to choose the correct behaviour in specific situations.

There are also applications that function as reward systems, allowing students to set goals and be rewarded with virtual stickers or tokens. The virtual stickers could then traded for a more tangible reward when the desired rate of behaviour is accomplished. For teachers, there are applications, such as Behaviour Tracker Pro, that track student behaviours then use the data collected to generate reports. These applications have the potential to be very useful, as some can actually be used to video the behaviour as well as count its frequency, rate, and duration. It would be advantageous for teachers to be able to collect, store, and retrieve behavioural data on the same portable device. One of these applications, eCove Observation, even allows teachers and/or other observers to track teacher responses to student behaviour. Information generated by this application can be used for self-monitoring and reflection, as well as a training tool to improve teacher practice. The Behaviour Breakthroughs application trains teachers and parents how to use positive reinforcement and extinction through the use of a virtual child who is displaying challenging behaviours. This gives teachers and preservice teachers the opportunity to practice these techniques in a safe, simulated environment.Communication. Sennott and Bowker (2009) theorize that visual communication systems applications on an iPad would be appropriate Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) tools for students who are ambulatory and have good visual processing skills, and there are a number available for this purpose. These applications range from very simple yes/no switch-type applications to applications that use both pictures and typing to assist the user in expressing himself or herself. Many communication system applications are symbol and picture-based, which is familiar to many students who have

40


Category Application Description Website Link to Video Tutorial?

Lan

guag

e A

rts,

EL

L, L

earn

ing

and

Inte

llect

ual D

isab

iliti

es

Dropbox Cloud computing; online data storage.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qeqw5OroHzY

Voicetext Pro Translates dictation into text. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pDbZgRGDclU&feature=related

Speak It! Converts text to speech. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wFAPPOE1fDs&feature=related

Wordspeller Helps find the correct spelling http://vimeo.com/20983876

Whiteboard Virtual whiteboard. Allows the user to “write” on the iPad screen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMqMsl00NT

iThoughts Mindmapping tool http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHO3TYoEw2g

iBooks Reading application, books and PDFs

http://www.apple.com/ipad/guided-tours/

Sight Words Reads customizable words out loud

http://vimeo.com/20024133

Language Builder Makes stories, self recorder http://vimeo.com/20024760

Conversation Builder

Simple interface to learn the pattern of conversation

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/04/conversation-builder/

SparkHD Conversation starters http://vimeo.com/20943417

Talking Tom Talking cat, repeats what you say http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/talking-tom/

Pictello Creates talking books and photo albums

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/pictello/

Speech with Milo Prepositions, verbs, nouns http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/speech-with-milo-prepositions/

Com

mun

icat

ion

Proloquo2go AAC program http://vimeo.com/27690693 TaptoTalk AAC program http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

=HH1SADGD0Yo&feature=related

Assistive Chat Says what is typed, word and next word prediction

http://vimeo.com/20858776

iCommunicate Text to speech http://vimeo.com/19507864 Answers Yes No Large buttons to communicate yes

or no http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/answers-yes-no/

Table 2 iPad applications to support students with disabilities

41


Category Application Description Website Link to Video Tutorial?

Beha

viou

r/ A

utism

Model Me Going Places

Social Stories http://vimeo.com/20726562

iReward A virtual reward board system http://vimeo.com/19492514

Everyday Social Skills

Videos for life and social skills http://vimeo.com/19912965

Unstoppable Me Story with 10 lessons on topics such as risk taking and stress.

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/2408/

Hidden Curriculum for Kids

Real-life based entries about the unwritten social rules encountered every day.

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/03/hidden-curriculum-for-kids/

Behaviour Tracker Pro

Data collection application http://www.behaviortrackerpro.com/support/demo.aspx/

Ther-Ad for Autism

Video modelling app http://www.datamtd.com/therad

GoalTracker Electronic sticker/goal setting app http://www.twiddlybitssoftware.com/goaltracker---an-ipad-app

DTT Numbers, Letters, Colors, Shapes

Four separate discrete trial applications

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/04/autism-dtt-numbers/

Time Timer Visual timer http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/time-timer/

Vola Faces Practice reading emotions http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/volafriends-faces/

See Touch Learn Picture learning system http://a4cwsn.com/2011/03/see-touch-learn/

Natural Learning Concepts Autism

Sorting and categorizing http://a4cwsn.com/2011/03/nlconcepts-autismsort-and-categorize/

First Then Visual Schedule

Visual Schedule http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/first-then-visual-schedule/

Rea

ding

Bob Books Reading Magic

Makes the connection between letters and sounds

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/bob-books/

Zoo Train Teaches the alphabet http://a4cwsn.com/2011/03/zoo-train/

Zanny Born to Run

Interactive story book about a boy with ADHD

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/01/zanny-born-to-run/

Phonetic Focus 19 activities to teach the sounds of English

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/phonetics-focus/

Mat

h

Hundred Board Teaches counting using visual materials

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/hundred-board/

Numerate Interactive calculations http://a4cwsn.com/2011/02/numerate/

Mot

or

Skill

s

Dexteria Assess and improve fine motor skills

http://a4cwsn.com/2011/03/dexteria-fine-motor-skill-development/

Fruit Ninja Fun, nonviolent game http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=98ZhvWX9uxQ

42


experience using the Picture Exchange System (PECS). The student touches a picture or symbol, and the iPad verbalizes a pre-programmed word or phrase. Several of these applications, such as Proloquo2Go and TaptoTalk, allow the student to create albums and store them for greater efficiency when communicating with others. Some are fully customizable and allow for the uploading of familiar voices, phrases, and/or pictures. Other applications for individuals with language difficulties focus on the user practicing language skills. These applications have potential

for students from non-English speaking backgrounds who are learning English. One of the applications, Language Builder, has the capability for the user to practice using sentences to describe a picture, then record and listen to themselves. Hence, the learner can practice independently in a safe environment, and a teacher or speech therapist has the option of listening to the recording at another time.Life and Social Skills. The Functional Skills System is a suite of applications in the form of videos that deal with functional skills. The videos cover topics such as manners, asking

Table 3 Web resources for iPad use for students with disabilities

Website Description URL Abledata Information on assistive technology. Type

“iPad” in the search box for a list of apps and reviews

http://abledata.com

About.Com:Apps for Children with Special Needs

Highlights new apps that are designed specifically to make life easier for people with special needs

http://specialchildren.about.com/od/equipment/tp/featuredapps.htm

Appolicious Online forum where users can discover and share the latest apps through social recommendations and reviews

http://www.appolicious.com/searches/site?term=special+education

Apps for Children with Special Needs

Produces videos on applications for children with disabilities to assist parents and teachers in making sensible buying decisions

http://a4cwsn.com/

Atla’s Assistive Technology Blog

Assistive technology blog that highlights useful new apps

http://atlaak.wordpress.com/

ATMac ATMac provides useful information about all Apple and Mac products for users with a disability, chronic illness, or other impairments

http://atmac.org/ipad-assistive-technology-disability-round-up

Babies with iPads

A blog designed to document infants/toddlers with disabilities using an iPad to promote their development. It aims to show how iPads can help children with disabilities develop their communication, play, literacy, cognitive, visual/auditory and motor skills

http://babieswithipads.blogspot.com/

43


Website Description URL iPad Academy Lists iPad apps for AAC, their prices, and

links http://ipadacademy.com/2010/12/ipads-as-assistive-technology-30-apps-for-augmentative-and-alternative-communication-aac

iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch Apps for Special Education

A useful list of special education apps, listed by category

http://www.scribd.com/doc/24470331/iPhone-iPad-and-iPod-touch-Apps-for-Special-Education

Lillie’s Pad The mission of this site is to be an up-to-date resource for everything special needs related to the iPad and the iPhone. Includes apps, app giveaways, videos, music, news stories, accessories, links, helpful hints, etc.

http://www.lilliespad.com/

Moms with Apps

Moms With Apps is a collaborative group of family-friendly developers seeking to promote quality apps for kids and families. Their app catalogue is now available on iTunes.

http://momswithapps.com/

One Place for Special Needs

A guide that breaks down apps by skill set so users can easily find and buy apps that most benefit their child. Includes apps for students with autism, ADHD, apraxia, learning disability, sensory issues and more. Included are apps for iPad, iPhone, iPod touch and some Android apps

http://www.oneplaceforspecialneeds.com/main/library_special_needs_apps.html

Special Needs Apps for Kids

A community of parents, therapists, doctors, and teachers who share information on how we are using the iPad, iPhone, iPod Touch and Android devices with children who have special needs.

http://snapps4kids.com/

Speech Language Pathology Sharing: App Resources

A resource page dedicated to iPhone, iPod touch and iPad devices and applications for (special) education

http://slpsharing.com/app-resources/

Squidalicious: iPad Apps for Autism

Categorized spread sheet of iPad apps for people with autism, including reviews, links and prices

http://www.squidalicious.com/2011/01/ipad-apps-for-autism-spreadsheet-of.html

44


for help, employment words, hygiene, seeking medical treatment, entertainment in the home, public transportation, and signs. The videos are short (under 10 minutes) and can be replayed to reinforce skills whenever necessary. These videos are portable and easy to view anywhere, as the applications are available for the iPhone, iPod touch, and the iPad.Literacy. For students with low literacy skills, screen readers such as Speak It! can read any printed material on the iPad. There are also applications that translate dictation into text, such as Dragon Dictation, and others that assist with spelling (Wordspeller, Word Wizard) and grammar. Interactive “talking” storybooks for the iPad have also become quite popular, and iBooks, the reading application that is included with the iPad has the ability to read text aloud and well as define words at the touch of a finger. Applications that supplement reading instruction are also available. Examples of these are games to teach the alphabet and common sight words, electronic flash cards, and phonics activities. Mathematics . There are countless applications that teach and support math skills in the forms of electronic flash cards, games and tutorials. Math Drills, for example, contains material at all levels, from counting to calculus. For support with functional math skills there are electronic calendar applications, calculators (Scientific Graphing Calculator), clocks, timers, and budget/money management applications. Many math teachers are finding tablet computers invaluable when teaching students with special needs; the New York Times (2011) describes how schools are using iPads, including for teaching complex math problems through step-by-step animations.Organizational Skills. The iPad can be used to assist students in organizing their schoolwork and their schedules. There

are applications available, such as iCal, Bento, eTask, iStudiez Pro, Homework, and My Homework, to manage projects, time, and even homework. Students who are more visual can see their schedule in pictorial form via the Pocket Picture Planner, an icon-based personal planner. The application Audionote allows students to use their iPads to take notes in class while recording the lecture, and the finished product will synch the written notes to the audio recording. Whiteboard, a virtual whiteboard applications allows students to take notes and draw diagrams to illustrate their notes.

CHALLENGESLarge numbers of teachers, parents, and students with disabilities have eagerly and quickly adopted the iPad (Sutherland, 2011). One only has to browse the websites, blogs, and Facebook pages to view the current level of enthusiasm. Some even describe the introduction of the device to both children and adults with disabilities as “life changing” (Abrahms, 2011; Fox, 2011; Hyatt, 2011). Although no central resource has been developed that compiles all of the information available for iPad use with students with disabilities, there are some websites that attempt to do just that (see Table 3). Despite the advantages of having this information at one’s fingertips, wading through it can be time consuming and possibly misleading. Teachers and parents should be aware that the iPad is not for everyone.Despite the potential benefits of using the iPad as assistive technology and/or as a pedagogical tool, Rahman (in Fox, 2011) suggests that caution be exercised. Teachers need to be mindful of the danger of taking a backwards approach and selecting the technology and fitting the needs and objectives of the individual to suit it, rather than choosing the technology based on the needs and objectives of the individual.

45


Additionally, the iPad is not a panacea, and it should not be viewed as one. Early research with students with disabilities on the use of handheld devices in the areas of communication, transition, and social skills looks promising (Cihak, Fahrenkrog, Ayres & Smith, 2009; Hammond, Whatley, Ayres, & Gast, 2010; Sennott, & Bowker, 2009), but many research projects exploring the efficacy of this technology as an educational tool are in their infancy, therefore there is limited research available with which to construct an evidence base. Adding iPad technology to widely used evidence-based practices appears to be a good place to begin.

CONCLUSIONThere is no doubt that response to the iPad in the disability community has been overwhelmingly positive. Students with disabilities are increasingly expressing the desire to own novel technologies such as the iPad, as they are age appropriate, engaging, and popular with their same-age peers (Hammond, Whatley, Ayres, & Gast, 2010). This desire, combined with informal reports of teacher and parent satisfaction, and the preliminary success of early studies into the iPad’s use as educational technology certainly warrants further investigation. Further study should be undertaken to discover how special education teachers are implementing the iPad to enhance classroom instruction, and to substantiate the effectiveness of these practices.

REFERENCESAbrahms, M. (2011). iPad apps for people

with disabilities. Disabilities @ Suite 101. Retrieved from: http://www.suite101.com/content/ipad-apps-for-people-with-disabilities-a331710

Apple (2011). Accessibility. Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/au/accessibility/ipad/vision.html

Apple (2011). The Mac App Store. Retrieved from http://www.apple.com/mac/appstore/

Carr, H. V. (1999) Technology adoption and diffusion. United States Air Force War College. Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/innovation/adoptiondiffusion.htm

CAST. (2011a). About UDL. Retrieved from http://www.cast.org/udl/index.html

CAST. (2011b). Universal design for learning guidelines – version 2.0. Wakefield, MA: Author. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines/downloads

Cihak, D., Fahrenkrog, C., Ayres, K., & Smith, C. (2009). The use of a video modelling via a video iPod and a system of least prompts to improve transitional behaviours for students with autism spectrum disorders in the general education classroom. Journal of positive behaviour Interventions OnlineFirst published on February 19, 2009 as doi:10.1177/1098300709332346

Des Roches Rosa (2010). The iPad: A near miracle for my son with autism. Squidalicious: The Adventures of Leo and His Potty Mouthed Mom [Blog]. Retrieved from http://www.blogher.com/frame.php?url=http: / /www.squidalicious.com

Edyburn, D.L. (2010). Would you recognize universal design for learning if you saw

46


it? Ten propositions for new directions for the second decade of UDL. Learning Disability Quarterly, 33(1), 33-41.

Fox, Z. (2010). 4 ways iPads are changing the lives of people with disabilities. Mashable. July 29, 2011. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2011/07/25/ipads-disabilities/

Hammond, D., Whatley, A., Ayres, K., & Gast, D. (2010). Effectiveness of video modelling to teach formatting errorPod use to students with moderate intellectual disabilities. Education and Training in Autism and Developmental Disabilities, 45(4), 525-538.

Hyatt, G. W. (2011). Upgrading to an iPad2? Change a life with your old iPad. Do it Myself Blog. Retrieved from http://www.doitmyselfblog.com/2011/upgrading-to-an-ipad-2-change-a-life-with-your-old-ipad/

James, G. (2011). Apps for Children with Special Needs [website]. Retrieved from http://a4cwsn.com

Michaels, P. (2011). All-time Mac, iPad sales help Apple turn in a record quarter. Macworld. Retrieved from http://www.macworld.com/article/163101/2011/10/record_mac_ipad_sales_help_apple_turn_in_record_quarter.html

Rothschild, B. (2011). Special tool for special needs. Courier Post-Cherry Hill N.J. Retrieved from http://beta.courierpostonline.com

Sennott, S. & Bowker, A. (2009). Autism, AAC, and Proloquo2Go. Perspectives on Augmentative and Alternative Communication, 18, 137-145 December 2009. doi:10.1044/aac18.4.137

Sutherland, E. (2011). Schools expect iPads to outnumber textbooks in next five years. Cult of Mac. Retrieved from http://www.cultofmac.com/127065/schools-expect-ipads-to-outnumber-computers-in-next-five-years-report/

Tomlinson, C. A. (2008). The goals of differentiation. Educational Leadership, 66(3), 26-30.

47


Positively InfluencingTHE PAPER

Roach Van Allen and the language-experience approach

THE EDUCATORWith over 50 years of experience in education, Peter Westwood has been an Associate Professor of Education and has taught all age groups, in schools, colleges and universities around the world. He holds awards for excellence in teaching from Flinders University in South Australia and from the University of Hong Kong. Peter has published many books and articles on the subject of learning and learning difficulties. His latest book, Inclusive and adaptive teaching is due out from Routledge Publishing (UK) in January 2013. His research interests include learning difficulties, literacy, numeracy, effective teaching methods, teacher competencies and curriculum adaptation.

THE INFLUENCE...

It was while I was teaching in the remedial department of a secondary school in England (1959-67) that I was searching for an effective alternative method to help our senior students overcome their long-seated literacy problems. The simplified books available for so-called ‘reluctant readers’ at the time (books that were often based on a look-and-say whole word method) were useless for motivating these students. They had already spent ten or more frustrating years on such material, and had still failed to become proficient readers.

By chance, I came across the writings of Roach Van Allen, one of the earliest exponents of the language-experience approach (LEA) in the U.S. (e.g., Van Allen, 1965; 1970). Allen recognized the value of using children’s own thoughts and language to produce carefully controlled amounts of personalized reading material. Given adequate practice and support, children could read what they had written (or what had been written for them). They acquired a vocabulary of words they could recognize by sight and were also taught the phonic skills necessary for decoding and encoding these and other words.

My reading of Van Allen’s work coincided with a visit I made to what was then called the Wordblind Center for Dyslexic Children in London. It was there that I was fortunate enough to observe a tutorial lesson conducted by a very skilled teacher, Gill Cotterell. She was using LEA in a highly structured way - and the results were impressive. She embedded direct teaching of phonics (letter knowledge, segmenting and blending) as well as building students’ sight vocabulary and spelling. It was immediately obvious

48

Papers that influenced me: P. Westwood

that the students being tutored were highly motivated and happily engaged.

From that t ime on I employed this structured form of language-exper ience approach in my secondary school specia l c lasses, utilising age-appropriate reading and writing themes from across the curriculum. At the same time, I reinforced the phonic aspects of the program with activities from Stott’s Programmed Reading Kit.

When I later moved into teacher education, language-experience was always one of the teaching methods I passed on to trainee teachers. LEA has proved to be suitable for beginning readers, students with dyslexia, adults with l iteracy dif f icult ies, ESL learners, students with intellectual disability, and Indigenous students. It is also an approach that can be used by classroom aides and volunteer tutors.

It is unfortunate that when the whole-language movement swamped Austra l ian pr imary school classrooms in the 1980s, LEA was used in a much less structured way, and the teaching of phonics virtually disappeared. If systematic phonics instruction is thoroughly embedded in the approach, LEA has much to offer struggling readers.

REFERENCESVan Allen, R. (1965). Attitudes and the art of teaching reading. ERIC document ED 038 240. Accessed 28 February 2012 at: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED038240.pdf

Van Allen, R. (1970). Updating the Language Experience Approach. Paper presented at the International Reading Association Conference4, Anaheim, CA: May 6-9, 1970. Accessed 27 February 2012 at: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED040831.pdf

Readers wishing to read more about LEA see: Nessel, D. D. & Dixon, C. N. (2008). Using language experience approach with English language learners: Strategies for engaging students and developing literacy. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

special education perspectivesaase.edu.au/wp-content/uploads/documents/sep... · students from...

Documents