Chapter 4

Teaching Special Students in General Education Classrooms 7th editionRena B. Lewis and Donald Doorlag

Pearson Education, Inc.

Chapter 4

Adapting Instruction

4.1



Spear-Swerling, L., & Sternberg, R.J. (2001). What science offers teachers of reading. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16(1), 51-57.

Not long ago, one of us heard a disturbing but revealing story about a school district participating in a research project on early intervention with at-risk readers. Like other successful interventions in reading, this program combined explicit instruction in word analysis (i.e., using knowledge about the alphabetic principle to read unfamiliar words), popularly known as phonics instruction, with ample practice in reading connected text and developing comprehension. However, the school district in question decided to drop the program-despite convincing data of its effectiveness with their own students-because, said district administrators, it was against their ‘philosophy’ to teach phonics.




In contrast, phonics instruction is sometimes presented as some sort of magic elixir for reading difficulties. For instance, on a recent television news show, a prominent teacher educator demonstrated his highly structured phonics program with a group of at-risk youngsters, claiming not only that all children learned to read easily with his program, but that they could do so in kindergarten.




There is a very substantial research literature in the field of reading, but from these and many other incidents, one wouldn’t know it. Instead, as in the first illustration, educational decisions that might be made by reference to a base of scientific knowledge frequently are treated as though they are entirely a matter of personal belief. And, without knowledge of the scientific evidence about reading, it is difficult for anyone, including educators, to evaluate sweeping claims about the effectiveness of specific programs, like those in the second illustration.




In this article we examine what science offers teachers of reading, both general and special educators. Although we think that science has something to offer teachers in many domains, we concentrate on reading for several reasons. First, there is probably more scientific knowledge about how children learn to read, and about why some children experience reading difficulties, than about any other field of education. Second, despite this large body of evidence, the debate about how, and even whether, scientific evidence should inform educational practice has been particularly fierce in the domain of reading. And finally, reading difficulties are a common reason for failure in school, as well as the most frequent reason for identifying children as needing learning disabilities service (Moats & Lyon, 1993).




There is a ‘research-to-practice gap’ in many areas of education, not only in reading. …misconceptions about the relationship between research and practice - such as the idea that researchers do not respect teachers or that empirical research in education is a failure - are common in the professional literature.




Why does this disconnect between educators and scientific knowledge exist? One important reason may be that many teachers simply are not exposed to scientific research on reading during their preservice or inservice preparation. …especially at the preservice level, teachers usually receive only a cursory introduction to reading instruction (Moats, 1995, 1999). Both general and special educators have reported that their real education occurs after they have entered a classroom (Lyon, Vaasen, & Toomey, 1989).




…One study (Vaughn, Moody, & Schumm, 1998), in which special education teachers were observed delivering reading instruction to elementary students with learning disabilities over the course of a year, found that there was little direct instruction addressing word analysis, perhaps reflecting teachers’ lack of preparation in this area.




Of course, based on practical experience, educators may have excellent intuitions about what is effective in reading instruction, and many teachers without knowledge of scientific research still teach well; neither is scientific knowledge about reading sufficient to make one a good teacher. Nevertheless, it makes little sense for educators to be cut off from what science has to offer. Most important, knowledgeable teachers are essential for ensuring that scientific research on reading benefits children.



Instruction: What works?

Early educational research focused on teacher variables like “whether teachers were liked by students and other school personnel” (p. 1).In the late 50s interest in effective teaching arose after the launch of “Sputnik” and tended to focus on sciences, specifically “new math.” “This type of research and development effort failed to take into account the role of teachers, focusing entirely on content and curriculum. Because of this, little knowledge was gained on effects of teacher behaviors. …some classrooms…succeeded while other classrooms failed.




In the early 1970s, researchers…focused on behaviors exhibited by teachers that were linked to student achievement gains. This research was important because it finally began to address the issue of what teachers could do to maximize student learning. …More recently, the roles of variables such as meaningfulness, concreteness, and active thinking have been investigated. These variables also have been found to be associated positively with student learning.




…teachers who learn and practice certain teaching skills are more effective than teachers who do not. The elitist notion that anyone can teach also has been refuted, with teaching now defined more strictly than just a ‘presence in a classroom.’ It is now known that teachers can manipulate their behavior to make critical differences in student learning. This fact is as true for special education as it is for ‘regular education’” (p. 2).




“…educators can increase the amount of time spent on academic tasks and can improve instruction by (a) actively engaging students on task during instruction; (b) presenting information in clear, concise ways; (c) asking students questions relevant to the instructional objectives; (d) keeping students actively involved in relevant instructional activities; and (e) monitoring student’s performance” (p. 3).



Correlations

Teacher/Student Relations

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16Teaching Effectiveness

Student Success

Series1



Teacher Effectiveness Literature tells us that major influences on student succes

are…

“Teachers maintain an academic focus…Teachers maintain direction and control in the management of the classroom learning environment.Teachers hold high expectations for academic progress…Students are accountable for satisfactory completion of classroom work.Students work together, showing cooperation rather than competition.The affective climate of the classroom learning environment is not negative.” (p. 81)

Read pp. 81-82.

Call up meta.ppt slides





Effect Size - Meta-Analysis

“Meta-analysis aggregates findings across a particular area of research by converting data in each study to a common metric or effect size (ES).

ES’s may range from zero (meaning no observable effect) to one or greater and may be thought of a…a standard deviation unit.

While a particular ES possesses no inherent value, ESs approaching the range of .40 or greater conventionally tend to be considered significant.”



Effect Size - Meta-Analysis

Distribute “Some methods are more effective than others” by Lloyd, Forness, and Kavale.Note interventions that work or have promise:

Mnemonic Strategies 1.62Enhancing Reading Comprehension 1.13Behavior Modification .93Direct Instruction .84Cognitive Behavior Modification .71Formative Evaluation .70Early intervention .68



Stages of Learning

• Acquisition• Maintenance• Generalization

4.2



Instruction [Fig. 4-1] (Read p. 82)

4.3



Principles of Instruction

• Select Appropriate Learning Task• Break the Learning Task into

Teachable Subcomponents– Task analysis

• Use systematic Instructional Procedures

– Demonstration– Guided practice– Independent practice

4.4



What About Discovery Learning?

“In discovery learning information and skills are not taught directly. Instead, the teacher arranges the learning environment and students explore that environment as they attempt to discover the facts, concepts, principles and skills that make up the school curriculum. Discovery approaches are considered constructivist because students are expected to construct their own knowledge by building on the prior knowledge they bring to the learning task. For example, proponents of the whole-language approach to reading and writing instruction recommend discovery learning. Students are expected to become proficient readers and writers by ‘exposure to and participation in many experiences involving written language not through direct teaching’.




“Unfortunately, some students do not succeed in programs in which discovery learning is the norm. In fact, Mayer (2004) asserts that “there is sufficient research evidence to make any reasonable person skeptical about the benefits of discovery learning.” Students with mild disabilities and others at risk for academic learning problems are more likely to succeed when instruction is presented using the principles of direct teaching.”



You make the call.

As Morsink and Lenk point out, effective instruction of students with special needs can take place in any setting, general education or special, if teachers ‘(a) engage in teacher-directed instruction, (b) provide students with opportunities for active academic responding, (c) use high rates of contingent reinforcement, (d) adapt teaching strategies to accommodate individual differences‘




Cancel this slide - Read p. 85.



More Principles of Instruction

• Consider Both Speed and Accuracy (p. 89)

• Maximize Engaged Time (p. 90)• Give Clear Task Directions (p. 90)• Provide Consequences for Successful

Task Performance (p. 91)• Check for Maintenance and

Generalization (p. 93)• Try the Least Intrusive Intervention First

(if change is needed) (p. 94)4.5



Methods for Gathering Data

• Determine the Student’s Current Levels of Performance– Curriculum–based assessment– Inventories– Criterion-referenced tests (Brigance)

• Evaluate Progress– Rubrics

• Analyze Reasons for Task Failure– Error analysis

4.6



Strategies for Adapting instruction

• Modify Materials and Activities– Clarify Task Directions– Add Prompts– Teach to Specific Student Errors

• Change Teaching Procedures– Present Additional Skills and Information– Provide Additional Guided Practice– Make Consequences for Successful

Performance More Attractive– Slow the Pace of Instruction

4.7



More Strategies for Adapting instruction

• Alter Task Requirements– Change the Criteria for Successful

Performance (Increase Standards)– Change the Task Characteristics– Break Task into Smaller Subtasks

• Select Alternate Task– Substitute a Similar but Easier Task– Substitute a Prerequisite Task

4.8



Making Test Accommodations

• Directions/Instructions• Demonstrations• Time Limits• Presentation Mode• Response Mode• Aids• Prompts and Cues• Feedback• Positive Reinforcement• Physical Location

4.9

Chapter 4

Documents

Transcript of Chapter 4