Key Takeaway

Experienced Early Childhood (EC) coaches whose interactions with teachers were recorded across a period of two years showed a range of coaching behaviors that were consistent with those that have been established as key practices in the existing literature. Analyses of these conversations revealed six predominant themes in the work and beliefs of experienced EC coaches. Having a clear and intentional focus, building upon previously trained strategies, and systematically documenting each session were raised by the EC coaches as being key principles of their practice. —Akane Yoshida

One-to-One Coaching and Coaching Behaviors

One-to-one coaching has become established as a key form of professional development for Early Childhood (EC) teachers in recent years, and yet “little is known about what EC coach qualities and competencies are important for successful implementation of EC coaching practices.” Certain key practices, such as establishing a positive relationship with the mentee, joint planning, making direct connections to observations, and maintaining coaching relationships for longer than 6 months are positively correlated with increased implementation of learned content and skill transfer; however, there is little consensus on minimum experience or education requirements for an effective EC coach.

In this study, the Thompson, Marvin, and Knoche analyzed a series of coaching conversations between two EC coaches and their teacher mentees that took place over a period of two years while considering the 12 behaviors for EC coaching conversations (ECCC) originally defined by Knoche and Bainter (2012):1

  • establishes/re-establishes a relationship with the teacher;
  • Encourages the teacher to share observations and priorities; 
  • encourages connections to previous conversation/session;
  • invites collaboration for topics of conversation;
  • introduces new topics for conversation;
  • verbally acknowledges or affirms teacher’s feelings, behaviors, and input;
  • shares specific observations or information;
  • shares observations, information, or suggestions based on inference/opinion, in response to teacher’s question/request;
  • invites input/reflection using questions to promote comparison/analysis;
  • clarifies intent using yes/no questions;
  • uses feedback in response to teachers input/questions/responses; and
  • promotes joint planning by using questions, comments, or clarifying statements.

Method

The two EC coaches who participated in the study were recruited from a sample of four such professionals who were already enrolled in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) research study on the effects of parent-teacher partnerships on early childhood outcomes over a number of years. These EC coaches were specifically chosen due to their relationship with their teacher mentees as an additional aim of this study was to fill the gap in the prevailing research base by exploring whether there are any differences in the approach that EC coaches take at the beginning of a new coaching relationship as opposed to once the relationship is well established. 

Individual interviews were conducted with each coach to gain their perspectives on the benefits of coaching relationships, their level of previous training, and a description of their duties. A series of 24 audio recordings of coaching conversations—12 for each coach—were reviewed and coded in order to “capture collective evidence of varied coaching topics and behaviors over time” and to establish a rate-per-minute occurrence for the 12 behaviors for ECCC listed above. 

Results

The coaches reflected on two years of coaching a mentee, and six themes of practice emerged: advancing relationships, using key coaching behaviors, use of a structured coaching approach, using trained strategies/practices, using documentation, and coaching benefits/outcomes. 

Each coach used all 12 of the ECCC behaviors each with varying rates. Verbally acknowledging or affirming the teacher’s feelings, behaviors, and input occurred every 3 – 5 minutes, whereas behaviors around sharing observation and requesting input happened about every 10 minutes. 

When comparing the beginning of the relationship to an established relationship, nine of the 12 coaching behaviors were used at similar rates, and three behaviors (verbally acknowledging or affirming teacher’s feelings, behaviors and input, promoting joint planning, and clarifying intent) increased as the relationship developed. Thompson et al. suggest that these findings be taken into account for professional development programs and coursework for coaches. 

Summarized Article:

Thompson, P. J., Marvin, C. A., & Knoche, L. L. (2021). Practices and Reflections of Experienced, Expert Early Childhood Coaches. Infants & Young Children, 34(4), 337-355.

Summary by: Akane Yoshida — Akane believes in the MARIO Approach because it puts student agency at the heart of the learning and goal-setting process. She loves how the MARIO Framework operationalizes this process and utilizes systematic measurement of student learning and teacher effectiveness to guide interventions.

Additional References:

  1. Knoche, L., & Bainter, S. (2012). Early childhood coaching conversation codes. Lincoln, NE: Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools, University of Nebraska Lincoln.

Key Takeaway

There appears to have been a decline in self-esteem and self-efficacy among teachers forced to make a rapid switch to online learning during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the cases of teachers working closely with students with learning disabilities. —Shekufeh Monadjem

Relationships Matter

The importance of relationships, and in particular those in school settings, is a theme that has begun to come to the forefront in the past year due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Cataudella et al. (2021) from the University of Cagliari in Italy investigated how the pandemic has affected teachers’ self-esteem and self-efficacy while trying to maintain meaningful relationships with their students. 

The sudden shift from face-to-face learning to online learning has “made policy-makers and educators realise the importance of human socioemotional aspects in the relationships between teachers and students”. Teachers suddenly had to deliver their lessons using technological tools, including specific online platforms, in order to reach their students. 

Although some teachers were ready to face the situation, a large majority had to adapt their teaching in a short time “without training, with insufficient capacity, and little preparation.” As a result, students became deprived of social, face-to-face interaction among their peers, and teachers and parents were forced to be more involved because of the need for monitoring school lessons at home. 

Teacher Self-Esteem and Self-Efficacy: Measurement and Results

The research in this article focused on the self-esteem and self-efficacy levels of the teachers, respectively defined as an “individual’s consideration of his/her own self as competent and important, as well as perceiving oneself as successful and valuable” and “a person’s conviction in their ability to succeed in a particular situation.”  Job satisfaction levels were measured among the teachers, as well as psychological, physiological, and environmental conditions that can generally guarantee positive feelings towards work,1 which, in turn, increase the rate of productivity and sense of well-being. “Among the variables found in the literature, self-esteem and self-efficacy were found to play an important role in job satisfaction and in the ability to meet or address changes.” The variables which had an effect on teachers’ job satisfaction were also found to have an effect on teacher-student and teacher-parent communication, as well as the aspect of collaboration. 

The results of this study “showed lower self-esteem and lower self-efficacy levels in the teachers who were involved with distance learning as compared with the normative sample.” Self-esteem and self-efficacy also decreased in teachers with greater service seniority at work, and it was usually these teachers who supported students with learning disorders. A consistent supportive context was present for the majority of students with learning disabilities who were successful in their online learning environment. This aspect of providing remote support, which added extra stress, resulted in the decline in job satisfaction rates among teachers in senior positions.

Summarized Article:

Cataudella, S., Carta, S. M., Mascia, M. L., Masala, C., Petretto, D. R., Agus, M., & Penna, M. P. (2021). Teaching in times of the COVID-19 pandemic: A pilot study on teachers’ self-esteem and self-efficacy in an Italian sample. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(15), 8211.

Summary by: Shekufeh – Shekufeh believes that the MARIO Framework builds relationships that enable students to view the world in a positive light as well as empowering them to create plans that ultimately lead to their success. 

Additional References:

  1. Baluyos, G. R., Rivera, H. L., & Baluyos, E. L. (2019). Teachers’ job satisfaction and work performance. Open Journal of Social Sciences, 7(08), 206.

Key Takeaway

Teacher candidates’ perceptions of individuals with disabilities can be positively and significantly altered when exposed to special education content and embedded reflective practice. —Matt Piercy

Change in Perception of Students with Disabilities

A study by Szocik, Gerry & Nagro (2021) examined how eighty-three teacher candidates in the United States changed the way they perceived individuals with disabilities. Increasingly around the world, more students with disabilities are spending 80% or more of their time in general education classrooms. A guiding document created by the United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) attests to this, as 92 countries signed this document in support of inclusive practices. Szocik, Gerry, and Nagro indicate how “there is a push for education professionals to adopt inclusive practices and be aware of their conceptualization of disability as part of their professional identity.” Further, “materializing during classroom practice, professional identity is influenced by external factors including engagement with diverse learners,1 social and cultural contextual structures,2 personal views and experiences,3 and mentorship.”4

Reflective Practice Intervention

Despite an international commitment to inclusion, educators’ professional identities continue to be impacted by inconsistent preparation to support students with disabilities. The authors suggest a good starting point in shaping professional identity is to implement reflective activities so teaching candidates might confront any perceptions towards different types of disabilities. To do this, teacher candidates were each enrolled in a one-semester introduction to special education course, and the study occurred during two consecutive semesters of the course. Attitudes towards individuals with disabilities were measured using a series of tools, such as The Groningen Reflective Ability Scale (GRAS). Further, the perceived reflective ability was scored using a five-point Likert scale.

Throughout the course, teacher candidates were provided multiple opportunities to reflect. These included:

  • reflecting on statements about special education
  • writing about their philosophy of teaching
  • confronting any beliefs they may have about special education and topics such as disabilities

The goal was to better understand and inform how professional identities might form. Though the findings from the study did not fully expose how professional perceptions might be formed, they did indicate the connection that exists between reflective practice and attitudes towards individuals with disabilities (one part of a teachers’ professional identity). The results also reflected how teacher candidates’ professional perceptions and the way they perceive individuals with disabilities can be significantly changed. As inclusive education practices continue to grow globally, embedding reflective practice early and often into teacher education programs has the potential to create a positive impact and the realization of truly inclusive experiences. 

Summarized Article:

Szocik, K., Gerry, M. A., & Nagro, S. A. (2021). The impact of reflective practice on teacher candidates’ attitudes towards individuals with disabilities and professional identity. Reflective Practice, 22(6), 739-752.

Summary by: Matt Piercy—Matt appreciates how at the heart of the MARIO Framework is a passion to develop relationships and a desire to empower students to uncover their purpose while building upon strengths. Further, Matt is inspired by how the MARIO team supports educators and is quickly and nobly becoming a collaborative force in pursuit of educational equity. 

Researcher Katherine Szocik was involved in the final version of this summary.

Additional References:

  1. Pugach, M. C., Blanton, L. P., Mickelson, A. M., & Boveda, M. (2020). Curriculum theory: The missing  perspective in teacher education for inclusion. Teacher Education and Special Education, 43(1),  85–103. https://doi.org/10.1177/0888406419883665
  2. Avalos, B., & Rios, D. (2013). Reform environment and teacher identity in Chile. In D. B. Napier &  S. Majhanovich (Eds.), Education, dominance and identity. Comparative and international education  (Vol. 1, pp. 153–175). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6209125-2_10 
  3. Beltman, S., Glass, C., Dinham, J., Chalk, B., & Nguyen, B. (2015). Drawing identity: Beginning pre service teachers’ professional identities. Issues in Educational Research, 25(3), 225–245. https://  www.iier.org.au/iier25/beltman.pdf 
  4. Pillen, M., Beijaard, D., & Brok, P. (2013). Tensions in beginning teachers’ professional identity  development, accompanying feelings and coping strategies. European Journal of Teacher  Education, 36(3), 240–260. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2012.696192

Key Takeaway

Over the past decade, we’ve seen a general increase in science, technology, engineering, the arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education as well as making it more inclusive by supporting students with learning disabilities (LD) and/or emotional behavioral disorder (EBD). There are a number of tools and resources available for teachers for maximizing remote instruction to make sure that all students are given equitable opportunities in STEAM education. Teachers can ensure that all of their students are able to participate in remote STEAM instruction by intentionally looking at strategies and frameworks that cater to students with LD or EBD. —Jay Lingo 

On top of that, learning structures have been expanded, adapting to different platforms of remote or face-to-face instruction each with a variety of instructional modes, including synchronous and asynchronous learning. These resources require a deliberate focus on framework and strategies.

Framework 

STEAM and universal design for learning (UDL) frameworks go hand-in-hand to help ground practice to support all students. “There are seven tenets of STEAM integrated Framework (1) real-world context/authentic problem (2) science/content inquiry (3) mathematical problem-solving (4) engineered hands-on activity (5) incorporation of the arts (6) use of technology (7) general conclusion for the real world.” While “UDL can be applied as an overlay to existing curricula as a way to promote access to the content by reducing the barriers to learning,” the UDL framework is designed to provide teachers and students with support that encourages individualization of the teaching and learning process. It appears that STEAM and UDL frameworks are complementary and provide a solid foundation for STEAM education to students with LD or EBD regardless of environment or setting. 

Strategies

Inquiry-based instruction

Scaffolded inquiry-based instruction finds more success for science and math learning outcomes. Using the three types of framing questions below will explicitly frame a topic to structure the discussion. 

  • Prelude – used to focus on a student’s previous knowledge as an advance organizer.
  • Outline – visually represented questions and subquestions.
  • Summary – concluding questions to connect concepts.

Concrete-representational-abstract

Students are first given the opportunity to manipulate concrete or physical objects to navigate a problem; they then progress to the representational stage, where they solve the problem by replacing those manipulatives with drawings on paper. Finally, they use the appropriate numbers, operational symbols, and notations based on the concept built from the previous stage. 

Graphic organizers 

These are visual supports that students can use to assist in organizing information to improve the understanding of content and concepts. It is often categorized by purpose: cause and effect, classifying, comparing and contrasting, describing, and sequencing. There are also multiple ways to access visual supports in remote instruction by using web-based programs such as Inspiration and Kidspiration, Mind Map, or Google Drawings where students can be guided whether in a synchronous or asynchronous setup. 

Overall, with proper support and resources available, teachers can help ensure all of their students participate in remote STEAM instruction with the inclusion of strategies and a framework that caters to students with LD or EBD. 

Summarized Article:

Taylor, J. C., & Hwang, J. (2021). Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts, and Mathematics Remote Instruction for Students With Disabilities. Intervention in School and Clinic, 10534512211001858.

Summary by: Jay Lingo – Jay believes the MARIO Framework is providing structure and common meaning to learning support programs across the globe. Backed up with current research on the best practices in inclusion and general education, we can reimagine education…together.

Researcher Jonté C. Taylor was involved in the final version of this summary.

Key Takeaway

The process of identifying reading disabilities and the interpretation of data around the identification of reading disabilities can be inconsistent and conflicting, as they will depend on who is in charge of the process and their training. Since there is considerable variation in the process of identifying reading disabilities, learning support teachers need to not only use current evidence-based and comprehensive assessments to identify and diagnose reading disabilities in a timely manner, but they also need to administer the appropriate interventions for learners to achieve educational success. —Michael Ho

“An estimated 10% to 15% of U.S. school-age children are identified with reading disabilities. Without consistent identification approaches, practitioners may lack a shared understanding of what constitutes RDs and, consequently, how to address areas of challenge in education plans.” On the other hand, a shared understanding of what leads to RDs can lead to effective instruction.

Al Dahhan, Mesite, Feller, Christodoulou (2021) administered a survey across the United States to identify current practices associated with the identification of reading disabilities (RDs). They specifically examined three areas: (a) who identifies and/or diagnoses RDs and what their roles are in this process, (b) the training that these practitioners have received relevant to this process, and (c) the current processes used by practitioners in educational and clinical settings to identify/diagnose RDs.

965 practitioners, including classroom teachers, special educators, reading specialists, school psychologists, and speech-language pathologists were invited to participate in the Reading Diagnostics Survey, and their responses were analyzed.

Variations in Approaches to Identifying RDs

Across school districts and states, there is a range of different definitions, eligibility criteria, diagnostic processes, guidelines, and policies for identifying RDs in both school settings. There are also differences among these features between school and clinical settings. 

Dahhan et al. (2021) refer to Mellard et al. (2009)1 and Scruggs and Mastropieri (2002)2—“Few studies reported on the variability in choice of reading assessments, cutoff points for test scores, pre-referral and/or progress monitoring approaches, magnitude of discrepancies between scores (when applicable), definition of adequate progress, and use of professional judgments.”

Additionally, there are inconsistencies among school districts and states on the use of the IQ/Achievement discrepancy criteria, use of Response to Intervention (RTI) and Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) models, and use of Personal Support Worker (PSW).

Practitioner Roles in Identifying RDs

In response to the first area of ‘Practitioner Roles in Identifying RDs’, participation reported the following practitioners, from most to least, directly assessing students for suspected RDs: school psychologists, speech and language pathologists, special educators, reading specialists, and classroom teachers. 

Multiple professionals conduct reading and writing assessments to identify RDs, while cognitive and language assessments tend to be conducted by school psychologists and speech and language pathologists.

Practitioner Training

In response to the second area of ‘Practitioner Training’, speech and language pathologists generally reported receiving less graduate training, while school psychologists frequently reported more graduate training on identifying RDs than those in other professions.

Practitioners in clinical settings and those with more training on this topic report higher levels of confidence compared to practitioners in school settings.

Measures and Procedures used to Identify RDs

In response to the third area of ‘Measures and Procedures used to Identify RDs”, more than 75% of participants indicated that they always evaluate word reading, reading comprehension, and reading fluency.

Practitioners in clinical settings less frequently indicated that they select measures based on accessibility and more frequently indicated that they select measures based on their validity and reliability. On the other hand, school-based practitioners primarily use measures available in their setting that they have been trained to use. 

The most commonly reported criteria included: failure to respond to intervention, an IQ/Achievement Discrepancy, and scoring a standard deviation or more below the population mean. 

The differences show that the criteria used to identify specific learning disabilities in reading vary across, and sometimes within, school settings.

Limitations

The limitations in this study are mainly related to the recruitment process.

Given the nonrandom sampling approach, these results cannot be expected to generalize to all practitioners across school and clinical settings in the United States. Moreover, participants from Massachusetts were oversampled and

medical professionals with roles in diagnosing RDs were underrepresented.

It is recommended in future studies to recruit more representative samples of practitioners, conduct qualitative evaluations that include practitioner

Interviews, and explore the role of student-level characteristics and contextual factors.

Summarized Article:

Al Dahhan, N. Z., Mesite, L., Feller, M. J., & Christodoulou, J. A. (2021). Identifying Reading Disabilities: A Survey of Practitioners. Learning Disability Quarterly, 44(4), 235–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0731948721998707

Summary by: Michael Ho—Michael supports the MARIO Framework because it empowers learners to take full control of their personalized learning journey, ensuring an impactful and meaningful experience.

Additional References:

  1. Mellard, D. F., McKnight, M., & Woods, K. (2009). Response to Intervention screening and progress-monitoring practices in 41 local schools. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(4), 186–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5826.2009.00292.x
  2. Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2002). On babies and bath-water: Addressing the problems of identification of learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 25(3), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511299

Key Takeaway

Tiered prevention models to promote student learning outcomes have been evidenced to support educator well-being with teachers demonstrating self-efficacy and reduced levels of burnout relative to national norms. This suggests that the implementation of tiered systems could facilitate greater teacher efficacy and well-being as they feel more capable of meeting the educational needs of a diverse range of learners. —Ayla Reau 

Three-Tiered Models 

Many schools have adopted tiered systems like Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), Response to Intervention (RTI), Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS), Interconnected Systems Framework (ISF), and Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-tiered models (Ci3T). “These models offer a school-wide structure to provide educators with clarity of roles, prioritize evidence-based practices to promote all students’ learning, use data to proactively identify students who exhibit additional needs, and inform targeted interventions to address identified needs.” 

Past research suggested that the use of tiered systems at the elementary level could lead to an increase in “educators’ commitment to students and positive feelings toward colleagues.” Lane et al. wanted to extend this line of inquiry and examine educators’ well-being (efficacy and burnout) after two years of implementation of a Ci3T model in secondary schools. 

Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered Model

As with many three-tier models, Tier 1 in a Ci3T model encompasses all students and meets most student needs. Tier 2 supports are additive and provide support for 10% – 15% of students, while Tier 3 supports are intended for the 3% – 5% of students with the most intensive educational needs. The Ci3T model “relies on the use of evidence-based programs, practices, and interventions to meet students’ needs” and uses “data [from multiple sources] to inform instructional decisions and target professional learning opportunities.” It also is unique in how it addresses academic, behavioral, and social and emotional well-being in one model. 

Efficacy and Burnout

According to the authors, two other important terms to define are efficacy and burnout. 

  • Sense of efficacy relates to the “degree to which teachers feel confident in their ability to navigate effectively their environment to teach, engage, and manage student behavior.”
  • Burnout happens when “individuals’ abilities to cope with work-related stressors are overwhelmed, leading them to experience one or more of the three core constructs of burnout: emotional exhaustion, depersonalization (i.e., cynical and emotionally withdrawn), and a lack of personal accomplishment.”

Results

The results mirrored previous findings from the primary level educators. Reports from middle and high school teachers showed comparable emotional exhaustion levels with the national norm. However, they “reported substantially lower levels of depersonalization and higher levels of personal accomplishment.” With regard to the participants’ sense of efficacy, the authors found that “self-efficacy related to student engagement was below the national sample, but self-efficacy related to classroom management was above the national average.” Participant educators also reported higher levels of efficacy related to instructional strategies. 

Tiered systems such as Ci3T can offer educators pathways for data-informed decision-making at the student and educator level in order to connect students to relevant higher-tiered supports. “Tiered systems can [also] assist educators by offering clearly defined roles, school-wide policies and procedures, and a collaborative structure for general and special educators to collectively support students’ learning and well-being as well as educators’ well-being.” 

While the results are in favor of tiered system implementation in schools, the results featured in this study should be cautiously interpreted. Data from the study were confined to only one geographical locale and only one phase of Ci3T implementation (end of the second year of implementation). 

Summarized Article:

Lane, K. L., Oakes, W. P., Royer, D. J., Menzies, H. M., Brunsting, N. C., Buckman, M. M., Common, E. A., Lane, N. A., Schatschneider, C., & Lane, K. S. (2021). Secondary Teachers’ Self-Efficacy During Initial Implementation of Comprehensive, Integrated, Three-Tiered Models. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 23(4), 232–244. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098300720946628

Summary by: Ayla Reau—Ayla is excited to help continue to grow the MARIO Framework, seeing the potential for it to impact all students across any educational context.

Researchers Wendy Oakes, Kathleen Lane, and Nelson Brunsting were involved in the final version of this summary. 

Key Takeaway

Culturally responsive parent advocacy programs, like FIRME, are necessary elements of any special education program. If parents aren’t informed, empowered, and prepared to advocate for their child’s rights, then the entire system suffers. School personnel lose a powerful partner and children miss out on the inclusion of the people who know their strengths and needs best. —Erin Madonna

Rios, Burke, and Aleman-Tovar’s study focused on Latinx families with children who have intellectual and/or developmental disabilities (IDD), including autism spectrum disorders (ASD). The study inquired into one avenue, a pilot-test of the Familias Incluidas en Recibiendo Mejor Educación Especial (FIRME) advocacy program, for removing systemic barriers for Latinx families so that they are better able to ensure that their children are receiving the special education or disability services they deserve. 

Previous studies have shown that special education knowledge, empowerment, and advocacy are all aspects that can remove systemic barriers for families of students with disabilities.1-4 Increased parental stress can also impact a family’s preparedness to advocate for and access disability services.5 Increased levels of stress can be particularly challenging when other barriers exist simultaneously, such as language differences, lack of resources, inequitable power dynamics, or racism exhibited by school personnel. The study utilized both surveys (quantitative) and interviews (qualitative) to articulate the results of the FIRME program’s use with Latinx families of students with IDD.

Culturally-Responsive Approach

Knowing all of this and employing it successfully through an advocacy program within the Latinx community also requires culturally responsive practices, which the authors considered carefully in their recruitment phase as well as throughout the study. Prior to inviting parents to participate in the study, the authors volunteered with Latinx groups and conducted other research projects within the community in order to develop relationships of trust with the families. The sessions were organized in locations accessible by public transportation and participants were provided a small stipend for their time. The FIRME program was delivered in Spanish and families had the option to conduct their interviews in their preferred language.

Research Questions:

  • “Does FIRME affect parental perceptions of parent (i.e., knowledge, advocacy skills, empowerment, and stress) and child (i.e., unmet service need outcomes) outcomes among Latinx parents of children with IDD?
  • How do Latinx parents of children with IDD perceive the feasibility of FIRME?”

Author’s Hypotheses:

  • “The FIRME program would increase special education knowledge; advocacy; empowerment; and access to services and decrease stress.
  • The FIRME program would be feasible as demonstrated by: a high attendance rate; a low attrition rate; and positive participant satisfaction.”

Primary Findings:

  • Participants’ knowledge of special education, their sense of self-efficacy around issues of advocacy, and their feelings of empowerment all increased post-intervention.
  • The measured stress levels of participants increased over the course of the intervention, indicating that the FIRME intervention needs to better address participant stress moving forward. 
  • Despite a high attrition rate (53.5%), regular attendance and high rates of satisfaction were reported by those participants who completed the program. 

In the Families’ Words

A powerful aspect of this study is the inclusion of the parents’ personal reflections. While causation could not be established due to the lack of a control group, it is clear that the families involved perceived their participation in a positive light. As one family member stated, “I feel more confident to sit at the IEP meeting and disagree if something is said that I don’t agree with . . . and now, I could just ask questions as well, and if I don’t understand something, stop them [school personnel] and say, you know, I didn’t understand it . . . so, I feel really empowered.” One parent started a parent support group to share what she had learned, and another stated that “this [FIRME] will give me the opportunity in the future to help other parents of the Latinx community who have to know how to navigate the IEP.” Parents also reported feeling more supported post-intervention: “Yes, I really liked [hearing from other parents] because now I don’t feel that I am alone.”

Limitations and Implications for Future Research:

The authors note that, while promising, the findings should be considered with the following understandings and recommendations in mind:

  • This was a single group intervention study, so only correlational inferences can be made.
  • The sample size was small and the attrition rate was high.
  • Exit interviews were not collected which means the authors were unable to identify all of the reasons participants dropped out.
  • Future research using a randomized controlled trial design should be conducted to investigate the effectiveness of the FIRME intervention through a causal lens.
  • Longitudinal data should be collected in future studies to determine if the effects persist well beyond the end of the intervention.
  • Participant feedback should be considered when preparing future iterations, such as more sessions offered, the ability to have the FIRME coach review their child’s IEP with them in order to answer any questions unique to their situations, and the incorporation of stress reduction techniques.

Summarized Article:

Rios, K., Burke, M. M., & Aleman-Tovar, J. (2021). A Study of the Families Included in Receiving Better Special Education Services (FIRME) Project for Latinx Families of Children with Autism and Developmental Disabilities. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10803-020-04827-3

Summary by: Erin Madonna- Erin philosophically aligns with the MARIO Framework’s deeply rooted belief that all learners are capable, and she firmly believes in MARIO’s commitment to the use of evidence-based practices drawn from the field of multidisciplinary research.

Researcher Meghan M. Burke participated in the final version of this summary.

Additional References:

  1. Burke, M., Arnold, C., & Owen, A. (2018a). Identifying the correlates and barriers of future planning among parents of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities, 56(2), 90–100. https:// doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-56.2.90.
  2. Casagrande, K. A., & Ingersoll, B. R. (2017). Service delivery outcomes in ASD: Role of parent education, empowerment, and professional partnerships. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 26(9), 2386–2395. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0759-8.
  3. Cohen, S. R. (2013). Advocacy for the “Abandonados”: Harnessing cultural beliefs for latino families and their children with intellectual disabilities. Journal of Policy and Practice in Intellectual Disabilities, 10(1), 71–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/jppi.12021.
  4. Taylor, J. L., Hodapp, R. M., Burke, M. M., Waitz-Kudla, S. N., & Rabideau, C. (2017). Training parents of youth with autism spectrum disorder to advocate for adult disability services: Results from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 47, 846–857. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s10803-016-2994-z. 
  5. Trainor, A. A. (2010). Diverse approaches to parent advocacy during special education home-school interactions: Identification and use of cultural and social capital. Remedial and Special Education, 31(1), 34–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741932508324401.


Key Takeaway

The current diagnostic system for learning disabilities is not accurate enough to allow for all children to receive support when they are experiencing challenges in academic skills across the curriculum. —Frankie Garbutt

In this article, Peterson et al. (University of Colorado) investigated to what extent specific learning disabilities (SpLD) are truly specific because they argue that academic skills “correlate across the curriculum.” The researchers took a sample that was “overselected for learning disabilities.” To do this, they “intentionally included children across the full range of individual differences in this study in response to growing recognition that a dimensional, quantitative view of SLD [specific learning disability] is more accurate than a categorical view.” The authors analysed the data of almost 700 children ranging from age 8-16.

Often Students Struggle Across the Curriculum

The basis of their research was that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition collapses diagnoses of “Reading Disorder, Mathematics Disorder, Disorder of Written Expression, and Learning Disorder” into one overarching category of SpLD. Through their analysis of how learning disabilities are measured and diagnosed the authors argue that all skills overlap as “a student with difficulties in one area of the curriculum is more likely to have difficulties in other areas.”

An Umbrella Diagnosis Is Reasonable in Most Cases

The conclusion drawn from their intensive analysis was that the hierarchical nature of academic skills under a single umbrella of SpLD is reasonable. However, one argument is that diagnosing a student with a SpLD in spelling is not meaningful because this affects word reading, thus linking to SpLD in basic reading or dyslexia. Moreover, the data shows that students, who experience difficulties in writing and need support in this area would “benefit from support for other academic skills as well.” 


Therefore the question of “how to classify children who struggle across academic domains” within the current diagnostic system remains. Some children, who perform low across a range of academic skills, yet do not qualify for SpLD, lose out on support because there is “so little specificity to their profile” and the diagnostic system does not have enough specifiers “to describe children who have widespread academic difficulties and subsequent need for educational services.” 

Summarized article:  

Peterson, R. L., McGrath, L. M., Willcutt, E. G., Keenan, J. M., Olson, R. K., & Pennington, B. F. (2021). How specific are learning disabilities?. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 0022219420982981.

Summary by: Frankie Garbutt- Frankie believes that the MARIO Framework encourages students to become reflective, independent learners who progress at their own rate.

Key Takeaway:

More students with disabilities (SWD) are attending college today than ever before; yet, limitations of the current research base preclude the identification of evidence-based predictors of college success for SWD. However, several studies present promising evidence to influence post-secondary outcomes through the development of student-centered skills (i.e., learning and study strategies and self-advocacy). —Ashley Parnell

Establishing Evidence-Based Practices for Postsecondary Experience

More students with disabilities (SWD) are attending college today than ever before, with SWD accounting for more than 19% of all undergraduate students.1  While the presence of a disability does not negatively influence eventual graduation, SWD take longer to graduate and often find the transition to college more difficult than students without disabilities.2 As such, identifying evidence-based practices and predictors would help practitioners to better support secondary transition and the postsecondary experiences of SWD.   

The purpose of this systematic literature review was to determine whether evidence-based practices can be identified that influence or predict college success for SWD. Researchers identified 28 studies that analyzed factors related to student GPA, retention, and graduation according to their inclusion criteria. 

Articles were rated according to a modified version of the NTACT Quality Indicators criteria for correlational research to determine if sufficient information existed to identify evidence-based, research-based, and promising practices related to factors that impact student success. However, too few studies met these criteria indicating that the research base is not yet robust enough to confidently report evidence-based practices. Given the paucity and reasonable quality of the identified research base, the research team decided to move forward with the analysis of all articles. 

Moving Forward: Practice Implications & Future Research

The results of this analysis provide researchers and practitioners with key takeaways specific to future research and secondary transition planning. 

 Results suggest several critical implications for secondary transition:

  • Student-specific factors (i.e., characteristics & skills) rather than institutional factors influenced or predicted success in college.
  • Self-advocacy and understanding one’s disability, including one’s strengths and needs (including academic accommodations), should be a critical part of secondary transition planning.
  • Learning & study skill instruction should be infused throughout secondary academic coursework. 

To grow & develop the current research base, the research team suggests:

  • Increases in research funding to support identification of research-based practices for improving postsecondary outcomes for SWD.
  • Employ more rigorous methodologies and examine long-term measures.
  • Further examination of predictors such as self-determination, college readiness, social connectedness, and integration.
  • Inclusion and consideration of student demographic details.

Summarized Article:

Madaus, J. W., Gelbar, N., Lyman, L. D., Taconet, A. & Faggella-Luby, M. (2020). Are there predictors of success for students with disabilities pursuing postsecondary education?. Career Development and Transition for Exceptional Individuals, 44(4), 191-202. 

Summary by: Ashley M. Parnell — Ashley strives to apply the MARIO Framework to build evidence-based learning environments that support student engagement, empowerment, and passion and is working with a team of educators to grow and share this framework with other educators.

Additional References:

  1. National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). IPEDS 2019-20 data collection system. United States Department of Education.
  2. Knight, W., Wessel, R., & Markle, L. (2018). Persistence to graduation for students with disabilities: Implications for performance-based outcomes. Journal of College Students Retention: Research, Theory, & Practice. 19(4), 362-380.  

Key Takeaway:

The transition from high school to college presents significant challenges for students with ADHD given the reliance on strong executive functioning skills for successful academic performance and independent daily living. However, providing opportunities to develop in key areas such as self-determination prior to graduation from high school, both within educational and home environments, can help to improve college readiness for students with (and without) ADHD. —Taryn McBrayne

What was Shared:

While all first-year college students encounter challenges associated with the transition from high school to independent living, young adults with ADHD tend to face increased difficulties. According to Weyandt & DuPaul (2013),1 “college students with ADHD tend to have lower grade point averages (GPAs), take longer to graduate, and have higher dropout rates than those without ADHD.” In their article, authors Canu et al. (2021) seek to explore how “ADHD-related cognitive deficits” may impact the transition to college for those students diagnosed with ADHD. 

Canu et al. (2021) outline three key domains that may influence overall readiness and successful adaptation to higher education, including self-determination, academic skills, and daily living skills. 

Self Determination 

“Self-determined people understand their own strengths and weaknesses, can solve problems, regulate their behavior, and effectively make decisions.”2 As stated by Canu et al. (2021), students with ADHD tend to “have characteristics that could impede various facets of self-determination,” including challenges with executive functioning, behavioral inhibition, and self-regulation. 

Academic Skills 

“Different expectations of professors and the structural differences of the college curriculum” may make for increased academic challenges for students with ADHD. As Maitland & Quinn (2011)2 noted, “critical reading, note taking, study skills . . . are all among the competencies that are important” in supporting students with ADHD in their college careers.  

Daily Living Skills 

Canu et al. (2021) explain that “impairment in general life skills is positively associated with ADHD’s cardinal symptoms of hyperactivity–impulsivity and inattention.” Therefore, “skills such as money management . . . and organization of one’s living space [that] are important for successful transition to college”3 are more likely to be underdeveloped in those with ADHD.

Key Findings

Considering these three aforementioned domains, the authors conducted a study of 2,893 participants from 4 different universities across the United States, 347 of which identified as having ADHD. The key findings of the study can be found below: 

  • “Evident deficits emerged for the college students with ADHD in the readiness area of self-determination and academic readiness area (i.e., managing assignments, taking notes, and preparing for tests).”
  • “Even more distinct deficits in readiness were noted for college students with ADHD in the daily living area.”
  • Academic achievement in high school contributes to “at least a portion of the readiness gap between those with and without ADHD.”
  • Readiness deficits and their associated impacts were most notable in women with ADHD. 
  • It is important to note that previous treatment for ADHD (ie. medication), led to an increased likelihood that students were able to be more aware of and mitigate academic impairments related to ADHD, improving college readiness. 

Key Implications 

  1. Interventions at home or school prior to the end of high school may help to address readiness, particularly in the area of self-determination.  
  2. Collaboration between parent and child is key in preparing students with ADHD for college. Canu et al., suggest that “parents should promote experiences that can lead to readiness skill development as opposed to simply scaffolding the completion of their child’s tasks” (i.e., laundry, cooking, etc.). 

Future studies in this area should explore how identification as part of a minority group and socioeconomic status may influence overall readiness, and further investigation into the role of executive functioning in this transition is recommended. 

Summarized Article:

Canu, W. H., Stevens, A. E., Ranson, L., Lefler, E. K., LaCount, P., Serrano, J. W., Willcutt, E., & Hartung, C. M. (2021). College Readiness: Differences Between First-Year Undergraduates With and Without ADHD. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 54(6), 403–411. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022219420972693 

Summary by: Taryn McBrayne — Taryn believes in the power of student voice and, through the MARIO Framework, strives to create more opportunities for both educators and students to regularly make use of this power.

Researcher Will Canu participated in the final version of this summary.

Additional References:

  1. Weyandt, L. L., & DuPaul, G. J. (2013). The performance of college students with and without ADHD: Neuropsychological, academic, and psychosocial functioning. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 35, 421–435.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-013-9351-8
  2. Maitland, T. E. L., & Quinn, P. O. (2011). Ready for takeoff: Preparing your teen with ADHD or LD for college. Magination Press.
  3. Sibley, M. H., & Yeguez, C. E. (2018). Managing ADHD at post-secondary transition: A qualitative study of parent and young adult perspectives. School Mental Health, 10, 352–371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12310-018-9273-4