Effective teaching and learning for students with autism requires special education teachers to possess a secure understanding of evidence-based practices and how to implement them. In the state of Texas, however, there is a significant research-to-practice gap that indicates a strong demand for improvement in the way teachers receive ongoing training in order to meet the needs of students with autism. – Akane Yoshida
The Research-to-Practice Gap
The role ofspecial needs teachers working to integrate students with learning differences in public schools requires a multitude of skills, not least of which is the ability to keep up with the most current research on evidence-based practices (EBP).
However, as Hamrick et al. note, there is a substantial body of research to show that while school administrators perceive their special education teachers to be well-versed in best practices,1 special education teachers report low preparedness for teaching students with autism the key skills they lack.2 Furthermore, teachers who report low understanding of EBP are more likely to use practices that are unsupported by research or even potentially harmful, such as facilitated communication or the rapid prompting method.2
Regarding instructional strategies, Hamrick et al. chose 35 interventions, of which 26 were documented EBPs and nine were practices that were deemed to be lacking in evidence:
Evidence-Based Practices
– antecedent based interventions – differential reinforcement – discrete trial training – exercise – extinction – functional behavior assessment – functional communication training – modeling – naturalistic interventions – peer-mediated instruction and intervention – picture exchange communication system (PECS) – pivotal response training – prompting – reinforcement – response interruption/redirection – scripting – self-management – social narratives – social skills training – structured play groups – task analysis – technology-aided instruction – time delay – video modeling – visual supports
Unsupported Practices
– auditory integration training – facilitated communication – floor-time – holding therapy – language acquisition through motor planning (LAMP) – music therapy – play therapy – rapid prompting method – sensory integration therapy – touch therapy
Findings and Implications for Public Education
The 255 participants involved in this study were individuals who were employed as special educators at various public schools in the state of Texas and had direct connections with students with autism, either through teaching, working with, or case-managing students with autism or intellectual disabilities (ID).
While the study is limited by its relatively small sample of participants and the lack of diversity among said sample, the results nonetheless agree with those of previous studies in that interventions used by special educators with students with autism are not necessarily evidence-based.
The EBPs reported by more than 50% of educators as being used on a daily basis include differential reinforcement (56.21), discrete trial (50.44), exercise (52.10), functional communication training (58.62), modeling (77.78), PECS (63.16), prompting (84.00), reinforcement (89.89), response interruption/redirection (RIRD; 74.42), self-management (55.77), technology-aided instruction (58.82), time delay (60.49), and visual supports (82.84).
Over 50% of participants also reported using several practices with no supporting evidence, such as facilitated communication (62.82), language acquisition through motor planning (52.38), rapid prompting method (58.82), sensory integration therapy (51.95), and touch therapy (53.33).
More than 50% of participants reported being very prepared to use only two EBPs—prompting (50.30) and reinforcement (53.22).
The authors point out that this clearly indicates a need for more in-depth training on EBP at the teacher training stage to prepare teachers for the specific demands of meeting the needs of students with autism.
However, an additional finding of the study is that despite the majority of training and resources offered by the state education agency being free online, only 5% of participants reported accessing online training, with over 50% of participants indicating no training for 19 of the 35 interventions in question.
Hamrick et al. state:
“State-funded agencies responsible for providing professional development and training for educators should look at the current findings to explore additional ways to provide training opportunities that provide additional face-to-face time to increase teacher knowledge and use of EBP when working with children with [autism]. In addition, these agencies should look at ways to disseminate information about the current online trainings teachers have access to…developing a plan to ensure local education agencies specialists and/or curriculum coaches are aware of these trainings and how to access them could potentially increase the number of educators accessing the online resources.“
They further suggest that educational agencies “could also consider extending their online services to include coaching and feedback” and that forming collaborative partnerships with university programs could spark meaningful change in the way teacher training programs address the research-to-practice gap.
Other recommendations include identifying clear standards for professional development, such as requiring educators to attend training for EBP rather than simply requiring a minimum number of professional development hours within a window of time, and involving teachers as participants in public education research in order to provide them with opportunities to increase their knowledge and application of EBP.
Summarized Article:
Hamrick, J., Cerda, M., O’Toole, C., & Hagen-Collins, K. (2021). Educator Knowledge and Preparedness for Educating Students With Autism in Public Schools. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 1088357621989310.
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:
Pazey, B. L., Gevarter, C., Hamrick, J., & Rojeski, L. (2014). Administrator views and knowledge of instructional practices for students with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders , 8 (10), 1253–1268.
Knight, V. F., Huber, H. B., Kuntz, E. M., Carter, E. W., & Juarez, A. P. (2018). Instructional practices, priorities, and preparedness for educating students with autism and intellectual disability. Focus on Autism and Other Developmental Disabilities, 34 (1), 3–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/108835761875569
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
Interventions at home or school prior to the end of high school may help to address readiness, particularly in the area of self-determination.
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:
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
Maitland, T. E. L., & Quinn, P. O. (2011). Ready for takeoff: Preparing your teen with ADHD or LD for college. Magination Press.
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
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
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:
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
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
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
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
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:
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 is a scarcity of research focusing on individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing (d/Dhh). Studies show that mathematical performance in d/Dhh students depends more on general cognitive abilities than on specific numerical abilities. This puts emphasis on the importance of general abilities for the development of mathematical abilities during the preschool years that can be rooted in the real world. — Jay Lingo
Why Study Math Achievement for Students Who Are Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing?
There is much research on hearing children and children with mathematical learning disabilities that shows that mathematical performance is dependent on general cognitive and specific numerical abilities. However, there is a scarcity of research focusing on individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing (d/Dhh). This current study aims to examine the contributions of three general cognitive abilities (nonverbal IQ, processing speed, and spatial ability) and two specific numerical abilities (symbolic and non-symbolic numerical magnitude processing) to curriculum-based math achievement in d/Dhh students.
In order to fully understand this study, it is important to build a common definition of these abilities. Nonverbal IQ is the ability to analyze information and solve problems using visual or hands-on reasoning. Processing speed is the time it takes a person to process visual or auditory information. Spatial ability is the ability to transform and rotate objects in mental space. In addition, we could use a common example to identify symbolic and non-symbolic stimuli. Symbolic stimuli are abstract concepts such as digits while non-symbolic stimuli are concrete representations such as a tally or dot array.
“Decades of research have consistently shown that d/Dhh children lag behind their hearing peers in mathematics.”1,2 This leaves us with questions such as, what are the factors that could affect this? How do we determine predictors which may raise potential opportunities for numerical development?
Results: General Cognitive Abilities Better Predict Math Achievement
This study found that general cognitive abilities, such as spatial ability and processing speed, were the predictors of mathematics achievement in d/Dhh students rather than specific numerical abilities. This emphasizes the “importance of general abilities for the development of mathematical abilities during the preschool years,” “especially for children who have difficulties in mathematical learning.”
The specific ways of training general cognitive abilities can be rooted in the real world. For example, educators and teachers can use regular activities such as paper folding, paper cutting, and LEGO construction to develop children’s spatial ability. Some teachers in the study took advantage of technology and used a virtual game to improve the spatial ability of d/Dhh children. These teachers found that practicing with virtual reality 3D spatial rotations significantly improved the performance of spatial rotation in d/Dhh students. “Even findings from brain imaging studies also suggest similar patterns of brain activation in the completion of spatial and mathematics tasks.”3,4
What about the numerical abilities, are they not considered to be important? According to Chen and Wang, statistically, there is still a “significant correlation between participants’ symbolic and non-symbolic numerical magnitude processing and their mathematics achievement,” but these specific abilities only become more important in primary school.5
In conclusion, mathematical performance in d/Dhh students depends more on general cognitive abilities such as spatial ability and processing speed than on specific numerical abilities. This puts more emphasis on strengthening general cognitive abilities to improve the mathematical performance in d/Dhh students who are at risk for mathematical learning problems.
Summarized Article:
Chen, L., & Wang, Y. (2021). The contribution of general cognitive abilities and specific numerical abilities to mathematics achievement in students who are deaf or hard-of-hearing. Journal of Developmental and Physical Disabilities, 33(5), 771-787.
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.
Additional References:
Swanwick, R., Oddy, A., & Roper, T. (2005). Mathematics and deaf children: An exploration of barriers to success. Deafness and Education International, 7(1), 1–21.
Gottardis, L., Nunes, T., & Lunt, I. (2011). A synthesis of research on deaf and hearing children’s mathematical achievement. Deafness and Education International, 13(3), 131–150.
Hubbard, E. M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(6), 435–448.
Umiltà, C., Priftis, K., & Zorzi, M. (2009). The spatial representation of numbers: Evidence from neglect and pseudoneglect. Experimental Brain Research, 192(3), 561–569.
Passolunghi, M. C., & Lanfranchi, S. (2012). Domain-specific and domain-general precursors of mathematical achievement: A longitudinal study from kindergarten to first grade. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 42–63.
Key Takeaway
Elementary students with or at risk of emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD) often experience failure and frustration in mathematics. With high-quality instruction and motivation strategies, such as reinforcing engagement, self-monitoring strategies, and using the high-p strategy, we can improve student engagement and motivation to scaffold learning. — Jay Lingo
We often hear about repeated experiences of frustration and failure in the mathematics classroom, more so for students with or at risk of emotional and behavioral disorders (EBD). “In regards to mathematics performance, 92% of students with EBD had significant deficits in mathematics. These feelings of incompetence could lead to loss of motivation and engagement which are important for academic success.”
In order to address this, general and special educators can promote engagement in math with three motivation strategies: (1) reinforcement strategies (2) self-monitoring of attention (SMA), and (3) high preference strategy. These strategies combined with high-quality, effective mathematics instruction will promote student success.
(1) Reinforcement strategies
“Praise statement that identifies a specific behavior for attending to and being engaged during mathematics instruction rather than a general praise leads to forming positive learning habits.” For example, “Lucas, great job cooperating with your group while you worked to solve that fraction problem.” Praises with behavioral description convey more authenticity and sincerity which increases the reinforcement.
Another strategy is a token economy system to simultaneously work on money and/or decimal concepts. For example, “Great work finding your division error and re-working the problem. I am adding a dollar and 25 cents to your token account for persistence.” We could be strategic in the timing of using the system by delivering tokens when they take risks or are off-task during group work to redirect their attention back to the task.
Educators could also use tech tools to help us remind ourselves to praise or deliver a token on a continuous loop. For example, a tactile prompting device such as iWatch sends a vibratory cue every 3-5 mins. Remembering to frequently and consistently reinforce engagement over an extended period of time makes this strategy more effective.
(2) Self-Regulation and Self-Monitoring
“Students with or at risk of EBD find self-regulation challenging. This is because it relies heavily on cognitive capacities such as working memory, inhibition, and attention.” Teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies to support learning and independence helps with this. For example, set a timer for every 5 or 10 minutes during mathematics instruction and circle “yes” or “no” when the timer sounds indicating whether or not the student was engaging in the previously defined attentive behavior. It is important that prior to this, baseline data is provided as well as teaching the student how to self-monitor. This process involves reviewing the target behavior, modeling examples and non-examples of the behavior, explaining when and how to record behavior using a self-monitoring checklist.
(3) The High Preference Strategy (High-p strategy)
Students could establish momentum when completing preferred tasks, and this momentum can carry over to facilitate the completion of non-preferred tasks. This strategy “greases the wheels” for students to tackle more effortful work. The high-p strategy also promotes engagement through increasing speed in task initiation and/or completion.
Try implementing these motivation strategies one at a time and see if it makes a difference for your students with EBD. Remember it’s important to keep track of data to see which strategies or combination of strategies work with each student. Even more important is working directly with the student to develop personalized goals for engagement and task completion.
Summarized Article:
Morano, S., Markelz, A. M., Randolph, K. M., Myers, A. M., & Church, N. (2021). Motivation Matters: Three Strategies to Support Motivation and Engagement in Mathematics. Intervention in School and Clinic, 1053451221994803.
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.
Researchers Stephanie Morano, Andrew M. Markelz, Kathleen M. Randolph, Anna M. Myers, and Naomi Church participated in the final version of this summary.
Key Takeaway
Strong interview performances are an essential part of obtaining employment and internship opportunities in today’s society. However, research indicates that those with disabilities face increased barriers in performing well on interviews, suggesting that transition-age youth who receive special education pre-employment services (Pre-ETS) may benefit from explicit interview training in high school as a means to increase vocational outcomes. — Taryn McBrayne
Transition-Age Youth and Interview Training
Transition-age youth (TAY) are defined in this article as those who are between the ages of 16 and 22 and who qualify for special education services. Often transition-age youth receive school-based support to assist with the transition from high school to adult life. However, data suggests that employment rates remain low amongst TAY in the United States.1 In their article, Smith et al. (2021) “aim to fill key gaps in the literature on job interviewing in TAY receiving special education pre-employment transition services (Pre-ETS) . . . at schools in urban, suburban, and rural locales.”
In their study, the researchers collected data from 47 schools across Michigan, Illinois, and Florida and evaluated “vocational interview history and outcomes among TAY prior to their school-level implementation of either Virtual Reality Job Interview Training (VR-JIT) or Virtual Interview Training for Transition Age Youth (VIT-TAY).” As part of the study requirements, teachers and/or administrators at the selected schools were asked to complete two surveys on behalf of each TAY: 1) a survey focused on student demographics, including the appropriate disability category as determined by the 13 disability categories according to Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and 2) “TAYs’ employment histories with regard to their current and lifetime employment at competitive and integrated jobs.” Both descriptive and inferential analyses were used to assess the collected data.
Survey Results
The results of the study can be summarized as follows:
The researchers observed that the age of TAY was an independent variable that affected outcomes.
“88.8% of TAY who were currently employed interviewed for their job,” which supports the need for interview training as part of Pre-ETS.
It was found that “TAY with a specific learning disability had greater odds of ever having been employed as compared to TAY with other disabilities,” including autism and intellectual disability. Such findings suggest that “autistic TAY and TAY with intellectual disability may need more intensive and individualized interventions and supports within Pre-ETS.”
“TAY with emotional disturbance . . . had greater odds of ever having been employed.”
In regards to internship opportunities, the data found that “21.7% of TAY were currently in an unpaid internship and 8.3% were currently in paid internships,” with TAY with a specific learning disability having lower odds of unpaid internships compared to others.
“Approximately 30% of unpaid and paid internships were obtained after completing an interview, which did not differ across the diagnostic subgroups.”
Study Limitations
Although the focus of the study was on interviewing and vocational outcomes, Smith et al. (2021) and Sullivan & Artiles2 (2011) note the importance of further investigating the prevalence of racial disparities among the disability categories indicated in this study in the future.
Smith et al. (2021) also outline limitations in their study. The authors emphasize that the results of their study may not be largely generalizable due to the fact that their study did not sample a nationally representative group, both in terms of geographic location and a school’s access to resources. In addition, Smith et al. (2021) acknowledge the possible presence of selection bias in their study given that schools who agreed to participate in the study may have been better prepared to conduct interviews with their students and prepare TAY for these interviews.
Ultimately, the authors conclude that the results from their study reinforce the “importance of implementing evidence-based job interviewing skills training within pre-employment transition services.”
Summarized Article: Smith, M. J., Sherwood, K., Blajeski, S., Ross, B., Smith, J. D., Jordan, N., Dawalt, L., Bishop, L., & Atkins, M. S. (2021). Job Interview and Vocational Outcomes Among Transition-Age Youth Receiving Special Education Pre-Employment Transition Services. Intellectual and developmental disabilities, 59(5), 405–421. https://doi.org/10.1352/1934-9556-59.5.405
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.
Sullivan, A. L., & Artiles, A. J. (2011). Theorizing racial inequity in special education: applying structural inequity theory to disproportionality. Urban Education, 46(6), 1526–1552.
Key Takeaway
Metacognitive awareness (MA) is a significant predictor of academic achievement, enabling learners to take charge of their own learning by increasing their self-reliance, flexibility, and productivity. Teachers’ ability to create learning environments that support the development of MA is crucial to successful, life-long academic and social-emotional learning. —Ashley Parnell
Three Core Components of Metacognitive Awareness
Metacognitive Awareness (MA) means being aware of how you think and learn, and involves the ability to reflect on, monitor, and evaluate your learning and learning strategies. This study sought to examine teachers’ perceived support for learners’ metacognitive awareness in relation to three core components of MA:
Knowledge of learning objects—to foster declarative (knowing what) & conditional (knowing why) metacognitive knowledge, teachers stimulate student understanding of what they know, what they need to know, and why they need to know and then support students in goal-setting.
Regulation of learning strategies—to cultivate the planning, monitoring, and debugging of learning strategies, teachers guide students in identifying their own learning strategies, utilizing problem-solving strategies to monitor and modify those strategies as needed.
Self-evaluation—to guide self-evaluation of knowledge and regulation, teachers use questioning strategies to support the learning in evaluating their learning progress and associated learning strategies.
Differences in Perceived Support by Discipline
Specifically, the researchers explored the differences in perceived support of MA across teacher groups, including subject teachers in both vocational education and training (VET) (those who teach skills needed in working life) and general education (GE) (those who teach all-round education), in addition to special education teachers.
Participants included 1,045 secondary vocational education and training (VET) subject teachers, GE subject teachers, and special teachers in Finland. Using the Inventory of Teacher’s Metacognition Support (ITEMS), teachers rated their practice of instructional strategies and scaffolds that effectively support the development of the three-component model of MA.
Results revealed the following differences or lack thereof:
Special education teachers support learners’ MA more than VET and GE subject teachers across all components except self-evaluation of knowledge of learning—an area which was better supported by VET teachers than special education teachers.
Perceived support varied between groups of subject areas in GE (i.e. math, physics, & chemistry vs. biology & geography) and components of MA.
Women systematically supported learners’ MA more than men.
Experienced teachers provided slightly more support for students’ MA than less experienced teachers, particularly teachers holding a Master’s degree.
These findings, considered alongside the critical role of teachers in effectively teaching and supporting the development of MA through instructional practices, confirm the importance of:
developing MA support capabilities during pre-service and in-service teacher education;
increasing collaboration between junior and senior teachers;
recognition of the value and impact of metacognitive awareness and understanding across all levels of education.
Summarized Article:
Kallio, H., Kallio, M., Virta, K., Iiskala, T., & Hotulainen, R. (2020). Teachers’ Support for Learners’ Metacognitive Awareness. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2020.1755358
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.
Key Takeaway
Training for Family Professional Partnerships (FPP) skills in institutions of higher education is essential to provide special educators with the skills needed in supporting families and fostering an inclusive school culture. The FPP skills taught in universities focus on communication, perspective-taking, self-awareness, and legally required skills through the use of case studies, stories, parent interviews, developing communication materials, and volunteering. —Tanya Farrol
Family Professional Partnerships
Building strong Family Professional Partnerships (FPP) is key to successful students in schools. This article explores ways that special education teacher training can support and develop positive partnerships.
Many special educators have found it challenging to develop positive FPPs, noting that families often feel “devalued and powerless”1 in Individual Education Plan (IEP) meetings. While there are many barriers in fostering strong FPPs, most notably is a lack of teacher preparation in universities or higher education. Researchers found that “novice teachers generally feel unprepared to communicate and partner with families, and report that their teacher preparation programs did not address the issue effectively.”2
This study focuses on the decision-making processes of special education faculty in delivering FPP content and skills in higher education. The study collected data using a previous survey where respondents were asked if they would be interested in a follow-up interview study.
Eighteen participants were interviewed over the phone according to the following protocol: a) demographic information; b) definition of FPP; c) skills and activities used in preparing students for building FPP; and d) preparing students for disputes with families. Based on the interviews, the answers were codified using the NVivo qualitative software program and organized into categories as indicated below.
Definition of FPP
FPP was defined as “educators and families working together to determine and meet student needs”. Here, the intention of FPP was to prioritize working with families as partners and capitalizing on the strengths and the expertise that families bring to a partnership.
FPP Skills
Communication skills are key in establishing relationships. Teachers should use multiple means of communicating with parents—face to face, emails, phone calls, letters, etc.—and ask parents how they would like to be contacted.
Teachers should not only reach out to parents during IEP times but also when their child has a positive experience in the classroom. Teachers should actively listen to parents and make sure their body language indicates genuine interest in what families are telling them.
Perspective-taking skills focus on understanding the parents’ point of view in order to build relationships and empathy. Teachers may either deem a parent to be over- or under-involved in their child’s education and must learn to look beyond that as many families don’t “have the same tools and resources and knowledge that [they] have.” Also, there may be cultural barriers or other circumstances at home (e.g. additional children with disabilities at home or the parent might have a ‘bad’ experience in a previous IEP meeting) that result in families not being able to work effectively with an educator. Teachers need to make positive assumptions and meet parents where they are to work together.
Self-awareness skills focus on the biases educators have and what cultural beliefs they hold. Teachers need to determine and understand their values and beliefs and how this affects their decision-making processes.
Legal requirement skills focus on understanding the legalities of family involvement in IEP processes under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Teachers need to be trained in knowing the procedural safeguards, legal requirements of parental involvement, and the rights and responsibilities of all people as they relate to the child with learning needs. Additionally, teachers need to know how to mediate if there is conflict between the family and the school or teachers.
Strategies for Teaching FPP Skills
University professors used the following means to support learning FPP skills and building empathy and understanding:
Stories—to build empathy and develop communication skills with families
Case Studies—to delve into cultural sensitivities, how to respond to different situations, and how to actively listen to families
Parent Interviews—determining how parents would like to be contacted and supports they have had in the past
Class Discussion & Group Work—practice role-playing various situations and determine how to increase parental collaboration
Developing Communication Materials—providing a list of resources for support or templates for running an IEP meeting
Volunteering—creating opportunities to work with parents in a different environment (possibly non-academic)
The implications for this study are especially important as many universities need to institute a programmatic focus on teaching FPP skills. This means further research needs to be conducted into evidence-based FPP practices and research into how to enhance FPP in a virtual setting. This virtual perspective has become particularly evident during the pandemic when educators are relying on parents for information about their child and need strong partnerships in order to support the student in their learning.
Summarized Article:
Francis, G. L., Kilpatrick, A., Haines, S. J., Gershwin, T., Kyzar, K. B., & Hossain, I. (2021). Special education faculty decision-making regarding designing and delivering family-professional partnership content and skills in the U.S. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103419
Summary by: Tanya Farrol – Tanya believes that the MARIO Framework is a personalized learning experience that develops skills and empowers learners to become an integral part of their learning journey.
Additional References
Mueller, T.G. & Vick, A.M. (2019) Rebuilding the family-professional partnerships through facilitated Individualized Education Programs meetings: A conflict prevention and resolution practice. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 111.
de Bruïne, E.J. et. al. (2014) Preparing teacher candidates for family-school partnerships. European Journal of Teacher Education, 37 (4), 409-425. http://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2014.912628
Curious how MARIO Education can enhance your school’s advisory or learning support programs? Schedule a no-obligationdemo with our team and discover how our innovative tools and 1-to-1 learning conversations can elevate student success and well-being in your school. Book your demo today!
