Transcript Setting the Stage - National Center On Deaf

Using the Classroom Observation
Instrument for Educational Environments
Serving Students with Deaf-Blindness in
Order to Assist Low Incidence Classrooms
Ella Taylor, Kat Stremel, Nancy Steele
National Technical Assistance Consortium for
Children and Youth who are Deaf-Blind (NTAC)
Teaching Research Institute
Western Oregon University
Setting the Stage: Need
Too many children with deaf-blindness and
other complex impairments are often placed
in classrooms that demonstrate a
collaborative process of day care
Lack of a comprehensive framework that
outlined critical quality services and effective
practices in a user-friendly format
Lack of tools to identify “Model Classrooms”
for Technical Assistance
Uses for Instrument
Determination of a potential “Model
Classroom”
Determination of potential “Practicum sites”
for Personnel Preparation projects
Determination of additional Technical
Assistance needs to bring a classroom to
model status
Determination of additional TA needs
Alignment with Standards
Review of CEC’s Knowledge and Skill Base for
All Beginning Special Education Teachers of
Students in
Individualized General Curriculums
Individualized Independence Curriculums
Review of Competencies for Teachers of
Learners who are Deaf-Blind
Review of the Rhode Island Services to
Students with Dual Sensory Impairments
Instrument
Alignment: Interview
Deaf-Blind
Individualized
General Curriculum
Individualized
Independence
Curriculum
Deaf-Blindness
Foundations
Foundations
Personal Identity,
Relationships & SelfEsteem (PIRSE)
Developmental
Characteristics
Developmental
Characteristics
Hearing-Vision
Individual Learning
Differences
Individual Learning
Differences
Environment &
Materials
Instructional Planning
Instructional Planning
Professional & Ethical
Practice
Professional & Ethical
Practice
Alignment: Observation
Instrument
Deaf-Blind
CEC: IGC, IIC
Curriculum
Concept Development
Communication
O&M
Instructional Strategies
(IS), Learning
Environments (LE) &
Social Interactions (SI),
Instructional Planning
(IP), Collaboration
Data-based Assessment
Communication
Embedded throughout
IS, LE & SI, IP,
Assessment
Preservation of Dignity
PIRSE
LE & SI, Collaboration
Communication
PIRSE, Concept Development, Communication,
Environment & Materials
Individual Learning
Differences, IS, LE & SI,
Communication
Social
PIRSE
LE & SI
Assistive Technology
Comm., H-V, O & M,
Environment & Materials
IS, LE & SI, Comm.,
Collaboration
Design Phase
Items adapted from the three reviewed
documents
Focus groups
Stakeholders rank order items
Parents provide input on relative importance
of items/sections
Teachers provide input on format
Field testing across multiple classrooms
Re-design
Identified the most critical elements that
could be observed
Curriculum
Data-based assessment
Preservation of dignity
Communication
Social
Assistive Technology
Development of teacher interview section
Refinement of the rubric
Achieved, Nearly achieved, Making progress, Nonexistent, Not applicable
Research Phase 2
Field testing of the instrument in
classroom observation with interviews
Interview provides the context for the
observation
Interview helps focus everyone
Rubric options are more discriminating
Protocol is understandable
Outside Consultant Review
“The instrument has value for students
beyond a strict eligibility of deaf-blind.
Students who have multiple disabilities and
are severely sensory impaired would benefit
from this observational overview. All
reviewers urged a broader marketing and I
suggest that you disseminate to programs
that serve more than students who are deafblind.”
Validation Phase
Content validity -- achieved
Construct validity
Concurrent validity
• Identify exemplary classrooms and determine if
the observation instrument aligns with the
characteristics within the classroom
Reliability
Identification of Classrooms
Requested nominations
from directors of state
deaf-blind projects
From the nominations,
eight classrooms were
selected
Seven interviews and
observations were
conducted (one
dropped out)
Findings
Teacher interview is critical
Review of IEP by observer is not critical
Clear alignment in
Curriculum
Preservation of Dignity
Communication
Social
Assistive Technology
Not so clear alignment in
Data-based assessment
Validation Phase
Content validity -- achieved
Construct validity -- achieved
Concurrent validity
Reliability
Inter-rater reliability of 0.95
Review of the Instrument
Teacher Interview
Context of the classroom (# of students, # or
assistants, type of classroom, information
about students)
Teacher’s main goals for student(s)
Family involvement
Family communication about student’s needs
Review of the Instrument
Student’s areas of strengths and
weaknesses
How these are used in planning for
instruction?
Inclusion in general education
curriculum
Interaction with peers
Review of the Instrument
IEP Review (usually conducted through
teacher interview)
IEP goals
Educational assessments (cognitive,
adaptive, sensory and motor)
• How used for planning instruction?
Student’s vision and hearing
Curricular and instructional modifications
for functional vision and hearing
Curriculum
8 items
Daily schedule
Engagement in learning
Varied activities
O&M
Classroom management
IEP goals addressed
Varied participation
Data-Based Assessment
2 items
Student’s instructional program
demonstrates ongoing use of a data
system that measures student progress on
IEP objectives. Data are collected on a
regular and consistent basis.
Data are reviewed frequently to make
programmatic and instructional changes to
meet the student’s needs.
Preservation of Dignity
4 items
Age-appropriate and respectful
Care-giving and personal mgmt routines
Self-determination and choice making
Frequent opportunities for engagement
Communication
8 items
Receptive communication cues
Receptive communication
Access to communication
Communication functions
Expressive communication
Response time
Behavior
Communication partners
Social
3 items
Social skills
General education curriculum
Peer interaction
Assistive Technology
Description of AT available and AT used
AT used for vision, hearing,
communication, behavior, daily life skills
AT aligns with student’s IEP
AT incorporated into student’s
educational program as appropriate
Overall Impressions
What were areas of strength within this
classroom?
What areas need improvement within
this classroom?
What were your overall impressions of
this classroom for serving the needs of
students who are deaf-blind?
Scoring
Each section is equally weighted
Item score is based on rubric scale
Section score is total points for section
divided by total items
Do not count items with non-applicable
Case study
South Carolina
Staff had varying levels of expertise in
deaf-blindness (TVI, THI, SLP, O & M, EI)
Needed a simple tool for identification of
TA needs within a variety of classrooms
• Needed clear and concise way to provide
recommendations to classroom teachers
Classroom teachers needed to know what
the targets were
Implemented for one year with success
Next Steps
Potential revision for transition age and early
childhood
Volunteers for field testing transition
Volunteers for field testing early childhood (homebased)
Volunteers for field testing early childhood
(educational setting)
Using COI to collect data about classrooms
serving students with deafblindness