Instructional Adaptation and Teachers’ Productivity in Inclusive Education Classrooms with Learners with Autism
Keywords:
Instructional Adaptation, Collaborative Learning, One-to-one Instruction, Ipsative Assessment, Teachers’ Productivity, AutismAbstract
Students in our schools are educated in inclusive settings now more than ever before. Autism spectrum disorders are lifelong developmental disabilities that can impact how people understand what they see, hear and otherwise sense. The present study that was carried out in Mezam Division of the North West Region of Cameroon, was aimed at examining the effects of instructional adaptation on teachers’ productivity in classrooms with learners with autism. Specifically, the study was guided by three objectives, namely, to examine the effects of ipsative assessment on teachers’ productivity in classrooms with learners with autism; to assess the effects of one to one instruction on teachers’ productivity in classrooms with learners with autism; and to investigate the effects of collaborative learning on teachers’ productivity in classrooms with learners with autism. Theoretically, the study made use of Vygotsky’s social constructivist theory of cognitive development; Tchombe’s theory of mediated mutual reciprocity; Bandura’s self-efficacy and social cognitive theory. Methodologically, the study made use of mixed research method with the use of both quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection and analysis. A concurrent nested design was used for the study. A sample of 15 teachers who had children with autism was selected from inclusive schools within the Division. The study was conducted using three instruments for data collection, namely questionnaire for teachers, observation guide for children with autism and focus group discussion guide for teachers. The findings of the study revealed that collaborative learning significantly predicts productivity, explaining 87.9% of its variation. For every unit increase in collaborative learning, productivity increases by 0.603, while age negatively affects productivity (β = -2.064, p = 0.006). One-to-one instruction significantly predicts teacher productivity, explaining 83.7% of its variation. For every unit increase in one-to-one instruction, productivity increases by 0.597 (β = 0.597, p = 0.004). Ipsative assessment has a positive and statistically significant impact on teacher productivity. The coefficient for ipsative assessment is 0.631 with a standard error of 0.166 and a p-value of 0.004. It is therefore recommended that teachers should provide children with autism with clear assessment rules that do no lead to competition with other learners but concentrate on their previous and current learning outcomes.
References
1. Alberta Education, (2003). Teaching Students with Autism Spectrum Disorders. Alberta Learning. Special Programs Branch.
2. American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association
3. Bandura, A. (1984). Self-efficacy. In V.S. Ramachaudran (Ed.). Encyclopaedia of human behaviour. Academic Press, pp71-81.
4. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
5. Baumgart, D., Brown, L., Pumpian, I., Nisbet, J., Ford, A., Sweet, M., Messina, R., & Schroeder, J. (1982). Principle of partial participation and individualized adaptations in educational programs for severely handicapped students. The Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 7 (2), 17-43.
6. Bettelheim, B. (1967). The empty fortress: Infantile autism and the birth of the self. Brunner; [Google Scholar]
7. Bohning, K. (2000). Curricular and instructional adaptations for special needs students in the general education setting students in the general education setting. Graduate Research Papers. 421. https://scholarworks.uni.edu/grp/421
8. Burks, B., Beziat, T., Danley, S., Davis, K., Lowery, H., & Lucas, J. (2015). Adapting to change: Teacher perceptions of implementing the Common Core State Standards. Education, Vol. 135, No. 2, pp. 253-258.
9. Carroll, R. A. Kodak, T. & Adolf, K. J. (2016). Effect of delayed reinforcement on skill acquisition during discrete-trial instruction: Implications for treatment-integrity errors in academic settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis. 49(1):176–181. doi: 10.1002/jaba.268. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Churchill, D. W., Alpern, G. D., & DeMyer, M. K. (1971). Infantile autism: Proceedings of the Indiana University Colloquium. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
11. Cousin, P., & Duncan, A. (1997). Collaborative conversations: Learning in inclusive communities. Primary Voices K-6, 5 (3), 3-10.
12. Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Evaluating teacher effectiveness: How teacher performance assessments can measure and improve teaching. Washington, DC: Center for American Progress.
13. Datnow, A. (2018). Time for change? The emotions of teacher collaboration and reform. Journal of Professional Capital and Community, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 157-172. DOI: 10.1108/JPCC 12-2017-0028
14. Delquadri, J. C., Greenwood, C. R., Stretton, K., & Hall, R. V. (1983). The peer tutoring spelling game: A classroom procedure for enhancing opportunity to respond and spelling performance. Education and Treatment of Children, 6. (3), 225-239.
15. Deschenes, C., Ebeling, D., & Sprague, J. (1994). Adapting curriculum and instruction in inclusive classrooms: A teacher's desk reference. Bloomington, IN: Institute for the Study of Developmental Disabilities.
16. Eikeseth S, Smith T, Jahr E, Eldevik S. (2002). Intensive behavioral treatment at school for 4- to 7-year-old children with autism. Behavior Modification.;26(1):49–68. doi: 10.1177/0145445502026001004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
17. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., & Ferguson, C. (1992). Effects of expert system consultation within curriculum-based measurement using a reading maze task. Exceptional Children. 58 (5), 436-450.
18. Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C. L., Phillips, N., & Karns, K. (1995). General educator's specialized adaptations for students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 61 (5), 440-459.
19. Golomb, K., & Hammeken, P. (1996). Grappling with inclusion confusion? Learning. 24 (4), 48-51.
20. Goodwin, B. (2010). Changing the odds for student success: What matters most. Denver, CO: Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning (McREL)
21. Hall, L. J. (1997). Effective behavioural strategies for the defining characteristics of autism. Behaviour Change. 14(2):139–154. doi: 10.1017/S0813483900003442. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
22. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.
23. Hughes, G. (2007). Using blended learning to increase learner support and improve retention. Teaching in Higher Education, 12(3), pp. 351-365.
24. Hughes, G. (2011). Aiming for Personal Best: a Case for Introducing Ipsative Assessment in Higher Education. Studies in Higher Education, 36 (3): pp. 353 – 367.
25. Hughes, G. (2014, forthcoming). Ipsative Assessment: Motivation through marking progress. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
26. Jex, S. M. (2002). Organizational Psychology A Scientist: Practitioner Approach. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
27. Kaiser AP, & Hester PP. (1994). Generalized effects of enhanced milieu teaching. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research.;37(6):1320–1340. doi: 10.1044/jshr.3706.1320. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
28. Kaiser AP, & Roberts MY. (20120. Parent-implemented enhanced milieu teaching with preschool children who have intellectual disabilities. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research.;56(3):295–309. doi: 10.1044/1092-4388(2012/11-0231). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
29. Kasari C, Freeman S, &. Paparella T. (2006). Joint attention and symbolic play in young children with autism: A randomized controlled intervention study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 47(6):611–620. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01567.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
30. Koegel, R. L. O’Dell, M. C. & Koegel, L. K. (1987). A natural language teaching paradigm for nonverbal autistic children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.;17(2):187–200. doi: 10.1007/BF01495055. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
31. Levine, D. U., & Lezotte, L. W. (1990). Unusually Effective Schools. Madison, WI: Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.
32. Lovaas, O. I. (1971). Considerations in the development of a behavioral treatment program for psychotic children. In D. Churchill, G. Alpern, & M. DeMyer (Eds.). Infantile autism: Proceedings of the Indiana University Colloquium (pp. 124–144). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.
33. McEachin, J. J, Smith, T. & Lovaas, O. I. (1993). Long-term outcome for children with autism who received early intensive behavioral treatment. American Journal on Mental Retardation.;97(4):359–372. doi: 10.1352/0895-8017(1997)102<0238:ibtfpw>2.0.co;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
34. McKenny, E. L. W. & Bristol, R, M. (2015). Supporting intensive interventions for students with autism spectrum disorder: Performance feedback and discrete trial teaching. School Psychology Quarterly.;30(1):8–22. doi: 10.1037/spq0000060. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
35. Mercer, C., Lane, H., Jordan, L., Allsopp, D., & Eisele, M. (1996). Empowering teachers and students with instructional choices in inclusive settings. Remedial and Special Education, 17 (4), 226-236.
36. Miyamoto, K. (2008). The origins of the standards movement in the United States: Adoption of the written test and its influence on classwork. Educational Studies in Japan: International Yearbook, No. 3, pp. 27-40.
37. Paige, R. (2002). No Child Left Behind: A desktop reference. Jessup, MD: Education Publication Center. https://www.2.ed.gov/admins/lead/account/nclbreference/reference.pdf
38. Panitz, T., & Panitz, P. (2018). Encouraging the use of collaborative learning in higher education. University Teaching, 161–202. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429459092-7
39. Schopler, E. & Reichler, R. J. (1971). Psychobiological referents for the treatment of autism. In D. Churchill, G. Alpern, & M. DeMyer (Eds.), (1971). Infantile autism: Proceedings of the Indiana University Colloquium (pp. 243–264). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas
40. Schreibman L, Dawson G, Stahmer AC, Landa R, Rogers SJ, McGee GG, Kasari C, Ingersoll B, Kaiser AP, Bruinsma Y, McNerney E, Wetherby A,& Halladay A. (2015). Naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions: Empirically validated treatments for autism spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders.;45(8):2411–2428. doi: 10.1007/s10803-015-2407-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
41. Schreibman L, Minjarez M. B, & .Bruinsma Y. (2020). Considering future directions in NDBI. In: Bruinsma Y, Minjarez M, Schreibman L, Stahmer A, editors. Naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions for autism spectrum disorder. Brookes Publishing Co; pp. 407–413. [Google Scholar]
42. Schumm, J, & Vaughn, S. (1991). Making adaptations for mainstreamed students: General classroom teacher's perspectives. Remedial and Special Education.12 (4), 18-25.
43. Sedarmayanti. (2017). Tata Kerja dan Produktivitas Kerja. Bandung: Mandar Maju.
44. Slavin, R. E. (1990). Point-counterpoint: Ability grouping, cooperative learning and the gifted. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 14(1), 3–8. https://doi.org/10.1177/016235329001400102
45. Spooner F, & Browder DM. (2015). Raising the bar: Significant advances and future needs for promoting learning for students with severe disabilities. Remedial and Special Education. 36(1):28–32. doi: 10.1177/0741932514555022. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
46. Spooner F, Ahlgrim-Delzell L, Kemp-Inman A, & Wood LA. (2014). Using an iPad2 with systematic instruction to teach shared stories for elementary-aged students with autism. Research & Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities.;39(1):30–46. doi: 10.1177/1540796914534631. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
47. Suhrheinrich J, Rieth SR, Dickson KS, Roesch S, & Stahmer AC. (2020). Classroom Pivotal Response Teaching: Teacher training outcomes of a community efficacy trial. Teacher Education and Special Education. 43(3):215–234. doi: 10.1177/0888406419850876. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
48. Taubman, M. Brierley, S. Wishner, J. Baker, D. McEachin, J. & Leaf, R. B. (2001).The effectiveness of a group discrete trial instructional approach for preschoolers with developmental disabilities. Research in Developmental Disabilities.;22(3):205–219. doi: 10.1016/s0891-4222(01)00068-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
49. Tchombe, T.M.S. (2019). Psychological parameters in teaching: An African perspective to learning as a process for cognitive enrichment. Design House. The preamble of the constitution of Cameroon (1996).
50. Tiede G, & Walton KM. (2019). Meta-analysis of naturalistic developmental behavioral interventions for young children with autism spectrum disorder. Autism.;23(8):2080–2095. doi: 10.1177/1362361319836371. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
51. U.S. Department of Education (1995). 17th Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Washington, D.C.: Office of Special Education Programs. https://www2.ed.gov/pubs/OSEP95AnlRpt/cover.html
52. U.S. Department of Education. (2021). 42nd Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilties Education Act, 2020. Washington, D. C.: Office of Special Education Programs.https://sites.ed.gov/idea/files/42nd-arc-for-idea.pdf
53. Udvari-Solner, A. (1992). Curricular adaptations: Accommodating the instructional needs of diverse learners in the context of general education ( Monograph). Kansas State Board of Education-Services for Children and Youth with Deaf-Blindness Project.
54. Udvari-Solner, A. (1996). Examining teacher thinking: Constructing a process to design curricular adaptations. Remedial and Special Education, 17 (4), 245-254.
55. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and Society: The development of higher mental processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press
56. Wolf, M. M, Risley, T. R, & Mees, H. (1964). Application of operant conditioning procedures to the behavior problems of an autistic child. Behavior Research and Therapy.;1(4):305–312. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(63)90045-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
57. Yell, M. L, & Drasgow, E. (2000). Litigating a free appropriate public education: The Lovaas hearings and cases. The Journal of Special Education. 33(4):205–214. doi: 10.1016/0005-7967(63)90045-7. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
58. Ysseldyke, J. E., & Algozzine, B. (1990). Introduction to special education (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
59. Ysseldyke, J. E., Thurlow, M., Wotruba, J., & Nania, P. (1990). Instructional arrangements: Perceptions for general education. Teaching Exceptional Children, 22 (4), 4-7.
