Adolescents with High Incidence Disabilities

                This week’s article review is entitled Teaching Adolescent Students with Learning Disabilities to Self-Advocate for Accommodations.  Although there were many articles from which to choose, and after reading several, this one captured my attention.  I will briefly summarize and critique the article, make connections to our classroom reading, and provide personal connections. 

                The article begins by stating that students with learning disabilities (LD) are spending more time within the general education classroom then they have in previous decades.  The general education teachers have been left to be accountable for making accommodations and remediation within the classroom to help these students succeed with the general education standards, without changing the actual content or difficulty level of the class.  Students with disabilities have been left to the mercy of the general education teacher.  The article sets out to support the theory that if students were taught to advocate for their own accommodations, they would meet with more academic success within the general education classroom.

                In order to accomplish self-advocacy, the high school students were directly taught how to identify their strengths and weaknesses, which accommodations were available to them, and how to ask for them in an appropriate way.  These areas were taught independently in four lessons, with lots of role-playing practice, before they were used in the actual general education classrooms.  Lesson one included direct instruction on self-advocacy and accommodations, lesson two identified strengths and weaknesses, lesson three taught the steps in how to ask for an accommodation, and lesson four allowed for practice in putting it all together.  Charts and checklists were used to help the students identify their strengths and areas of need, to identify eight different accommodations available to them and which they might need when, a skill inventory survey, and a role-play checklist. 

                This study followed four of the high school students into the general education classroom to evaluate how this method was applied.  The results were conclusive; teaching students with disabilities to self-advocate for accommodations increased their academic performance across the board.  The students and the general education teachers were surveyed to evaluate the strategy.  Every teacher agreed that the students with LD who advocated for their own accommodations met with greater success.  They also thought that all students could benefit from self-advocacy.  They believed that this was due to greater amounts of accountability and initiative shown and felt by the students.  The students also agreed with these findings.  One stated “that he thought he could do better in his general education classes if his teachers had a better understanding of how and when to help students.” (Prater, Redman, Anderson & Gibb, 2014) 

                Although only four students were actually followed into the general education classroom for evaluation, others were excluded for various reasons, and the teachers did comment on students who were self-advocating but not followed.  The article recognized several previous studies on self-advocacy and noted that their research came to the same conclusions.  I thought that they really gave a good description of the strategy and how to go about implementing it.  If you wanted to start it within your own school, this article gives you all of the tools, charts, and graphs you’d need.  It also provided a nice section at the end with “suggestions for teachers”.  It should probably be noted that the special education teacher made sure to inform all of the general education teachers who were going to be asked about accommodations by the students, what was being taught and applied to the students with LD.  Therefore, I’m not sure that all teachers would react the same to accommodation requests, had they no prior knowledge of this strategy. 

                I can’t help but think about my own children.  I don’t know that their request for accommodations would be met with “open arms”.  They are often met with a bit of push-back.  I don’t think that all general education teachers are equipped to make accommodations for students with LD or other disabilities.  This is not to say that all teachers are this way, but I do think that many lack the knowledge and understanding of what LD is and how they can modify the learning environment for these students.  The second situation that I thought of was when I was recently teaching in middle school.  The students expressed that they were not comfortable talking with teachers about how they felt, especially how they felt about something going on in the classroom.  They overwhelmingly expressed how they feared that a teacher would react negatively to their feelings and that they may even punish them for having a different opinion or feeling about something in the classroom. 

                After reading in our textbook this week about the high social needs of acceptance and the autonomy that students feel at this age, these comments really struck me.  We, as adults/teachers, do make most of the decisions regarding our students.  We make their lesson plans, accommodation, seating charts, behavior expectations, and schedules.  In doing these things, we take away a lot of accountability and interest in the school experience away from the individual student.  While I don’t know that we can, or should, change all of these things; giving them the ability to understand their own learning style, strengths, and needs is beneficial to them.  Teaching students with LD, and all students, to become self-advocates will help them become involved in their own education and in their adult lives.  They will be active participants within their classroom, which in turn promotes performance and participation.  Instead of just coasting through school, the students have a new purpose and reason to do well.  And, I can’t argue with that.

Reference:

Prater, M. A., Redman, A. S., Anderson, D., and Gibb, G. S. (2014).  Teaching adolescent students with learning disabilities to self-advocate for accommodations. Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(5), 298-305.

                

Journal Article Review on Communication Disorders and OHI

                This week’s article review is going to cover two articles which were written in conjunction with each other.  The first is entitled Communication Disorders in the School: Perspectives on Academic and Social Success an Introduction and a follow up article entitled Professionals’ Perceptions of the Role of Literacy in Early Intervention Services.  The journal Psychology in the Schools dedicated an entire issue to discussing the multidisciplinary approach to interventions for children with communication disorders.  As I read through the first article, it became apparent that the real “meat” that I was looking for was going to be found in the various articles that were contained in this issue.  Therefore, I chose a secondary article from this journal issue to discuss at greater length.   Both articles will be briefly summarized, critiqued, and applied to our classroom learning.

                The article containing the introduction clearly set the stage by stating “The critical role of communication in schools cannot be understated.  Communication skills are a necessity both in the academic and social atmosphere of the school environment.” (Thatcher, Fletcher, & Decker, 2008)  More than 6 million children ages 3-21 were being serviced under the IDEA in 2002, with more than 21% of those receiving interventions for speech and language disorders. (ASHA, 2008)  Children who had communication disorders secondary to other disorders were excluded from these numbers.  This is a significant percentage of the special education population. 

                In the past, therapies would isolate the issues being addressed, but more recent approaches are looking at all of the effects a child may experience because of the disorder.  The authors of the articles pose that all professionals need to work together to understand and meet the needs of the child at academic, social, and psychological levels that coexist with communication disorders.  The introductory article also stated the importance of early literacy for developing lifelong success in school and life, as well as proficient speech/language development.  The article argues that students with speech and language disorders also often struggle with reading and writing.  The second article probes this area on a deeper level, arguing that Early Intervention (EI) level literacy-related activities, used across the disciplines, can help children with developmental delays achieve more positive results across the board. 

                In the second article, 168 therapy providers were surveyed.  The focus was on very young children who were receiving interventions through EI in the areas of speech, developmental, occupational, and physical therapies.  The participation was voluntary (possibly skewing results) and the findings showed more literacy being used regularly by the speech and developmental therapists.  The physical and occupational therapist thought literacy to be important, but did not feel trained to adequately integrate it into therapy practices.  Parents who had children with diagnosed disabilities felt that literacy was not of top priority.  They had more basic needs to deal with, such as physical and mental health issues, and basic areas of self-care.  The article noted that the more educated the parents had, the more likely they were to value and integrate literacy into their children’s lives at an early age.  And, children attending Head Start and regular preschool programs received literacy activities, but their special education preschool peers were less likely to receive literacy activities being sent home. 

                                The exposure and access to literacy is not only critical for children with

                                special needs, but has significant lifelong implications.  For example,

                                literate adults with special needs are more accepted by their peers

                                (Donahue & Prescott, 1988), have increased vocational options

                                (Richardson, Koller, & Katz, 1988), and perhaps more critically,

                                increased expectations and opportunities for adults with special

                                needs (Erickson, Koppenhaver, & Yoder, 1994) (2008).

               

                All indications point to the fact that the earlier literacy is introduced to children, regardless of ability, the more positive the outcome was in language development.   While there might be barriers of economics, education, lack of interest, or time constraints; the goal to integrate literacy across the multidisciplinary team is of vital importance to communication and success later in life.  We continuously hear about the need for the various educational professionals to collaborate together.  It reminds me of the “whole child” movement of the 90s.  The idea was to interconnect the content the children were studying between the subject areas, and use groups to accomplish the tasks. Isn't that what we are asking of the education professionals?

                While we can see the benefits of working together as professionals, finding the time to logistically do this properly can be difficult.  It requires great communication, planning, and educational time to develop strategies that will bring about effective results.  It also requires frequent assessments, evaluations, and tweaking of the plan to adapt it for the specific needs of each child.  The example schools of our textbook seem to manage this quite well.  I’m sure it took a lot of trial and error along the way.  I would imagine that the staff would need open communication, honesty, clarity, and a lot of forgiveness and grace.  I don’t think something like this is going to happen overnight, but we should be working toward a common goal.  Getting the EI team and parents of children, regardless of ability, on board early is essential to the success of a program like this. 

                It is also important to note that with America becoming such a “melting pot” of various cultures and languages, it is important to provide materials and interventions that can manage these obstacles.  A “one size fits most” approach is no longer appropriate for most schools, especially in more urban settings.  We need to be able to make a distinction between a communication disorder and a communication difference.  Since communication is such a necessary skill, both in school and society, finding ways to help children with communication disorders become successful in navigating the activities they will encounter in the school and social setting is imperative.  And since we know that the foundation for early communication begins long before children are of school age, the earlier we get started the better.   

References:

Thatcher, K. L., Fletcher, K., & Decker, B. (2008).  Communication disorders in the school: Perspectives on academic and social success an introduction.  Psychology In The Schools, 45(&), 579-581.

Thatcher, K., &Fletcher, K. (2008).  Professionals’ perceptions of the role of literacy in early intervention services.  Psychology In The Schools, 45(7), 600-608.

http://ezproxy.trnty.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=33385829