Purpose Statement: - Information Technology Services



Running head: METHODS SECTION

Sara Mills

Qualitative Methods Section:

Parent and teacher expectations for the literate lives

of students with severe disabilities

George Mason University

EDRS 810

Spring 2008

Background Literature

In Kliewer and Biklen’s (2001) research synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities, the authors describe how literacy acquisition is often viewed as a step ladder. Students must master basic skills, such as sound-symbol correspondence, before moving up to the next rung on the ladder that contains more meaning-based skills. Students with severe disabilities often are seen as unable to master those basic skills and, therefore, are summarily excluded from meaningful literacy instruction (Kliewer & Biklen, 2001). They argue that viewing literacy from a meaning-making perspective, rather than as a set of increasingly complex subskills, opens up participation in literacy to students with severe mental retardation.

One critical component of literacy development for students with severe disabilities is a deeply caring, intimate relationship (Kliewer & Biklen, 2001). Only someone with such an intimate knowledge of the “idiosyncratic demonstrations of understanding that are otherwise dismissed or disregarded by more distant observers” (p. 3) will be able to recognize when a student with severe mental retardation is engaged in meaning making and communicating his or her meaning. To that end, Kliewer and Biklen describe a case study in which the mother of a boy with severe disabilities sees her son demonstrating literate behavior at home, while the boy’s teachers do not see that behavior in school. This disconnect between what parents report their children are able to do at home and what teachers report children are able to do at school seems to be a common theme in special education, particularly for students with more severe disabilities. The purpose of this qualitative study will be to understand parent and teacher expectations for the literate lives of 4 elementary-age students with severe mental retardation in self-contained classes.

Research Questions

This study, therefore, is intended to replicate and extend the work of Kliewer and Biklen (2001) by describing parent and teacher expectations for the literate lives of elementary school students with severe mental retardation. Research questions include:

1. How do parents perceive the literacy goals and instruction for their children?

2. How do teachers perceive the literacy goals and instruction for their students?

3. How do parents and teachers perceive each others’ views of student literacy skills and goals?

Method

Researcher Background

I have worked as a special education teacher for the past 8 ½ years in the same school district as the teachers in this study. In addition to teaching, I serve as a mentor to new special education teachers in my district. Through my work with new teachers serving students with moderate and severe disabilities, I have developed an interest in providing meaningful literacy instruction to these students. Furthermore, my experiences as a teacher have highlighted the importance of the home-school connection. I believe that a critical component of my job is working with the families of my students. In my experience, students with disabilities make the most progress when teachers and parents work together to support them. Additionally, I believe it is important for me to help parents gain the information they need to advocate for their children, and to assist them to become comfortable working within the highly bureaucratic school structure.

Design

This qualitative research study will use multiple case studies to examine parent and teacher perceptions of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. An extreme sampling procedure was used to identify 4 teachers of students with severe mental retardation who exhibit exemplary literacy practices and positive relationships with parents (Creswell, 2008, p. 215). One student in each teacher’s classroom, along with his or her family, will be included in the study. The study will be conducted over the course of one semester in selected elementary schools within a suburban school district in the Mid-Atlantic region.

Participants

Teachers. Four elementary school teachers of students with severe mental retardation were identified by their school district as being exemplary teachers. To be considered exemplary for the purposes of this study, teachers must: (a) implement comprehensive, meaning-based literacy instruction in their classroom; (b) demonstrate some student achievement in the area of literacy based on teacher-designed, classroom-based measures; and (c) develop on-going, positive relationships with the parents of their students. Three of the teachers identified by the school district have their Master of Teaching degree in special education, with an emphasis on mental retardation. One teacher has a Bachelor’s degree and recently obtained her licensure in K-12 special education.

“Ms. Adams,” at 42 years old, is the most experienced teacher in the study, having taught for 16 years. During that time, she has taught students in kindergarten through fifth grade. She has taught students with autism, as well as students with moderate and severe mental retardation. Ms. Adams’ current classroom, like all classrooms in this study, follows a multi-age model. Her kindergarten through second grade classroom includes eight students with moderate and severe mental retardation, and two instructional assistants (IAs).

“Ms. Brown” is 25 years old and in her second year of teaching. The seven students in her class are in kindergarten through second grade. All qualified for special education as students with moderate or severe mental retardation. Two IAs work in the classroom for the entire school day.

“Ms. Cameron” teaches a third through fifth grade multi-age class, supported by one IA. She is 36 years old and has been teaching for 8 years. There are four students in her classroom, all of whom qualified for special education under the autism label. Two of the students in her class, including the student in this study, also have been identified as having mental retardation.

“Ms. Daley,” the fourth teacher in our study, is 30 years old and in her third year of teaching. Prior to becoming a teacher, Ms. Daley was in the army. She gained her teaching credentials through an alternative licensing program during her first 2 years of teaching. Ms. Daley teaches a fourth and fifth grade class with eight students with moderate and severe mental retardation and two IAs.

Students and Families. This study will focus on 4 elementary-age students with severe mental retardation, including 2 boys and 2 girls. To be included in the study, students must have a measured IQ less than 40 on a standardized cognitive test administered within the last 3 years. The mean IQ for this group of students is 37, with scores ranging from 30 to 40. The parents and caregivers of these students have agreed to be interviewed and observed in their homes for this research study.

“Ben” is a 6-year-old, Caucasian boy in the first grade of Ms. Adam’s class. Ben is confined to a wheelchair, having severely limited movement of his arms and legs. To communicate, Ben raises his right arm slightly. He is beginning to learn to use eye-gaze for communication. Ben lives with his mother, grandmother, and 10-year-old sister. Ben’s mother has a Bachelor’s degree and works in the human resources department of a government agency.

“Beth” is a 7-year-old Caucasian girl in the second grade of Ms. Brown’s class. Beth communicates primarily through facial expression. She is learning to use the PECS system for communication. Beth is included in a second grade general education class for read aloud 3 days a week. An IA goes with her to the general education classroom. Beth lives with her mother, father, and 3-year-old brother. Beth’s father is a lawyer. Her mother, a college graduate, is a stay-at-home mom.

“Briana” is a 9-year-old, African-American girl in the fourth grade of Ms. Cameron’s class. Briana communicates verbally through one-word utterances, as well as with the assistance of an electronic communication device. Briana lives with her mother. Briana’s mother has a Bachelor’s degree, and works as a school nurse in the same district that Briana attends.

“Billy” is an 11-year-old, Asian, fifth-grade boy in Ms. Daley’s class. He communicates through the use of an electronic communication device. Billy lives with his mother, father, and two teenage sisters. Billy’s parents did not attend college. They own and run a successful local business.

All of the students participating in this study receive speech-language services for 1 to 1½ hours each week. Additionally, most students receive support from physical disabilities specialists, occupational therapists, and adaptive PE specialists. Ben’s classroom teacher also consults with the Public Health Nurse to address his medical needs.

Setting

This study will be conducted in a large, suburban school district in the Mid-Atlantic region. Students in the sample attend four different elementary schools within the school district. In this district, students with severe disabilities are served in self-contained programs within neighborhood schools. Because of the small number of students with low-incidence disabilities, these self-contained classes typically serve students at two or three grade levels within one class. Classroom observations and teacher interviews will be conducted in students’ classrooms. Samples of student work and written parent-teacher communication will also be collected at the school sites.

In addition to the school sites, data will also be collected in students’ homes. Specifically, parent and caregiver interviews will be conducted in their homes, and two observations will be done in the home. Additional observation sites may be added if it is identified through parent and caregiver interviews that literacy activities take place in other settings (e.g., the public library). Finally, literacy artifacts will be collected at the home sites.

Data Sources

For this qualitative study, data will be collected from a variety of sources over the course of the semester. Data sources include interviews, observations, and document collection.

Observations. Classroom observations will be regularly conducted throughout the semester. During these observations, the researcher will take the role of an observer rather than a participant, recording field notes using an observation protocol (see Appendix A for observation protocol). The first of these observations will occur within the first two weeks of the school year. At least one observation will be conducted each month thereafter, ending in January.

I will also observe each child in his or her home setting two times – once in the second month of school, and once in January at the end of the study. The observation protocol will be used for field notes collected at the home site. If a parent or caregiver identifies another setting in which a child engages in literacy activity, such as the public library or a day care center, I will also conduct an observation in that setting.

Interviews. Two semi-structured, one-on-one interviews will be conducted with

each teacher. The first interview will be conducted in the second month of school and is expected to last 45 minutes. The second interviews, conducted at the end of the semester, will last approximately 30 minutes. Interview protocols with guiding questions will be used for these sessions (see Appendix B for teacher interview protocol). Sample protocol questions include, “Tell me about some of the literacy activities you do with [your student],” and “When you think about [your student] 10 or 15 years from now, how do you envision literacy being part of his/her life?” All sessions will be audio taped and transcribed for analysis. Teacher interviews will focus on: (a) current literacy practices in the classroom; (b) literacy goals for the student; and (c) the teacher’s perception of the parents’ literacy goals for their child and the literacy activities used by parents at home.

Similarly, two semi-structured interviews will be conducted with the child’s parent or caregiver – one in the second month of school, and one in January. Like the teacher interviews, the first parent interview is expected to last approximately 45 minutes, with the second interview lasting about 30 minutes. An interview protocol with guiding questions will be used (see Appendix C for parent interview protocol). Questions on the parent protocol are similar to those on the teacher interview protocol, with wording adjustments to focus on the home perspective. Parent interviews will focus on: (a) current literacy practices in the home; (b) literacy goals for the child; and (c) parents’ perceptions of the teacher’s goals for and instructional strategies used with the child. These interviews will also be audio recorded and transcribed to ensure accurate data collection.

Document collection. In addition to observations and interviews, I will also collect documents to use as a data source. Existing school records will be utilized, including: demographic data, Individualized Education Plans (IEPs), quarterly progress reports, and any achievement test scores. I will also collect copies of student work samples and teacher-parent communication pertaining to literacy, such as emails and daily home-school logs. Any literacy artifacts available at students’ homes will also be collected.

Data Collection Procedures

The first step in the research process will be to obtain approval from George Mason University’s Human Subjects Review Board (HSRB) in the summer before school starts. Simultaneously, I will seek approval from the school district. Once approved by HSRB and the school district, I will begin recruiting teachers and students for the study. To that end, I will ask principals in elementary schools that have classes for students with severe mental retardation to nominate exemplary teachers for the study. I will then meet with nominated teachers and administrators to explain the study and obtain informed consent. Teachers who agree to participate will nominate a child from their class for participation in the study. The teacher must feel she has a positive working relationship with the child’s parents for that child to be included in the study. A meeting will be set up with identified parents and children to explain the study and to solicit participation. Students and parents will be asked to give informed consent before the observations and interviews are conducted.

Within the first 2 weeks of school, I will begin collecting data through classroom observation. I will continue to observe literacy instruction in the classroom once a month until the end of the semester in January. During the second month of school, I will interview teachers and parents to gain insight into their perceptions of the literate lives of their students. The two-month mark was selected to give students a chance to settle into the classroom environment, thereby giving parents and teachers a more stable view of student performance. The first home observation will be conducted following this initial parent interview.

In January, I will conduct a second round of interviews with parents and teachers. These interviews are intended to gauge any refinements and changes in parent and teacher perspectives since the beginning of the school year. A second home observation will be conducted at this time.

Throughout the course of the study, copies of student literacy work samples will be collected. I will also make copies of parent and teacher communication regarding student literacy.

Proposed Data Analysis

Data analysis will begin after the first round of teacher and parent interviews during the second month of school. To begin the process, I will transcribe the interviews verbatim, using pseudonyms to protect the privacy of participants. After transcribing the interviews, I will use the constant comparative method to generate and connect categories by “comparing incidents in the data to other incidents, incidents to categories, and categories to other categories” (Creswell, 2008, p. 443). The qualitative data analysis software program NVivo will be used to aid this process. Data analysis will be ongoing throughout the school year as additional observations and interviews are conducted.

I will use three strategies to validate the themes that emerge from the data – triangulation, member checking, and external audit (Creswell, 2008, p. 266-267). First, I will use triangulation of data from teacher interviews, parent interviews, observation field notes, and collected documents to verify the accuracy of information. Second, I will ask parents and teachers to read portions of the study to ensure that information is complete, themes are accurate, and interpretations are fair. Finally, an external audit will be sought to validate the process, findings, and interpretations of the study.

References

Creswell, J.W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kliewer, C., & Biklen, D. (2001). “School’s not really a place for reading”: A research synthesis of the literate lives of students with severe disabilities. The Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 26(1), 1-12.

Appendix A

Observation Protocol

|Time |Activity* |Student Response |Reflective Notes |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

| | | | |

*Include materials used and participants (including leader).

Appendix B

Teacher Interview Protocol

First Teacher Interview

1. Tell me about some of the literacy activities you do with [your student].

(Prompts may include: read aloud, shared writing, expressive activities, listening activities)

Possible follow-up questions:

1a. How does [your student] respond to these activities?

(Prompt: How do you know he/she is enjoying a book you read?)

1b. What do you expect [your student] to learn from these activities?

2. What kinds of literacy activities does [your student] do at home that you know about?

Possible follow-up questions:

2a. What do you think [your student’s] parents expect him/her to learn from these activities?

2b. What are some ways you see him/her benefiting from these home activities?

3. When you think about [your student] 10 or 15 years from now, how do you envision literacy being a part of his/her life?

4. How do you think his/her parents’ literacy expectations for [your student] compare to your own?

Second Teacher Interview

1. Tell me how your thinking about [your student’s] literate life has evolved over the last few months.

Possible follow-up questions:

1a. How have your goals and strategies changed since the beginning of the year?

1b. How have your views about his/her literate life at home changed since the beginning of the year?

Appendix C

Parent Interview Protocol

First Parent Interview

1. Tell me about some of the literacy activities you do with [your child].

(Prompts may include: storytelling, books, listening, picture comprehension, communicating understanding)

Possible follow-up questions:

1a. How does [your child] respond to these activities?

(Prompt: How does [your child] let you know when he/she enjoys a book you are looking at?)

1b. What do you expect [your child] to learn from these activities?

2. What are some of the kinds of literacy activities [your child] does at school?

Possible follow-up questions:

2a. What do you think the teacher expects [your child] to learn from these activities?

2b. Which literacy activities do you think are working well for him/her?

2c. Which literacy activities do you think are not working well?

3. When you think about [your child] 10 or 15 years from now, how do you envision literacy being part of his/her life?

4. How do you think the school’s literacy expectations for [your child] compare to your own?

Second Parent Interview

1. Tell me about how your thinking about [your child’s] literate life has evolved over the last few months.

Possible follow-up questions:

1a. How have your literacy goals and activities changed since the beginning of the school year?

1b. How have your views about his/her literate life at school changed since the beginning of the year?

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download