Research paper assignment

Outline

Our task for this assignment was to summarize, critique, and compare six journal articles, as well as offer personal reflections about the content or our learning.  In this blog, I will summarize each article in turn, and then I will offer a comparison and critique.  This will be followed by a short personal reflection.
 

Summaries

Cumming, T. M., Strnadova, I., & Singh S. (2014). iPads as instructional tools to enhance learning opportunities for students with developmental disabilities: an action research project. Action Research, 12(2), 151–176. doi:10.1177/1476750314525480

This paper describes action research in which an ICT integration consultant and five special education teachers used iPads to support developmentally disabled high school students at a private school in Sydney.  The students were affected by epilepsy and autism, moderate intellectual disabilities, or autism and a global developmental delay, and all received instruction in an inclusive setting as well as pull-out to the special education classroom.  Initially, teachers received professional development about iPads and collected baseline evidence about students’ abilities and engagement.  Then they selected appropriate apps to provide content material in a variety of ways, increase engagement and independence, and serve as communication tools.  These were used during instruction and more evidence about student performance was collected.  Teacher perceptions were recorded using a blog, interviews, and a focus group, and students were interviewed.  An inductive content analysis was conducted. 

Teachers indicated that iPads allowed students to learn more outcomes, be more engaged, and work independently.  They could be more creative in their teaching, and stated the value of working with other teachers.  Students noted that iPads increased their enjoyment of learning. Specifically for reading, students could easily access pronunciations, definitions, and pictures, and the appearance of the font could be altered.  Communication was improved with particular apps and the camera for pictures to share information. 

Challenges faced by teachers included locating subject-specific apps and high-interest low-level apps that were age appropriate, as well as making time to sync the iPads and not having their own iPads to use.  They were also frustrated that regular classroom teachers were reluctant to use iPads.  Authors note the importance of purchasing a sync cart or a site licence for apps, maintaining records of student progress, and keeping abreast of new technology.

 

Edyburn, D. L. (2003). Learning from text. Special Education Technology Practice, 24(1), 16–27.

Edyburn describes the challenges faced by struggling readers in general education classrooms that require reading to learn, and discusses AT interventions that allow effective integration of these students.  He asks whether remediation or compensation is the best way to serve struggling readers and notes that compensatory technology provides a means of accessing text after school.  He provides both a systems approach for making text accessible and a taxonomy of text modification strategies that offer a formalized roadmap for considering issues of educating students in the general classroom.

Strategies suggested include:

·         bypassing reading altogether, which requires a person or the passage to be recorded for playback or computer technology to read digital text,

·         decreasing reading by reducing the reading level using documents on the web or autosummary tools in word,

·         supporting reading to enhance comprehension by using Google Images or multimedia dictionaries,

·         organizing reading with graphic organizers to show relationships among key ideas in text, which could be accomplished in low tech format on paper or higher tech using Inspiration software, and

·         guiding reading by teaching reading strategies and providing study guides or websites that help students through the reading by offering summaries of plots or characters, for instance.

Using AT to apply such reading strategies is a move away from the one-size-fits-all classroom, and can make the general curriculum cognitively accessible for struggling readers and provide a balance between compensation and remediation.

 

 

Kurth, J. A. (2013). A unit-based approach to adaptations in inclusive classrooms. Teaching  Exceptional Children, 46(2), 34–43. doi:10.1177/1053451213509488

 Kurth discusses adaptations based on UDL principles, where teachers plan curriculum for diverse needs from the outset rather than initially planning for one group and making adaptations for each student with special needs afterwards.  Use of general adaptations that aid a variety of learners, such as graphic organizers, peer tutors, or word banks, and additional specific adaptations for a few students, ensure learning for all.  As examples, the article refers to two students with low-incidence disabilities (Amanda has an intellectual disability and John is autistic), both working at a different grade level from their peers in eighth-grade English class.  An ecological assessment as well as teacher observation and collaboration highlight the difference between students’ skills and needs so that appropriate yet unobtrusive adaptations can be created.  Then teachers focus on supporting learning by defining outcomes, ensuring that the classroom routine allows for participation and learning, and identifying and gathering specific materials for lessons.  Specific examples are provided in the article.  During and after instruction, both the general and specific adaptations are evaluated to see if students were actively engaged in their work, whether work was meaningful and individualized curricular outcomes were addressed, and to ensure social engagement among students and the development of confidence and self-advocacy skills.

 

Messinger-Willman, J., & Marino, M. T. (2010). Universal design for learning and assistive technology: leadership considerations for promoting inclusive education in today's secondary schools. NASSP Bulletin, 94(1), 5–16. doi:10.1177/0192636510371977

This article describes how UDL and AT can “enhance educational opportunities for secondary students with learning disabilities” (p. 5), as AT can remove learning barriers for some students as an application of UDL principles.  Reading is identified as a significant challenge for LD students, with most reading at a grade four or five level.  AT can serve as both a reading support and an intervention, aiding students as a low or high tech device or software depending on the task the student must do and their technology skill.  For instance, highlighters, pencil grips, magnifying glasses, or slant boards may suffice for some exercises, whereas text-to-speech and word prediction software or digital text to reduce reading level and focus on higher order thinking would be required for others.  

Barriers that prevent teachers from choosing, implementing, and assessing AT devices in the classroom are identified and solutions are discussed.  Lack of knowledge about the capabilities of AT is pervasive, but knowledge is imperative for selecting, acquiring, implementing, and integrating AT, so the authors state that more training opportunities and teamwork when designing a student’s individualized education plan is necessary.  Other barriers including lack of funding, information, and time are noted and action steps to eliminate the obstacles are suggested.

 

Rodríguez, C. D., Strnadová, I., & Cumming, T. (2014). Using iPads with students with disabilities: lessons learned from students, teachers, and parents. Intervention in School and Clinic, 49(4), 244– 250. doi:10.1177/1053451213509488

This article reviews research studies about use of mobile technologies such as iPads in special education, finding that a variety of iPad features are beneficial to English language learners and students with disabilities including autism, intellectual disabilities, and ADHD.  The devices increase learning opportunities, particularly in literacy, because apps permit the individualization of lessons.  Student engagement is higher as well.  Both parents and teachers noted that iPads allow more student independence, but also emphasize the importance of home-school communication for student support when implementing assistive technology.  Suggestions for integration of mobile technologies are provided, and include ensuring adequate teacher training and considering continued access across environments for students.  Teachers must plan for effective classroom use and maintenance of the technology, and a graphic organizer to aid with this is provided.

 

Zascavage, V., & Winterman, K. G. (2009). What middle school educators should know about assistive technology and universal design for learning. Middle School Journal, 40(4), 46–52.

To integrate students with disabilities into the regular classroom and allow them autonomy there, the authors advocate the use of AT to ensure a UDL curriculum.  Useful programs include speech recognition software, allowing students with handwriting or spelling challenges to dictate work, and ultimately improving reading comprehension, spelling, and word recognition. The only downfall of these programs is that background noise must be limited, so students generally leave the classroom to work.  Text-to-speech technology allows students to have documents or just particular words read aloud to them by the computer.  This aids word recognition and decoding and therefore comprehension, especially in classes laden with technical vocabulary.  As long as the teacher is organized and has electronic material for students to learn, this is a great option for weak readers.  Students who are good readers but have difficulty spelling can use word prediction software or spell check to aid in communicating their ideas.  Using word prediction with a text-to-speech program provides further assistance.  Finally, Inspiration is a UDL software package that allows all students to organize their thoughts using pictures and concept maps, focusing their attention and clarifying the purpose of their work.  The authors suggest that an AT team should exist at each school and that cost should not be considered a limiting factor because technology is important for an appropriate education.  They emphasize the classroom teacher’s role in choosing technologies for each student, and suggest a useful focus question to accomplish this goal: “What are the student’s cognitive abilities and how will they interface with technology?” (p. 51).  The technology can serve as a tool to allow learners to realize their potential.

  

Comparison and Critique

While Kurth (2013) focused on general and specific adaptations according to UDL principles but not technology, all the other authors discussed AT and more specifically described ways that AT could be used to support UDL.  These authors acknowledged that AT is more effective with disabled students: Cumming, Strnadova, and Singh (2014) studied developmentally disabled students; Messinger-Willman and Marino (2010) reported on learning disabled students, focusing on reading; and Edyburn (2003) narrowed his focus to struggling readers.  Both Rodríguez, Strnadová, and Cumming (2014) and Zascavage and Winterman (2009) discussed AT use with a more general group of special education students, with disabilities including autism, intellectual disabilities, and ADHD noted by the former but no specific disabled groups mentioned by the latter.

Only Cumming et al. and Kurth reported directly on research or classroom activities, whereas the other authors provided review pieces.  The benefit of research reports is that the reader views comments and findings first-hand, perhaps allowing a more balanced or critical consideration of the subject being studied, as more challenges were noted by Cumming et al. than the others.  Nevertheless, findings verify statements made by other authors.  For example, Cumming et al. noted that some teachers were reluctant to use iPads because of issues with student access to the technology at home as well as at school.  Rodríguez et al. corroborated this concern, stating the importance of continued access across environments.  Generally, all authors stated that teachers must be trained on the technology and plan for its effective implementation in instruction, and that AT allows students to learn more, increase engagement, and work independently.

The most helpful articles for me offered specific examples about using iPads with students.  Edyburn provided websites useful for remedial and compensatory reading support, and others discussed the value of digital text and text-to-speech and word prediction software (Messinger-Willman & Marino;  Zascavage & Winterman).

 

Personal Reflection

Two main ideas resonated with me as I completed these readings.  First, there is tremendous potential for AT to increase student learning, particularly students with disabilities, in a UDL environment.  Of course, this is not new because I have been thinking the same thing for the past ten weeks!  The articles served to reiterate the variety of accessibility options and relevant apps available with iPad technology.  Second, teacher training is a necessary first step for integration of mobile devices in the general education classroom.  Ideally, each teacher would have their own mobile device on which to learn, and there would be rich collaboration and support amongst teachers sharing the common goal of incorporating AT to support learners in their classes.

The readings have caused me to reflect on my own personal teaching situation.  I just received a transfer to another school that does not block any websites, encourages students to bring their own devices to class, and has a variety of assistive technology available at the school.  This is very different from the school where I currently work.  This assignment and the class in general has given me great ideas that will no doubt serve me well in the upcoming year, but I am also a bit nervous about the great deal of work required to effectively implement technology in the classroom, as evidenced by the diversity of AT tools noted in all the articles, but specifically as described in the Cumming et al. article.  The action research teachers worked many hours to implement iPads.  Further, the challenges noted make me wary, particularly with regard to consistent access for low socio-economic status students who might not have devices at home.  Regardless, I look forward to the upcoming challenge.