Supporting Emergent Literacy Development in Students who are Deafblind

1
Supporting Emergent Literacy Development in
Students who are Deafblind

• NCDB Topical Conference
• May 13, 2008
• Amy R. McKenzie, Ed.D.
• Florida State University
• Program in Visual Impairments

2
Presentation Outline

• Literacy Defined
• The Fundamental Truths
• Barriers to Literacy Development
• Research Findings
• Recommendations

3
Emergent Literacy Defined

• Emergent literacy is the process of developing
  literacy that begins at birth and ends when
  children begin to engage in conventional or
  functional reading and writing (Sulzby Teale,
  1991)

4
Literacy and Student who are DB

• Students with deafblindness may or may not attain
  conventional literacy skills
• However, many students with deafblindness will
  attain functional literacy skills
• Additionally, communication is often the primary
  need for this student population

5
Literacy and Students who are DB

• literacy is communication especially when the
  concepts and issues are applied to students with
  visual impairments and additional disabilities.
  In this respect, then, literacy is the most basic
  foundation for all learning, for receiving and
  imparting information, and for initiating
  interactions with others. (Langley, 2000)

6
The Fundamental Truths
7
The Fundamental Truths

• The following fundamental truths are borrowed
  from
• Alan Koenig Cay Holbrooks keynote presentation
  at the Getting in Touch with Literacy Conference
  in Philadelphia 2001

8
The Fundamental Truths

• Every child who is deafblind has the right to
  attain literacy to the greatest extend of his or
  her abilities.

9
The Fundamental Truths

• 2. All students who are deafblind have the right
  to literacy instruction from qualified personnel,
  including a teacher of students with visual
  impairments, a teacher of students who are deaf
  or hard of hearing, and a deafblind specialist.

10
Barriers to Literacy Development for Students who
are Deafblind
11
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 1. The low incidence nature of deafblindness
• This is a numbers issue!

12
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 2. The lack of knowledge about deafblindness of
  general educators, special educators, and related
  service providers
• This is a preservice training issue!

13
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 3. The limited knowledge and skills for working
  with students who are deafblind of teachers of
  students with visual impairments teachers of
  the deaf and hard of hearing
• Again, this is a preservice training issue!

14
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 4. The limited supply of qualified personnel to
  work with students who are deafblind
• This is a preservice funding issue!

15
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 5. The limited or lack of knowledge regarding the
  unique needs and literacy needs of students who
  are deafblind by administrators, departments of
  education, and legislatures
• This is an advocacy issue!

16
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 6. The lack of curricular publications and
  materials for literacy instruction of students
  who are deafblind
• This is a low-incidence issue!

17
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 7. The belief that many students who are
  deafblind are nonreaders
• This is an awareness issue!

18
Barriers to Literacy Development

• 8. A lack of research!
• This is a field-wide issue!

19
Emergent Literacy Supports for Students who are
Deafblind Research Findings
20
Study Background Information

• Qualitative, multiple case study involving 4
  schools
• 6 classrooms for students with deafblindness or
  visual impairments
• 18 student participants
• Ages ranges from 3.25-21.8 years mean age of
  11.3 years
• 100 had additional disabilities

21
Study Background Information

• Data collected
• Environmental Supports
• Teaching Strategies Activities
• Assessment Reports
• IEP Goals Objectives
• IEP Accommodations Supplementary Aids/Service

22
Environments and Activities

• On average, 46 of the environmental
  characteristics supported by el research were
  observed
• On average, 51 of the teaching strategies and
  activities supported by el research were observed
• See Table 1 2

23
Assessment Reports

• 100 eye reports
• 100 audiologist reports
• 94 FVE
• 11.1 LMA
• 64.7 Communication Assessment (Partial)
• 55 OM Evaluations

24
IEPs

• 27.6 of goals communication
• 14.2 of goals literacy
• 24.2 of accommodations communication
• 22.7 of accommodations literacy

25
Other Significant Findings

• In 5 of the 6 classrooms, the print rich
  environment was inaccessible to the students who
  are deafblind
• The most academic classroom displayed the
  fewest characteristics supported by the el
  research

26
Other Significant Findings

• All related service providers reported supporting
  emergent literacy development
• All paraprofessionals reported supporting
  emergent literacy development

27
Other Significant Findings

• Discrepancies between classroom teacher
  interviews, observations, and IEP reviews existed
  
• All classroom teachers reported being a
  facilitator of literacy development
• Two classroom teachers reported their students
  were nonreaders

28
Other Significant Findings

• One classroom teacher graduated from a deafblind
  training program no other classrooms had contact
  with such trained professionals
• One classroom had contact with a teacher of the
  deaf hard of hearing

29
Other Significant Findings

• Two classroom teachers were trained as teachers
  of students with visual impairments no other
  classrooms had access to a teacher of students
  with visual impairments

30
Recommendations
31
Emergent Literacy Practices

• Continue and increase the use of age appropriate
  environmental characteristics and activities that
  support emergent literacy development
• Increase the use of accommodations for access to
  environmental print in students assessed
  learning media

32
Emergent Literacy Practices

• Increase the use of learning media assessments
  (LMAs) for students who are deafblind
• Decrease the use of the terminology nonreader
  when referring to students in the emergent
  literacy phase of literacy development

33
Practices in the Field

• Include information on deafblindness in
  preservice and inservice training for general
  educators, special educators, and related service
  providers

34
Practices in the Field

• Increase information on the literacy needs of
  students who are deafblind in preservice and
  inservice training of teachers of students with
  visual impairments and teachers of the deaf
  hard of hearing

35
Practices in the Field

• Increased advocacy for funding to existing and
  new preservice programs training deafblind
  specialists

36
Practices in the Field

• Increased advocacy to bring about awareness of
  administrators, departments of education, and
  legislatures regarding the unique literacy needs
  of students who are deafblind

37
Practices in the Field

• Increased demand for and creation of literacy
  curricular materials for students who are
  deafblind

38
Practices in the Field

• RESEARCH!
• First, we need to build a foundation of knowledge
  regarding current practices and standards
• Next, we need to expand intervention-based
  research regarding current and new practices and
  standards

39
Contact Information

• Amy R. McKenzie, Ed.D.
• Assistant Professor
• Program in Visual Impairments
• College of Education
• Florida State University
• mckenzie_at_coe.fsu.edu
• 850-645-6588