Using the Classroom Observation Instrument for Educational Environments Serving Students with Deaf-Blindness in Order to Assist Low Incidence Classrooms

1
Using the Classroom Observation Instrument for
Educational Environments Serving Students with
Deaf-Blindness in Order to Assist Low Incidence
Classrooms

• Ella Taylor, Kat Stremel, Nancy Steele
• National Technical Assistance Consortium for
  Children and Youth who are Deaf-Blind (NTAC)
• Teaching Research Institute
• Western Oregon University

2
Setting the Stage Need

• Too many children with deaf-blindness and other
  complex impairments are often placed in
  classrooms that demonstrate a collaborative
  process of day care
• Lack of a comprehensive framework that outlined
  critical quality services and effective practices
  in a user-friendly format
• Lack of tools to identify Model Classrooms for
  Technical Assistance

3
Uses for Instrument

• Determination of a potential Model Classroom
• Determination of potential Practicum sites for
  Personnel Preparation projects
• Determination of additional Technical Assistance
  needs to bring a classroom to model status
• Determination of additional TA needs

4
Alignment with Standards

• Review of CECs Knowledge and Skill Base for All
  Beginning Special Education Teachers of Students
  in
• Individualized General Curriculums
• Individualized Independence Curriculums
• Review of Competencies for Teachers of Learners
  who are Deaf-Blind
• Review of the Rhode Island Services to Students
  with Dual Sensory Impairments Instrument

5
Alignment Interview
Deaf-Blind Individualized General Curriculum Individualized Independence Curriculum
Deaf-Blindness Foundations Foundations
Personal Identity, Relationships Self-Esteem (PIRSE) Developmental Characteristics Developmental Characteristics
Hearing-Vision Individual Learning Differences Individual Learning Differences
Environment Materials Instructional Planning Instructional Planning
Professional Ethical Practice Professional Ethical Practice
6
Alignment Observation
Instrument Deaf-Blind CEC IGC, IIC
Curriculum Concept Development Communication O M Instructional Strategies (IS), Learning Environments (LE) Social Interactions (SI), Instructional Planning (IP), Collaboration
Data-based Assessment Communication Embedded throughout IS, LE SI, IP, Assessment
Preservation of Dignity PIRSE LE SI, Collaboration
Communication PIRSE, Concept Develop-ment, Communication, Environment Materials Individual Learning Differences, IS, LE SI, Communication
Social PIRSE LE SI
Assistive Technology Comm., H-V, O M, Environment Materials IS, LE SI, Comm., Collaboration
7
Design Phase

• Items adapted from the three reviewed documents
• Focus groups
• Stakeholders rank order items
• Parents provide input on relative importance of
  items/sections
• Teachers provide input on format
• Field testing across multiple classrooms

8
Re-design

• Identified the most critical elements that could
  be observed
• Curriculum
• Data-based assessment
• Preservation of dignity
• Communication
• Social
• Assistive Technology
• Development of teacher interview section
• Refinement of the rubric
• Achieved, Nearly achieved, Making progress,
  Non-existent, Not applicable

9
Research Phase 2

• Field testing of the instrument in classroom
  observation with interviews
• Interview provides the context for the
  observation
• Interview helps focus everyone
• Rubric options are more discriminating
• Protocol is understandable

10
Outside Consultant Review

• The instrument has value for students beyond a
  strict eligibility of deaf-blind. Students who
  have multiple disabilities and are severely
  sensory impaired would benefit from this
  observational overview. All reviewers urged a
  broader marketing and I suggest that you
  disseminate to programs that serve more than
  students who are deaf-blind.

11
Validation Phase

• Content validity -- achieved
• Construct validity
• Concurrent validity
• Identify exemplary classrooms and determine if
  the observation instrument aligns with the
  characteristics within the classroom
• Reliability

12
Identification of Classrooms

• Requested nominations from directors of state
  deaf-blind projects
• From the nominations, eight classrooms were
  selected
• Seven interviews and observations were conducted
  (one dropped out)

13
Findings

• Teacher interview is critical
• Review of IEP by observer is not critical
• Clear alignment in
• Curriculum
• Preservation of Dignity
• Communication
• Social
• Assistive Technology
• Not so clear alignment in
• Data-based assessment

14
Validation Phase

• Content validity -- achieved
• Construct validity -- achieved
• Concurrent validity
• Reliability
• Inter-rater reliability of 0.95

15
Review of the Instrument

• Teacher Interview
• Context of the classroom ( of students, or
  assistants, type of classroom, information about
  students)
• Teachers main goals for student(s)
• Family involvement
• Family communication about students needs

16
Review of the Instrument

• Students areas of strengths and weaknesses
• How these are used in planning for instruction?
• Inclusion in general education curriculum
• Interaction with peers

17
Review of the Instrument

• IEP Review (usually conducted through teacher
  interview)
• IEP goals
• Educational assessments (cognitive, adaptive,
  sensory and motor)
• How used for planning instruction?
• Students vision and hearing
• Curricular and instructional modifications for
  functional vision and hearing

18
Curriculum

• 8 items
• Daily schedule
• Engagement in learning
• Varied activities
• O M
• Classroom management
• IEP goals addressed
• Varied participation

19
Data-Based Assessment

• 2 items
• Students instructional program demonstrates
  ongoing use of a data system that measures
  student progress on IEP objectives. Data are
  collected on a regular and consistent basis.
• Data are reviewed frequently to make programmatic
  and instructional changes to meet the students
  needs.

20
Preservation of Dignity

• 4 items
• Age-appropriate and respectful
• Care-giving and personal mgmt routines
• Self-determination and choice making
• Frequent opportunities for engagement

21
Communication

• 8 items
• Receptive communication cues
• Receptive communication
• Access to communication
• Communication functions
• Expressive communication
• Response time
• Behavior
• Communication partners

22
Social

• 3 items
• Social skills
• General education curriculum
• Peer interaction

23
Assistive Technology

• Description of AT available and AT used
• AT used for vision, hearing, communication,
  behavior, daily life skills
• AT aligns with students IEP
• AT incorporated into students educational
  program as appropriate

24
Overall Impressions

• What were areas of strength within this
  classroom?
• What areas need improvement within this
  classroom?
• What were your overall impressions of this
  classroom for serving the needs of students who
  are deaf-blind?

25
Scoring

• Each section is equally weighted
• Item score is based on rubric scale
• Section score is total points for section divided
  by total items
• Do not count items with non-applicable

26
Case study

• South Carolina
• Staff had varying levels of expertise in
  deaf-blindness (TVI, THI, SLP, O M, EI)
• Needed a simple tool for identification of TA
  needs within a variety of classrooms
• Needed clear and concise way to provide
  recommendations to classroom teachers
• Classroom teachers needed to know what the
  targets were
• Implemented for one year with success

27
Next Steps

• Potential revision for transition age and early
  childhood
• Volunteers for field testing transition
• Volunteers for field testing early childhood
  (home-based)
• Volunteers for field testing early childhood
  (educational setting)
• Using COI to collect data about classrooms
  serving students with deafblindness