Transcript The life and times of Coretta Scott King

RMIT University Psychology Clinic (est 1976)
Assessment & treatment of clinical and educational
problems of children, adolescents, and adults.
http://www.rmit.edu.au/psychology/clinic
Training clinic: Postgrad psychology students log 40 hours
face to face with clients per year
Supervised by staff – Clinical psychologists
& educational psychologists
Typical referrals:
• Educational problems (e.g., reading, spelling, maths)
• Bedwetting
• Difficulties associated with toilet training
• Behaviour difficulties (e.g., aggression, temper tantrums,
disobedience)
• Anxiety, depression, phobias
• Sleep disturbances (e.g., getting children to bed, frequent
nightmares)
• Disability issues
• Adolescent: parent-adolescent conflict, sexuality, sexual offenders,
depression & suicidal behaviour, anger management
• Eating or body-image disorders
• Habit disorders (e.g., nervous tics, fingernail biting)
• Relationship difficulties
Details
1991 educational cases 10%
2008, educational cases = 62% of 134 referrals
Others
• Sleep = 3
• Behaviour = 15
• Toileting = 10
• Autism = 4
• Anxiety-Related Concerns = 11
• Adults = 8
Details
Referrals from clients/parents or professionals
Cost $60/session
Also assessment referrals involving litigation
Major focus is on intervention
Library of Direct Instruction programs loaned to parents
Client characteristics
Majority of referrals are for students from middle primary,
through secondary, to adult
Vast majority have underdeveloped decoding/fluency
Some have comprehension issues additional to or arising
from the decoding/fluency hurdles
Parents describe a history of being reassured over the
early years by teachers
Typical educational case sequence
Phone contact – intake call
First call to client to make appointment.
Session 1: Initial Interview
(a) Relevant information
(b) Clinic’s role
(c) Agreement about what’s possible
(d) Intervention responsibility
Typical educational case sequence
Session 2: Intellectual assessment
Session 3: Assessment of reading/other educational skills
Session 4: Discussion of the written report
Sessions 5+: Reading intervention training; monitoring of
progress weekly by phone
Later sessions: Mid and post-program testing; new
programs selected
Other programs in spelling, language, maths, writing.
Example of a scripted task:
Decoding Level B Lesson 12, Ex 3
SOUND COMBINATION: oo
1. Open your Student Book to Lesson 12. Touch the letters o-o in part
1. •
oo too broom
soon
room
2. In many words, the letters o-o make the sound oo as in too. What
sound? oo.
3. You're going to read words that have the sound oo. You're going
to say the sound for the underlined part and then read the word.
4. First word. • What sound? oo. What word? Too.
5. Next word. • What sound? oo. What word? Broom.
6. (Repeat step 5 for each remaining word.)
Details in educational cases
• Postgrad students are provided with in-course training to
guide them - from initial interview to follow-up.
• In the first semester, supervisors provide direct service to
the client – minimal student contribution
• Students have access to a library of videotaped
examples
• Increased student responsibility as
competence/confidence allows
Details in educational cases
• Student sessions with clients are video-recorded supervisors provide feedback to students based on
viewing the tapes.
• Particular client-clinician interactions (e.g.,
demonstrating a teaching procedure to a parent) can
be simulated in the supervision session.
• Students rated on a competency scale each semester
Course philosophy that empiricism should
drive practice: Assessment
Majority of referrals are for reading problems
Reading assessment battery includes the 5 components
identified by the National Reading Panel (2000)
1. Phonemic awareness (CTOPP)
2. Phonics (TOWRE nonwords)
3. Fluency (TOWRE lists, DIBELS or AIMSweb passages)
4. Vocabulary (WISC or Peabody)
5. Comprehension (Brigance or Spadafore)
Also spelling (SAST, Brigance or WRAT), writing (Brigance or
TOWL), maths (WRAT, Keymath)
Course philosophy that empiricism should
drive practice: Intervention
Programs recommended must have adequate theoretical
and empirical support
Why Direct Instruction programs?
• Strong theoretical evidence
• Strong empirical evidence
• Scripted lessons reduce complexity for parents
• Inbuilt monitoring system enables rapid problem
identification
• Points system assists early cooperation from students
• Careful program design and placement ensures the
potential for success
Typical educational case sequence
A. Phone contact: Intake. First call to client to make
appointment.
B. Session 1: Initial Interview
(a) Relevant information
(b) Clinic’s role
(c) Agreement about what’s possible
(d) Intervention responsibility
Typical educational case sequence
C. Session 2: Intellectual assessment
D. Session 3: Assessment of reading/other educational skills
E. Session 4: Discussion of the written report
F. Sessions 5+: Reading intervention training; monitoring of
progress weekly by phone
G. Later sessions: Mid and post-program testing; new
programs selected
Progress monitoring
Parent behaviours – program fidelity
Evidence of having previously read and practised the script
Parent gets into the lesson quickly (without unnecessary
discussion or rehearsal), and maintains an undistracted
task focus.
Follows the script closely, and adjusts as needed when the
script applies only to a group instruction.
Uses praise when the child follows the rules, and when the
child performs especially well, e.g., when he is sitting
properly, does a difficult exercise with no mistakes,
responds well to error correction, tries harder than during
the last exercise, etc.
Parent behaviours – program fidelity
Does all of the exercises.
Ensures child remains alert, by praising desirable behaviour.
"You’re answering quickly, I like that”.
Good humouredly challenges the child, e.g., "I know you
really can do it. I bet you can do these 5 rows without
even one mistake.“
Parent ensures child can see the book when necessary, e.g.,
not blocking the words with parent’s own hand.
Parent behaviours – program fidelity
Follows the “Pause” instruction in the manual. For example,
"I'm going to name some things that are (pause)
DIFFERENT.”
Responds if a rule is broken during the lesson, reminding the
child. "I need to hear you say the word clearly with your
hand away from your mouth. Now let’s do that row
again." And later on, "I like the way you're saying the word
so clearly.“
Makes use of delayed tests to check-on and to firm-up items
that were weak earlier. "Let's do those ain words again.
They're hard. But we can do it.“
Parent behaviours – program fidelity
Employs the designated “Error Correction” procedure
If the points system is being used, parent assigns points
quickly and appropriately.
When signals such as clapping are required, parent claps
in time and at a reasonable pace.
Parent moves at a brisk, but not too fast, pace. Guided by
error rates.
Parent behaviours – program fidelity
Parent corrects every error immediately, not waiting for the
child to self-correct.
Parent does the corrections quickly and with good humour without any signs of frustration.
Parent able to present the tasks without sounding-out errors
Parent puts vigour and enthusiasm into their presentation.
Rating system
For each quality:
4. consistently well done
3. mostly well done
2. uneven
1. mostly not happening
not applicable
Divide the maximum available score by the assessed score
to establish the Mastery Score.
The aim is to achieve a Mastery Score above 90%
Issues
Limitations to generalisation of this Clinic approach
Clinic parents are motivated
Monitoring is time consuming
Major hurdles:
• Overcoming student resistance – parental control
• Maintaining lesson frequency
• Ensuring program fidelity
• Parent endurance
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
• Because they have a long history of
effectiveness
• Direct Instruction programs acknowledged as
having the exemplary research base required
under the Reading First Act
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
• A 2006 report (on 800 studies) from
American Institutes for Research
found that Direct Instruction was one of
only two programs with adequate
evidence for effectiveness in reading
instruction.
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
For Direct Instruction there were 49
studies with 182 outcomes. DI had the
largest effect size of the three models
included in the group - displaying the
Strongest Evidence of Effectiveness (U.S.
Department of Education, 2002).
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
The Council for Exceptional Children
provides informed judgements regarding
professional practices in the field.
The Direct Instruction model was judged by
the Editorial Committee to be well validated
and reliably used.
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
Adams & Engelmann' (1996) metaanalysis of DI studies produced an effect
size of .68 for the 44 acceptable
comparisons. A similar meta-analysis of
the effectiveness of the whole language
approach to reading found an effect size
of only .09
Why did we choose these Direct
Instruction programs?
DI for English language learners
The beginning reading programs with the
strongest evidence of effectiveness in this
review made use of systematic phonics such as Success for All, Direct Instruction,
and Jolly Phonics (Slavin & Cheung,
2003).
Why did we choose Corrective
Reading?
The instructional content and design of Corrective
Reading is consistent with scientifically based
reading research (Torgesen, 2004, Florida Center
for Reading Research)
My own use in schools and Clinic for over 25 years
My own research on 206 students (Aus J Sp Ed 2008)
Why did we choose Corrective Reading?
• Corrective Reading, a remedial small group
form of Direct Instruction has strong evidence
of effectiveness (Slavin, 2009, Best Evidence
Encyclopedia)
• Corrective Reading had significant positive
effects on LD students’ achievements in
reading, as well as on their attentive
behaviours in the classroom (Rowe, 2006,
ACER)
Instruction
DI derives formats from the effective teaching
literature:
• Struggling students require systematic
instruction in basic skills
• Instruction, and I don't mean facilitation, I
mean stand-up-in-front-of-the-class, put-iton-the-board, do-it-this-way-because-itworks-best, practise-until-you've-got-it-right
instruction.
Teaching behaviours help the battlers
• goals are clear to students;
• time allocated for instruction is sufficient and
continuous;
• content coverage is extensive;
• student performance is monitored;
• questions are at a low cognitive level and
produce many correct responses; a
Teaching behaviours help the battlers
• corrective feedback to students is immediate
and academically oriented.
• the teacher controls the instructional goals,
• employs material appropriate for the students’
attainment level, and
• paces the instructional episode
(Rosenshine & Berliner, 1978)
Characteristics
• Clear academic objectives
• Sequenced curriculum presented in logical
order
• Scripted lessons to assist non-specialist
teachers
• Choral responses enable monitoring each child
even in a group
Characteristics
• Brisk pace keeps students engaged
• Correction procedures reduce errors
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
The word is _______
What word?
Spell _______.
What word?
Go back to the first word in the (row/column)
What word?
Characteristics
• Positive reinforcement assists participation
• Numerous massed and spaced practice opportunities
for retention
• Continuous progress monitoring and mastery tests to
preclude unnoticed failure
• Shown effective for the range of learners from gifted
to mild intellectual disability
• Shown effective across ages from beginner to adult.
Instructional features for interventions
• Provide ample opportunities for guided
practice of new skills
• Provide a significant increase in intensity
of instruction
Instructional features for interventions
• Provide systematic cueing of appropriate
strategies in context
• Interventions are more effective when
they provide appropriate levels of
scaffolding as children learn to apply new
skills
Instructional features for interventions
• Provides systematic and explicit instruction
on whatever component skills are
deficient: phonemic awareness, phonics,
fluency, vocabulary, reading
comprehension strategies (Torgesen, 2003)
For primary level programs
• Corrective Reading program: a remedial
reading program designed for students in
Year 3 and above.
• Two strands: Decoding and
Comprehension
For primary level programs
• Within these strands are a number of
levels (A, B1, B2, C1, C2) corresponding
to the students’ attainments as assessed
with a placement test.
• The Decoding strand teaches word attack,
word identification, and fluency
Lessons involve:
• Word-attack skills
• Group story-reading
• Individual reading rate and accuracy
checkouts
• Workbook activities
Placement outcomes are:
• decoding skill below Level A, and need a
beginning reading program, such as “100
Lessons”
• appropriate for placement in one of the four
program levels, or
• already mastered skills taught at each level reading deficits probably not decoding.
Approximate year levels
• Level A - early 1st Year to early 2nd
(Start Rate 45 wpm - End Rate 60 wpm)
• Level B1 - early 2nd Year to end of 2nd
(Start Rate 60 wpm - End Rate 90 wpm)
• Level B2 - early 3rd Year to end of 3rd
(Start Rate 90 wpm - End Rate 120 wpm)
• Level C1 - early 4th Year to end of 4th
(Start Rate 100 wpm - End Rate 120 wpm)
• Level C2 - early 5th Year to end of 5th.
(Start Rate 120 wpm - End Rate 130 wpm)
For Decoding program
• Expected Progress: Approximately one
grade level in each 65 lesson program.
• Average reading delay of students arriving
at secondary school with reading problems
is about 3-4 years
Independence unlikely after only
Level B
Level B allows them to:
• more readily decode unfamiliar words than
previously
• develop automatic recognition of some
irregular words
Outcome of Level C:
• improved ability to manage texts from other
subjects
• increased coping with the large number of
irregular and technical words
• May still lack basic word knowledge - may not
show good comprehension of orally presented
or written material
For beginners and non-readers
• Group program: Reading Mastery program
(Engelmann & Bruner, 1999) McGraw Hill publisher
• For use by parents or in 1:1 tutoring:
Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons
(Engelmann, Haddox, & Bruner, 1983)
• For use by parents or in 1:1 tutoring using
computer: Funnix (Engelmann & Engelmann, 2001)
Script for Oral Blending Activity
Blending larger units (model – test)
Let’s play say-it-fast
My turn: motor (pause) boat.
I can say it fast (pause) motorboat
Your turn: motor (pause) boat
Say it fast “ Motorboat”
Blending phoneme units
To assist the mastery of simple two phoneme blends an
additional step is included in the model-test sequence. The
sequence becomes model-lead-test, thus providing an
additional prompt.
• First I’ll say am slowly. Listen: aaammm.
• Now it’s your turn to say the word slowly with me.
Take a deep breath and we’ll say aaammm. Get ready
aaammm
• Your turn to say the word slowly by yourself. Say
aaammm. Get ready "aaammm."
Script for Grapheme Blending Activity
sat
(Point to sat.) You’re going to touch under the sounds
as you sound out this word and say it fast. (Touch
under s)
What’s the first sound you’re going to say? "sss."
(Touch under a.)
What’s the next sound you’re going to say? "aaa."
(Touch under t.)
What’s the next sound you’re going to say? "t."
Script for Grapheme Blending Activity
2. Touch the first ball of the arrow. Take a deep
breath and say the sounds as you touch under
them. Get ready. Go. (Child touches under s, a,
and t and says "sssaaat." (Repeat until firm.)
3. Say it fast. "sat." Yes, what word? "sat." You read
the word sat. Good reading.
Program Evaluation
• Within program mastery tests
• Formal reading tests
• Questionnaires
Program fidelity problems:
Departures from the program such as:
• omitting specific exercises or tasks
• failing to detect and correct errors
• failing to Repeat until firm
• providing fewer than 4-5 lessons per week
problems
Reading comprehension is the product of two
processes:
1. word recognition
2. linguistic comprehension
RC = WR x LC
Accounts for up to 85% of the variance in
reading comprehension
Reading comprehension & Listening
comprehension
Johnny Yr 4
RC yr 4
LC yr 4
Sarah Yr 4
RC Yr 2
LC Yr 6
James Yr 4
RC Yr 2
LC Yr 2
Jarrad Yr 4
RC Yr 6
LC Yr 2
Johnny Yr 4
RC yr 4
LC yr 4
Doing well. Leave him to the current provisions
Sarah Yr 4
RC Yr 2
LC Yr 6
Probable decoding problem, but strong language
skills. Test on non-words, and consider Corrective
Reading: Decoding
James Yr 4 RC Yr 2
LC Yr 2
Probable decoding and comprehension problem.
Commence Corrective Reading: Decoding and
Corrective Reading: Comprehension
Jarrad Yr 4 RC Yr 6
LC Yr 2
Unusual outcome. Consider attention problems that
are evident in listening, but not problematic when text
commands his attention. Also consider face-to-face
anxiety, not evident when engaged with text.