Transcript Supporting Effective Consultation in Itinerant Pre-K SPED Services: Tools for Success William McInerney, Ph.D. Laurie Dinnebeil, Ph.D. Lyn Hale, Ph.D. Margie Spino, M.A. Judith Herb College of.

Supporting Effective Consultation in
Itinerant Pre-K SPED Services:
Tools for Success
William McInerney, Ph.D.
Laurie Dinnebeil, Ph.D.
Lyn Hale, Ph.D.
Margie Spino, M.A.
Judith Herb College of Education
University of Toledo
DEC Conference - Albuquerque, N.M.
October 16, 2009
IECSE Services Across U.S.
 OSEP does not require SEAs to report number of
children receiving itinerant services
 OSEP does not report number of children
receiving itinerant services
 OSEP does report number of children served in
different educational environments
OSEP Part B 619
Educational Environments
•
•
•
•
Regular EC program
at least 80% of time
Regular EC program
40%-79% of time
Regular EC program
less than 40% of
time
Home
•
•
•
•
Separate class
Separate school
Residential
facility
Service provider
location
Number of Children Ages 3-5 yrs. Served
Under IDEA Part B 619, in U.S. (2007)
source: IDEAdata.org
20,571
389
154,957
340,047
56,570
14,998
66,687
43,424
>80%
40-79%
<40%
Home
Service prov loc
Separate class
Separate school
Residential
Percent of Children Ages 3-5 yrs.
Served under IDEA Part B 619 in U.S. (2003-2007)
80%
70%
64%
63%
64%
65%
67%
60%
50%
Home
40%
PT EC/SPED
EC setting
30%
20%
10%
0%
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Massed vs. Distributed Practice
Massed Practice
• Child instructed with same
materials, multiple times
in single session, without a
break
• EXAMPLE: Identifying
basic shapes for 20
minutes in one day
Distributed Practice
• Child practices with same or
different materials, multiple
times, with breaks between
instruction/ practice
• EXAMPLE: Practice
identifying basic shapes for
10 mins. during sessions
scheduled several times per
week
Research Support: Distributed Practice
Adults
 Ebbinghaus,
1885/1964
 Donovan & Radosevich, 1999, meta-analysis
 Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted & Rohrer, 2006, metaanalysis
Children - ages 3 months to 8 years old
 Childers
& Tomasello, 2002 (word learning)
 Rea & Modigliani, 1985 (spelling, math)
 Rovee-Collier, 1995 (visual recognition)
 Seabrook, Brown, & Solity, 2005 (phonics)
Distributed
Practice
Research
Results
Better
Learning
with
Distributed
Practice
The Process of Consultation in
IECSE Services
OBJECTIVES OF
CONSULTATION:
Multiple Levels of
Influence and Effect
Components of Effective
IECSE Consultation Service Model
Monitoring of Child
Progress
Analysis of Learning
Environment
Feedback/Partner
Progress
Prioritizing Child IEP
Objectives
Transfer of Knowledge,
Skills, Attitudes &
Values
Administrative Support
Interpersonal
Communication Skills
Communication with
Families
Self-Advocacy &
Professional
Development
Level 1 - Addressing Priority IEP Objectives
• Review of IEP to Determine Options for
Instruction
 Use of MEPI Process with ECE Partner
Teacher
MEPI Model for Determining Level of
Intensity of Intervention
Planning Model
IEP Intervention Planning with Consultation ‘Partner’
•Maturation - Biological Influence
•Environment - Facilitative effect of materials, routines, etc.
•Peer Mediation - Structured peer interactions
•Intensive - Direct intervention necessary
M = Maturation / Biology
• Evaluate learning objective to determine if ‘target’
behavior / skill is likely to improve as a result of
biological development and experience without
significant teacher or peer involvement
• (e.g. minor articulation problems, grasping of objects,
dressing skills, response to peer communication bids)
E = Environmental Support
 Evaluate learning objective to determine if ‘target’
behavior / skill is likely to improve as a result of
child access to materials or teacher ‘engineering’ of
learning (or home) environment’. Will securing
items in a variety of containers and placing out of
child’s reach result in increased opportunities for
fine motor skill development and communication
(e.g. seeking desired toy/item with or w/o request
for assistance)?
P = Peer Intervention / Support
 Evaluate learning objective to determine if ‘target’
behavior / skill is likely to improve as a result of
child interaction with competent peers. Teacher
organization of ‘peer buddies’ and cooperative
activity groups will increase opportunities for
imitation learning (via peer modeling). Also peer
‘expectations’
for
social
interaction
and
communication may provide ‘motivation’ to target
child to improve skill or behavior
I = Intensive / Direct Intervention
• Evaluate learning objective to determine if ‘target’
behavior / skill requires IMMEDIATE intervention
and/or will enhance child’s acceptance in learning
community. Examples would include aggressive behavior,
very limited communication skills, very limited personal
mobility, and toilet training (if developmental indicators
present). Child would not be expected to make reasonable
progress toward acquisition of this skill/behavior without
DIRECT and consistent teacher intervention.
Level 1 - Addressing Priority IEP Objectives
• Matching of Priority Learning Objectives
with Curriculum
 Development of Planning Matrix
(Objectives x Activity) with ECE Partner
Teacher
Date:
ECE Teacher: Jennifer Bristol
10/23/2008
Matrix Planning Form
In the first column, list the routine/schedule and describe in detail what will be occurring during each time period for this particular day. For
each IEP objective you will address for Amanda, identify three (3) different opportunities across the day where you can embed the IEP
objectives into the daily routine. In the boxes, describe in observable terms what Amanda will do to indicate this learning objective is being
addressed.
Child A:
1. Will use words/gestures to indicate wants and
needs.
2. Will begin daily routine within 1 minute of first
prompt.
Child B:
1. Will follow 1-step directions for at least 3-5
minutes with tactile/verbal cueing as needed.
2. Will use sign/gestures to indicate wants/needs.
1: Will push switch to indicate when the student has
to go potty.
2: Will sign “all done” when going potty (model/cue
provided if needed).
Story Time/Art: 9:45-10:30

2: During story/Art time when prompted will sit at
the table.
1: Will follow directions and participate in story/art
(painting) fore at least 3 minutes (verbal/tactile
prompts as needed and wait time).
Outside Play/Walk: 10:30-11:30

2. Will come inside from outside play when given
verbal/tactile prompt.
1. Will stay with an adult while outside when provide
verbal/tactile cues.
11:30-12:00
 Prep for Lunch
2. Will get towel out of cart to get ready for lunch
when provided a verbal/tactile prompt.
12:00-1:00
 Lunch
1. Will say “muh” to indicate more when eating.
IEP Objectives
Routine/Schedule
8:45-9:15
 Unload buses/Check Book Bags
9:15-9:45
 Toileting, personal hygiene,
etc.
2. Will sign “all done” when finished eating lunch
provided verbal prompting and/or a model.
Level 1 - Addressing Priority IEP Objectives
• Matching of Priority Learning Objectives
with Teaching Strategies
 Development of Planning Matrix
(Objectives x Activity x Teaching Strategy)
with ECE Partner Teacher
SAMPLE
INTERVENTION PLANNING MATRIX - FORM B
In the first column, IEP outcomes related to Ohio Dept. of ED - ELCS standards for Devon are entered. Across the top row, 5 typical
routines that occur in the classroom are identified. For EACH of these IEP/ODE ECLS outcomes, identify 3 routines during which these
target skills can be addressed. A teaching strategy to address these objectives also is entered in this matrix.
Routine
----------------------ODE ELCS
& Child Learning
Outcomes
Arrival
Center
(SCIENCE)
Snack
Art
Reading/Circle
ODE ELCS:
Child Learning Outcome:
LA(Reading): recognize first
name in print across settings
1a
 Devon hangs coat in
cubby w/ first name
label
 Materials Cue child’s name plate on
cubbie has 1st letter of
name in RED.
1b

1c
• Devon will sit at table
with nameplate
• Gestural Prompt peer will point to
appropriate chair if
child does not respond
to ‘where do you sit?’
1d
 Choose box w/
Devon’s name
label
 Limiting Access child has to point
to or seek
assistance to
secure his box
from a # of boxes
out of reach.
1e

2a

2b
 Devon will ask for
‘bigger’ of 2 rocks
 Insufficient Materials
Child needs bigger
rock to complete rock
project (glue rock to
booklet on outline of
rock)
2c
2d
 Devon will
request larger
(‘bigger’) marker.
 Insufficient
Materials provide small
marker while
peers have large
markers
2e
 When presented w 2
books, Devon will
identify smaller book.
 Unexpected Event –
Teacher picks ‘small’
book and says ‘ Let’s
read the BIG book!’
Devon will select items and
position in classroom
labeled with 1st name.
ODE ELCS:
Child Learning Outcome:
Math (Measurement): begin
to use terms to compare the
attributes of objects
Devon will identify which of
two objects is bigger or
smaller.
Tools For Monitoring Child Progress
General Tools for Monitoring Child Progress
 New Jersey Positive Behavior Support In Schools – Direct Assessment Tools
NJPBS Direct Assessment Tools
Time Sampling
 Special Connections – Momentary Time Sampling
Includes example form, blank form, rationale for use, interactive tool
Special Connections Time Sample Tool
Interval Sampling
 Kansas Institute for Positive Behavior Support – Whole and Partial Interval Recording
Includes blank form and example
KIPBS Partial Interval Recording Example
KIPBS Partial Interval Recording Form
KIPBS Whole Interval Recording Example
KIPBS Whole Interval Recording Form
Frequency Count/Event Count
 Special Connections – Event Recording
Includes example form, blank form, rationale for use, interactive tool
Special Connections Event Recording
Level 1 - Addressing Priority IEP Objectives
• Monitoring of Progress of Child with IEP
 Selection of Appropriate Monitoring
Procedure and Form
Monitoring Stages of Skill Acquisition
Jessica S.
Child’s Name:
Observation: During play activity (water table, art, housekeeping)
Skill/Behavior: Jessica will use ASL sign and speech to request items.
Level
Level
Level
Level
1
2
3
4
DATE
Child
Child
Child
Child
communicates w peer via ASL sign and speech approx.
communicates w peer via ASL and vocalizations
communicates w peer using ASL after teacher ASL prompt
secures item from peer w/o use of ASL / speech
STAFF
INITIAL
LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE
1
4/10/09
4/17/09
4/24/09
4/31/09
5/04/09
5/11/09
wfm
lh
lh
wfm
lh
wfm
2
3
√
√
√
√
√
4
√
Monitoring Level of Assistance - Coding of Prompt Levels
Child’s Name: Steven L.
Skill/Behavior: Steven will hold 4 “ brush(1/2” diameter) and create 6 “
stroke on paper or other art materials.
PA - Hand (H) / Elbow (E) Teacher/peer support
M - Peer or teacher modeling
V - Verbal prompt - peer/teacher
I - Independent - No assistance
* MOD - Independent with modified brush / utensil
DATE
STAFF
INITIAL
LEVEL OF ASSISTANCE
1
5/10/09
5/17/09
5/24/09
5/31/09
wfm
lh
lh
wfm
2
3
√
√
4
√
√
Time Sampling
Child’s Name: Julio
Behavior/Skill: OUT OF SEAT (OFF TASK)
DATE:
TIME OF DAY/INTERVAL:
ACTIVITY:
10:00-10:04
X
10:04-10:08
X
4/10/09
10:00-10:20AM @ 4 minute intervals
GROUP ART
10:08-10:12 10:12-10:16
X
X
10:16-10:20
0
TOTAL
4
DATE:
4/17/09
TIME OF DAY/INTERVAL:
9:00-9:30 @ 6 minute intervals
ACTIVITY:
MORNING CIRCLE
9:00-9:06
9:06-9:12
9:12-9:18
9:18-9:24
9:24-9:30
X
X
X
X
X
TOTAL
5
DATE:
5/7/09
TIME OF DAY/INTERVAL:
10:30-10:40 @ 2 minute intervals
ACTIVITY:
SNACK
10:30-10:32 10:32-10:34 10:34-10:36 10:36-10:38 10:38-10:40
X
0
0
X
X
TOTAL
3
Level 2 - Addressing Professional Development Objectives of
ECE Partner Teacher: Expansion of Knowledge and Skills
• Discussion of Awareness of ECE Partner Teacher
of SPED Teaching Strategies
• Identification of Resources to Support Expansion
of SPED-related Knowledge
• Identification of Resources to Support Expansion
of SPED-related Skills
Level 3- Addressing Personal Development Objectives of
ECE Partner Teacher
• Consideration of Professional Career Objectives of
ECE Partner Teacher
• Consideration of Formal Education Objectives of
ECE Partner Teacher
Evaluating the Success of Itinerant Consultation
• Just as we need to verify that children
achieve IEP objectives, we need to verify
that consultants and consultees have
achieved their objectives in the consultation
process.
General vs. Specific Outcomes
for Itinerant Consultation
General…
 Increase opportunities
for partner to practice
communication skills.
Specific…
 Provide partner with
at least two
opportunities to
initiate interactions
with her peers during
snack time.
General vs. Specific Outcomes
for Itinerant Consultation
General…
 Help Riley to remain
engaged with toys and
materials.
Specific…
 During center time,
help Riley play with a
specific toy or material
for at least 3 minutes.
General vs. Specific Outcomes
for Itinerant Consultation
General…
 Increase Jenni’s
knowledge in regards
to working with a child
who has special needs.
Specific…
 Jenni will identify four
characteristics of
children with Down
syndrome and describe
how those
characteristics affect
learning.
General vs. Specific Outcomes
for Itinerant Consultation
General…
 Enhance Pat’s ability to
provide individualized
instruction to the child
with special needs.
Specific…
 Pat will correctly use a
system of backward
chaining to help
Jeremy put on his coat
twice a day—once at
recess and once when
it’s time to go home.
General vs. Specific Outcomes
for Itinerant Consultation
General…
 Improve the quality of
Parker’s learning
environment.
Specific…
 Tanisha and Erin (ECE
teachers) will increase the
number of materials (e.g.,
blocks of different sizes,
shapes, and colors, signs,
cars, and toy people) in the
block area in order to
expand opportunities for
learning for Parker and the
other children in the
classroom.
Judging the Success of a
Consultation Relationship
 Did the consultation session go as planned?
 What does the data tell us (reflection) ?
 How was the learning environment changed ?
What effect did it have on the child’s learning?
 Did the consultee acquire the knowledge and/or
skills that were targeted for the session? How do
you know?
 Was the consultee satisfied with the outcome of
the session re: knowledge/skill gains? How do
you know?
Following up …
Examples of Consultation Support
Level 1
 Providing information on how IEP objectives can be prioritized with




respect to factors that may be related to child progress via MEPI Model
Prioritizing IEP objectives with respect to intensity of intervention via
MEPI Model
Addressing IEP objectives in typical pre-K activities via MATRIX
planning tool
Linking IEP objectives with typical pre-K activities and general
education learning objectives via MATRIX planning tool
Using monitoring forms to assess child progress on IEP objectives
Examples of Consultation Support
Level 2
 Providing basic information on disability conditions
 Providing basic information on implications of disability on child




development
Providing information on special education teaching strategies
Demonstrating/modeling special education teaching strategies that are
linked to specific IEP objectives
Providing information on the process of screening and assessment and
eligibility for SPED services in Part C and Part B 619 programs
Providing information on the process for determination of LRE
placement in the IEP process
Examples of Consultation Support
Level 3
 Providing resources that can inform and support professional
competence of ECE partners
 Providing resources that can inform and support formal education
objectives of ECE partners
 Resources: web links, videos, articles, modeling, digital photos, LEA
website, e-mail list serve, iPod apps, cell phone images, links to state
certification/licensing information, college and university teacher
preparation programs, professional development/advocacy groups e.g.
CEC-DEC, NAEYC, etc.
Progression of Consultation Partnership
General References
 Buysse & Wesley (1993): The Identity Crisis in ECSE
 Jung (2003): Why Limit Interventions to
Professionals' Visits?
 McCollum & Yates (1994): Dyad as Focus, Triad as
Means
 McWilliam (2005): Teams focus on "betweensession" times
Project DIRECT Web Site
http://www.utoledo.edu/education/direct/
Web Site Includes:
• Training Modules related to Itinerant ECSE Services
• Articles and Links to Resources
• Professional Development Tool (P.I.E.C.E.S.)
• Information re: Training Sessions
Contact Information:
Laurie Dinnebeil, Ph.D. – [email protected]
Bill McInerney, Ph.D. – [email protected]
Lyn Hale, Ph.D. – [email protected]
Margie Spino, M.A. – [email protected]
Judith Herb College of Education - MS 954
The University of Toledo
2801 W. Bancroft St.,
Toledo, OH 43606