To Speak or Not to Speak? Is That the Only Question? The Impact of Adaptations in Eliciting Communicative Responses Danielle Zarnick 2010­2011 Intern: First Grade [email protected] Inquiry Conference April 30, 2011 Table of Contents
Description of Teaching Context…...………………………………………………………………………3
Wonderings and Questions………..…………………………………………………………………………4
Main Wondering……………………..…………………………………………………………………………..4 Sub‐questions……………………..……………………………………………………………………………….4
Data Collection & Analysis……..………...…………………………………………………………………...4
Explanation of Findings…………………...…………………………………………………………………...7
Reflections and Implications for Future Practice………………………………………………….12
Appendices Appendix A: Inquiry Brief….……………………………………………………………………………..…14 Appendix B: Daily Communication Chart..………….…………………………....…………………..20 Appendix C: Communication Graph…………..............………………………………………………21 Appendix D: Total Communication Graph……………..........………………………………………22 Appendix E: Anecdotal Notes Wordle ……………………………………………..…………………23 Appendix F: Interview Questions with Regular Education Teacher .......………………..24 Appendix G: Interview Questions with paraprofessional......................................................25 Appendix H: Interview Questions with Learning Support Teacher...................................26 Appendix I: Emotion Cards .................................................................................................................27 Appendix J: Sample screen shots from videos............................................................................31 Appendix K: Annotated Bibliography.............................................................................................33 2 Description of Teaching Context During the 2010-2011 school year, as a Professional Development Intern through
a partnership between the State College Area School District and Penn State University, I
have had the opportunity to teach in a first grade classroom. In addition to this
experience, I have worked in a partner classroom in a multi-age Learning Support room
that I assist in several times a week. Within this learning support room, I have been
working closely with Dee, a third grade student, who receives services in speech,
mathematics, reading, and writing. In her regular education third grade classroom, there
are a total of 24 students, 16 males and 8 females. Within the classroom, one student is
found on the autistic spectrum, one student is an ESL (English Second Language)
student, and one student is diagnosed with ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder). The
majority of students in the classroom are Caucasian, which is similar to the make-up of
the school and the teaching staff.
Dee is a ten year old with Down syndrome who has received services since
entering the school system as a kindergarten student. She repeated kindergarten for two
years with the same teacher. Upon entering the school in kindergarten, she received
speech services and occupational therapy weekly. Recently, Dee met exit requirements
for occupational therapy and no longer qualifies for these services. She is currently
working on spelling and language at a kindergarten level in Words Their Way and
Edmark, which are two research supported phonics programs. Her reading level is
mastery at later kindergarten/first grade level. For math, she is at a beginning first grade
level, but her mastery of concepts is rapidly increasing.
In terms of speech, in kindergarten, she had almost no vocabulary, but in mid first
grade her vocabulary use and vocabulary acquisition began to increase. More recently as
3 a 3rd grader her rate of progress has been dramatically increasing. She has started
expressing more commands and is very social with her peers, however communication
remains a great barrier. She is not hesitant to approach her peers and enjoys making them
laugh. She has worked hard to know all of the names of the students in her classroom.
However, her communication is a barrier when communicating with peers because her
rate of speaking is often quickened when she is talking about something of interest to her;
therefore it is often not easily comprehendible by other students. Not being able to
communicate with peers is increasing her frustration because she wants to be 'included'.
For example, she will say words rapidly and repetitively with gestures, until eventually
giving up if not understood. The peer relationships are further strained because Dee
spends approximately two hours (sometimes even more) per day in the Learning Support
room away from her classroom peers.
Wonderings & Questions • Main Wondering 
What adaptations are most effective in eliciting more frequent communicative
responses from Dee?
• Sub­Wonderings 
How can technology help communication?

What impact does teacher prompting have on verbal communication?
Data Collection and Data Analysis Throughout the course of my inquiry, I have collected and analyzed several types
of data to reflect upon the advantages and disadvantages of various adaptations. Data was
4 collected before, during, and after adaptations were made. As I planned to collect my
data, I tried to focus my collection on what types of responses elicited from Dee should
be considered communicative feedback.
Anecdotal Records
To get a baseline for my student, I kept a notebook with anecdotal records. I
recorded what the student was working on and her behaviors during that time period. I
made specific notes of how she was communicating most frequently during the time
period. For example, she mainly uses verbal communication, however, she does know
some American Sign Language signs that she will use in conjunction with verbal
communication. I maintained these anecdotal notes throughout the inquiry process to
analyze the notes for any patterns that I may have seen across several time periods. I also
recorded any additional notes on her mood, productivity, events at home, etc. The
purpose of this was to make sure that I could track her communicative responses and also
keep track of any other variables that might have affected Dee's behavior.
When analyzing the anecdotal notes, I paid close attention to patterns of behavior
that were noted, and specifically the amount of communication that was elicited during
this time frame. I placed my typed notes into a Wordle to see which words were used
most frequently throughout my note keeping.
Video Recording
I videotaped several occasions that I worked with this student. The videos are
mainly focused around math or working on conversational phrases. From the videos, I
have used StudioCode to code for specific communicative behaviors such as speaking or
5 gesturing and whether or not she initiated the response. I analyzed the clips further to see
if teacher prompting may impact the frequency of communicative responses. I coded for
the same behaviors before, during, and after my adaptations were made to see which were
most effective providing evidence for my main wondering.
Communication Chart
The paraprofessional in her third grade room keeps a daily tally of Dee's
communication in various areas (Appendix B). Examples that are charted include: getting
someone's attention, greeting someone, answering questions, making choices, sharing
information, etc. In addition to the tally marks, notes are made regarding the
activity/subject for each time period and whether the communication is classified as a
gesture, as speech, or using a voice output device. Although it is impossible to tally every
one of the instances (specials, other paraprofessional duties, etc.) they provide strong
evidence toward Dee’s progress. I analyzed this data to see if there were changes
overtime as interventions were implemented (Appendix C & D). I placed the data in
spreadsheets and charts so that the numerical information was easier to compare. From
these graphs, I was able to see specific increases or stability within different categories.
Within this inquiry, data was also collected during interviews with Dee's regular
education teacher, paraprofessional, and learning support teacher (Appendix F). Notes
were taken on these interviews to gain professional opinions on Dee's progress that may
not be able to be represented through numerical data. Specific questions were asked that
focused on her progress, her classroom behaviors, her social interactions with peers,
technology usage and her academic achievements. From these interviews, I was able to
6 gain valuable information before implementing any adaptations so that at the end of the
inquiry, I could compare their opinion of her progress.
Explanation of Findings: Claims and Evidence Claim 1: When some technologies were implemented to practice speech,
communicative responses increased.
As I analyzed my data collected throughout my inquiry, specifically the lessons
that were video recorded, I noticed that the adaptation of some technologies greatly
increased the frequency of communicative responses from Dee. Technologies that were
implemented involve a computer, an iPad, and a communication board.The data that was
collected and analyzed strongly supports this belief.
Evidence A:
The main source of evidence to support this claim comes from the lessons in the
learning support room when the iPad was a focus versus any other technology. The iPad
was used as an instructional adaptation/tool to elicit more verbal communication, not to
be used solely as a communication device. The videos show a student who is much more
focused during her work when the iPad is integrated into the lesson. An important factor
is that these lessons were conducted in a one-on-one setting in the learning support room.
This is important because when technology is integrated in the regular education
classroom she does not like using it to "speak" for her.
Evidence B:
Initially I believed that by integrating any technology adaptations, all would be
greatly effective in eliciting more communicative feedback, however, this was not the
7 case. Dee very much prefers to only use the iPad instructionally, rather than as a tool for
communicating. Furthermore, she does not like using her communication board in any
setting that we found (within her regular education or learning support classroom). This
was most evident during morning meetings in the regular education classroom where Dee
refused to use the board and wanted to communicate verbally without technology
assistance (Appendix F).
Evidence C:
This claim is also supported through the student's communicative responses while
on the computer. Although the student is focused and works hard while working on a
laptop, she is not very communicative, in fact she is actually less communicative when
she is working independently on the laptop versus no technology adaptations. This is
evident through the professional opinions of the teachers who work with Dee. The
paraprofessional stated, "When I get out any device she will either push it away or say "put away" We tried to use the iPad in a social setting in the regular classroom and D pushed icons and said nothing."
As evident in the videos, anecdotal notes, and professional opinions Dee clearly
has a preference towards which technology she would like to use and when she would
like to use it. This preference may therefore impact the amount of communicative
responses that she will elicit. From the data, it is evident that the most effective
technology (out of those implemented) in eliciting communicative responses is the iPad,
however only when it is used to practice speaking and not actually speak for the child.
8 Claim 2: Use of consistent prompting, has lead Dee to speak in longer
phrases.
A sub-wondering that my data greatly focused around was the relationship
between teacher prompting and communicative responses. I wanted to know that if I
consistently prompted and focused in on a few areas where Dee could expand her speech,
if she would begin to speak in longer phrases. From the data that was analyzed, evidence
of Dee's capabilities to speak in longer phrases, in the areas where I used consistent
prompting, is evident.
Evidence A:
An area where I focused greatly was conversational phrases that I prompted Dee
to use. At the beginning of my inquiry, I would see Dee informally in the hallway or
lunchroom and I would say hello to her. As evident in my anecdotal notes, Dee’s initial
response was to sign the letter 'z' (for Ms. Zarnick) when she saw me. I would make a
point to see Dee for a moment each day to continue with his prompting. In addition, I
started integrating conversational phrases into our sessions and applications that we used
on the iPad. By consistently prompting her she has now progressed to longer phrases
when I see her in the hallway, lunchroom, or learning support room.
By the end of the inquiry, when I would see Dee I would always start with the
consistent prompt: "Hello Dee! How are you?" Within the past month of my anecdotal
notes Dee's response has greatly expanded. She now will wave and say, "Hi Miss Z" with
a smile on her face (sometimes she still includes the signed 'Z'). As recorded in my
anecdotal notes, on February 28th, Dee even responded with "I'm fine", in addition to
9 saying "Hello." Since this point, in anticipation of my question, she will often see me and
state "Hi Ms. Z. Good."
Evidence B:
Another piece of evidence to support this claim is the professional opinions of the
learning support teacher, Dee's third grade regular education teacher, and the
paraprofessional in her regular education room (Appendix F). The paraprofessional
stated, " She is talking more instead of using gestures although she will speak incoherently if she's excited about something or trying to get out of doing her class work." To support this statement, the regular education teacher also expressed her belief that because of consistent prompting, Dee is now able to speak in longer phrases (Appendix F).
Evidence C:
I think you switched fonts here: Lastly, a strong piece of evidence to support this
claim comes from analyzing the videos taken throughout the inquiry. From the videos, I
have seen the progress that the student has made. Initially, it would take several prompts
to get the student focused in on the lesson. However, because of the consistent prompting
and clear expectations she has been able to make great progress in reading, writing and
math. The videos that were taken at the beginning of the inquiry show a student who
would only answer in one-word phrases. On the other hand, videos taken towards the end
of the inquiry show evidence of short phrases starting to be used. For example, in a video
taken in February, the student held her pencil out to me and said, "pencil" to indicate that
she wanted it sharpened. The progress is then shown in a video taken two months later
where Dee hands her pencil to me and said, "Pencil sharpen please" then gestures towards
10 the sharpener to ask if she could go sharpen it. This is strong evidence that the student has
been able to make notable progress in speaking in longer phrases due to consistent
prompting.
Claim 3: Teacher prompting has lead Dee to speak more clearly.
Evidence A:
Within Dee's regular education classroom, she has now progressed to be able to
say all the student's names clearly and loudly, specifically during morning meeting. At
the beginning of the year, as evidenced in the paraprofessional and regular education
teachers’ interviews, Dee was only able to say the names of a few children. As the year
has progressed, Dee has been consistently prompted to learn the names of students. In my
anecdotal notes for example on Valentine's Day, Dee handed out her valentines to each
student and was prompted to say their names. By focusing in on this area, Dee was able
to eventually say the names of each student in her classroom, something that is vital to
social integration into her classroom community.
Evidence B:
As previously stated, Dee has worked hard on acquiring conversational pieces,
not just on phrasing but also speaking more clearly. Through my data I have realized the
progressions that Dee has made to speak more clearly. When analyzing the videos, it is
evident that Dee can speak more clearly by the end of the inquiry than the beginning. I
believe that teacher prompting has lead her to speak more clearly because we are able to
understand her more and therefore focus on what she is trying to say and reinforcing how
it needs to sound. The videos show that when answering yes/no questions or given
choices, her answers are far clearer now than at the beginning of the year. For example, I
11 may have had to prompt her several times to understand her choice for computer time
over a puzzle, however, now she can clearly state her choice.
Evidence C:
Lastly, the professional opinions of those that work with Dee provide strong
evidence to this claim, because it is not something that can really be judged or
represented numerically. In the closing interviews, the paraprofessional stated, "She is saying "yes" very clearly now where at the beginning of the year she would just shake her head. She is saying other words more frequently now like "bathroom," "stop it," "drink," and any responses given during class work."
Reflections & Implications for Future Practice Completing my inquiry with one student has really taught me about what any
student is able to achieve, even in such a short amount of time. Dee is a student who
thrives on praise, who is very proud of her work, and who has a great sense of humor. As
a result of her positive personality, she has been able to meet with great success this
school year academically and socially.
Throughout the inquiry process, I have gained more experience, knowledge, and
appreciation for education and teaching than I ever could have imagined. Through this
inquiry I was able to gain greater insight into this student, future students, and myself. I
knew that I would be facing a challenge because my inquiry was based solely on the
results of one child. For example, this child's work is greatly affected by changes in her
daily routine (not getting enough sleep etc.). As a result, I was prepared to not have as
much evidence as I actually did, although it is hard to represent numerically.
12 Upon starting this inquiry I had a page full of ideas, interventions, and
adaptations that I was eager to try. While beginning to collect data, I realized that a page
full of ideas is not really practical because of the time constraints. Once I realized what
was truly manageable, I was able to focus in my adaptations to what I truly wanted to
work with the student on, realizing that my work could continue even after my inquiry
was finished.
When I was at the point to begin analyzing data I panicked because my graphs did
not point "straight up" showing a complete progression. However, through the support of
the Professional Development School (PDS), I was able to realize that data did not all
have to be quantitative, and that qualitative data was just as effective as evidence. With
this realization also came the understanding that I did not specifically have to see
progress in every area, but this was rather an inquiry for me to learn more about myself as
a teacher.
From the inquiry process, I have learned that when I face a problem, whether it is
with a single student, a whole class, or involving a teaching style, it is my responsibility
as a professional to seek information on the situation, to plan and implement
interventions and to analyze the data to research a solution. Because of the strong support
and guidance that I received throughout my first inquiry, I now feel confident to repeat
this process throughout my teaching career, keeping in mind that teaching is circular and
improvements can always be made!
This is a strong paper, Danielle! I know I’ve said it before but this is evidence of your
growth as a writer and a teacher who inquires about her practice and her students’
13 learning. I’m confident you will always have an inquiry stance toward your teaching.
Happy Inquiring!
Appendix A: Inquiry Brief
During the 2010-2011 school year, as a Professional Development Intern through
a partnership between the State College Area School District and Penn State University, I
have had the opportunity to teach in a first grade classroom at Ferguson Township
Elementary. In addition to this experience, I have worked in a partner classroom in a
multi-age Learning Support room that I assist in several times a week. Within this
learning support room, I have been working closely with Dee, a third grade student who
receives services in speech, mathematics, reading, and writing. In her regular education
third grade classroom, there are a total of 24 students, 16 being male and 8 being female.
Within the classroom, one student has autism, one ESL (English Second Language)
student, and one student diagnosed with ADD (Attention Deficit Disorder). The majority
of the classroom is Caucasian, which is similar to the make-up of the school and the
teaching staff.
Dee is a ten year old with Down syndrome who has received services upon
entering the school system as a kindergarten student. She repeated kindergarten for two
years with the same teacher. Upon entering Ferguson Township School in kindergarten,
she received speech services and occupational therapy weekly. Recently, Dee met
requirements for occupational therapy and no longer qualifies for these services. She is
currently working on spelling and language at a kindergarten level in Words Their Way
14 and Edmark. Her reading level is mastery at later kindergarten/first grade level. For math,
she is at a beginning first grade level, but her mastery of concepts is rapidly increasing.
In terms of speech, in kindergarten, she had almost no vocabulary, but towards
first grade this began to increase. More recently within this school year as a 3rd grader her
rate of progress has been dramatic. She has started eliciting more commands and is very
social with her peers, however communication remains a great barrier. She is not hesitant
to approach her peers and enjoys making them laugh. She has worked hard to know all of
the names of the students in her classroom. However, her communication is a barrier
when communicating with peers because her speech is often quickened when she is
talking about something of interest to her; therefore it is often not easily comprehendible
to other students. By not being able to communicate with peers it is visibly increasing her
frustration because she wants to be 'included'. The peer relationships are further strained
because Dee spends approximately two hours (sometimes even more) per day in the
Learning Support room.
Rationale
Throughout my experience in my partner classroom, I have noticed that one
student has struggled with communication because of her disability. She has a wonderful
sense of humor and takes great pride in completing her work. She is very imaginative and
likes to encourage others to play or joke with her. Dee enjoys being helpful to her peers
and teachers and is a very kinesthetic learner. She does well when using math
manipulatives or a lesson that involves moving around. For example, a social studies
lesson on different forms of dance had her dancing in the middle of the circle in front of
the whole regular education class. Seeing her success in other areas, as well as her
15 struggles to communicate, I began to wonder what adaptations could be made to elicit
more communication.
Throughout my observations and my time working with her, I have seen her using
many different communication devices in an effort to increase her communication with
her teaching staff and peers. Although there have been some improvements, I am
interested to see what other adaptations can be effective for her, whether it be provided
through a communication device, an iPad, or guided instruction.
I have read through several journals, articles, and studies regarding children with
learning support how to increase their communication skills. The lack of research on this
topic has intrigued me even further. I want to inquire into this topic where researchers
have never directly explored with the same wonderings.
Main Wondering:
What adaptations are most effective in eliciting more frequent communicative responses
from Dee?
Sub Wonderings:
•
•
•
•
•
•
How can technology help communication?
How can manipulatives be used during math to increase communication?
In what way is on-task behavior related to responses?
How can self-assessment of reading help communication?
What impact does teacher prompting have on verbal communication?
What is the child's preferred method of communicating?
Timeline:
Date
Week of February 21st
What I plan to accomplish
Data collection, Data analysis
-Collect On-task behavior analysis
-1st Intervention: implementing mood chart
16 -Show the movie of Book Buddies to
her, ask her how she feels
-Initiate the conversation "Hello Dee,
How are you?" every time I see her.
Prompt her for the response "I am
_____. How are you?"
-Work with math manipulatives
-To manipulatives keep her more on
task?
-Do they help her understand the
concepts more?
-Should they only be used to reinforce
a task?
Week of February 28th
Week of March 7th
Week of March 14th
-film or document results
-Final Inquiry Brief Due Fri. March 4th
- Data collection, Data analysis
-Math problems per minute
-Edmark
-Anecdotal notes on interactions
initiated
-2nd Intervention: Recording reading for
iBook
-Have D read a poem out loud &
record- "Shapes"
-Start working on own illustrations for
the book
-Work with math manipulatives
-film or document results
Spring Break
Interpret data collected from Para on daily
communication
-Combine data to see relationships
between: subjects, who she is working
with, change in schedule, etc.
Plan for next interventions
-Showing Dee video of herself
reading, documenting response
-Survey Dee for preferred method of
communicating
-Data collection, Data analysis
-Finish illustrations for iBook
-3rd Intervention: Survey Dee for her
preferred method of communicating
-Work with math manipulatives
-film or document results
17 Week of March 21st
Week of March 28th
Week of April 4th
Week of April 11th
Week of April 18th
Week of April 25th
Week of May 2nd
Week of May 9th
-Data collection, Data analysis
-Put together iBook
-Collect On-Task Behavior Analysis
-Continue 2 interventions, documenting
results- noticing changes
-Data analysis, Draft Paper
--4th Intervention: Provide
microphone/iPad to promote
communication
-Encourage her to sing a song & film
-Encourage her to read a familiar poem
into the microphone
-Encourage her to use the iPad
applications to type sentences to further
a conversation
-Can watch video of herself if she
completes a set number of
communicative tasks
-Data analysis, Draft Paper
-Make representations of data, making
connections across data
-Charts/graphs
-Final paper presentation
-Presentation Practice
-Inquiry Paper to PDA via TS
-Revise Final Paper
-Inquiry to Bern May 13th
Data Collection: • On-Task Behavior Analysis- PDA or I will conduct this during a ten minute
time period in the learning support room.
o Relates to: In what way is on-task behavior related to responses?
• Initiated Communication- collected daily by the Paraprofessional for specific
initiated behaviors, tally marks are marked on a chart with anecdotal notes
taken. The chart is broken down into time periods during each day. These
behaviors include: greeting others, getting someone's attention, answer
questions, tell news/comment, ask for help, make choices, and expressing
manners and consideration for others.
o This data is being collected in the regular education classroom by the
paraprofessional.
o Relates to: What impact does teacher prompting have on verbal
communication? What is the child's preferred method of
communicating? How can manipulatives be used during math to
increase communication?
18 •
•
Video Recordings: collected weekly to create a portfolio of student progress.
Some videos will be coded using Studiocode, whereas some will be a
representation of the child's work and progress to create a project (iBook). The
electronic project will be created to show to the student as a form of selfassessment.
o Relates to: How can technology help communication? How can
self-assessment of reading help communication? How can
manipulatives be used during math to increase communication?
Anecdotal Notes: These notes will be taken during each session with case
study. I will be looking for patterns of behavior and progress in specific
subject areas in addition to keeping track of initiated behaviors within the
Learning Support room. I will take these notes during the times that I work
with her or that I observe the paraprofessional working with her. o Relates to: What impact does teacher prompting have on verbal
communication? What is the child's preferred method of
communicating? How can manipulatives be used during math to
increase communication? 19 Appendix B: Daily communication Chart
Mon Tues Wed Thurs Fri Total # Greet Others Share and show objects Tell News/ Comment Answer Questions Express Feelings Request Objects Request information Share Information Relate events Call attention to how things are related/ similar and/or different Talk about past and future Negotiate State Opinion Tease Threaten Make up story Express manners and consideration for others Total # Week of _____________________ Given various opportunities throughout the day and prompts as needed, Dee will communicate different intentions throughout the school day and across environments through the use of gesture/speech/ voice output device. 20 Appendix C: Communication Graph
21 Appendix D: Total Communication Graph
22 Appendix E: Anecdotal Notes Wordle
23 Appendix F: Interview Questions with Regular Education
1. Is D more communicative when using the iPad or laptop? How can you tell?
I do not find Dee to be more communicative with the ipad in the classroom. The
paraprofessional will ask her if she would like to use it to communicate and she does not
usually want to use it. She seems to prefer communicating like the other students in the
classroom. Although Dee loves the laptop and is very good with a laptop, she is not more
communicative with it. She seems to prefer to explore on the laptop and play games.
2. How do you know she doesn't want to use the communication board?
She will usually tell the teacher 'no' when given the option of using the
communication board.
3. Has she ever wanted to use the communication board in a conversational setting?
I do not believe that she has ever wanted to use the board (she has never asked
to use it...at least to me knowledge), but she has used it when told by her teachers. I feel
that when Dee is in a regular classroom setting, she wants to be just like the other
students and do/say what they are doing, which is communicating without a piece of
technology.
4. What do you think of Dee's progress (if any/ what areas)?
Dee has made great progress in all areas. Although she still struggles with her
speech, she has definitely made improvements and is much more clear when talking. She
is saying names and words clearer, so that even some students understand what she is
saying. (At the beginning of the year, it was very difficult to understand anything.) She
is also making nice progress in reading, writing, and math. Dee is able to work in a
handwriting, spelling, or math booklet in the classroom with the other students
independently for at least 20 minutes.
5. Anything else you think I should know about changes or areas that have stayed
the same with Dee's communication?
Dee has been saying the names of students in the classroom much more clearer.
She also seems to be expanding her vocabulary more. I hope her nice progress
continues!!
24 Appendix G: Interview with paraprofessional
1. Is D more communicative when using the iPad or laptop? How can you tell?
D tends to be more communicative WITHOUT any device. When we use any
device she requires frequent prompting or she doesn't respond or participate.
2. How do you know she doesn't want to use the communication board?
When I get out any device she will either push it away or say "put away."
3. Has she ever wanted to use the communication board in a conversational setting?
We tried to use the iPad in a social setting in the regular classroom and D pushed
icons and said nothing.
4. What do you think of D's progress (if any/ what areas)
As far as communication goes, D will speak when given choices or if the
questions are yes/no questions. She is saying "yes" very clearly now where at the
beginning of the year she would just shake her head. She is saying other words more
frequently now like "bathroom," "stop it," "drink," and any responses given during class
work.
5. Anything else you think I should know about changes or areas that have stayed
the same with D's communication?
She is talking more instead of using gestures although she will speak incoherently
if she's excited about something or trying to get out of doing her class work.
25 Appendix H: Interview with Learning Support Teacher
1. Is Dee more communicative when using the iPad or laptop? How can you tell?
I think Dee has been more communicative using the IPAD since you have been
using it with her more. Also I think she is just more communicative in general when
asked questions, etc.
2. How do you know she doesn't want to use the communication board?
She has said that she does not want to use it.
3. Has she ever wanted to use the communication board in a conversational setting?
She has never requested to use the board with me but I have seen her in previous
times use the board to play interactive games that have been teacher directed.
4. What do you think of Dee's progress (if any/ what areas)
I think Dee has made progress. She is doing well with answering the question
"How are you?" Also, asking it as well with less prompts that initially. She has also made
great progress in math and in saying her numbers to fifty.
5. Anything else you think I should know about changes or areas that have stayed
the same with Dee's communication?
This year she is doing more of asking if she can go to the bathroom and she is
overall expressing her needs/desires a bit more clearly.
26 Appendix I: Pictures of Emotion Cards
27 28 29 30 Appendix J: Sample screen shots from videos
31 32 Appendix K: Annotated Bibliography
1. Baroody, A. (2006). Why children have difficulties mastering the basic number combinations and how to help them. Teaching Children Mathematics, 13(1), 22‐22. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/doc
view/62004239?accountid=13158 a. This article gives and in‐depth discussion as to how children learn basic math facts. It provides insight into why many children may have difficulty mastering these skills and how teachers can prevent and help overcome these learning obstacles. This will be used within the math component of my inquiry because this is at the current level of material that the student is working on mastering, therefore any insight into how to focus interventions in this area will be a great advantage. 2. Behrend, J. L. (2003). Learning‐disabled students make sense of mathematics. Teaching Children Mathematics, 9(5), 269‐273. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.co
m/docview/62004239?accountid=13158 a. This article discusses five children in primary grades that are identified as
having a learning-disability. This article focused on instruction that involved
children making sense of word problems and being able to justify their answers. I
believe that this is a great resource to be used within my inquiry because it
discusses that an adjustment in the question type versus prompting that may cause
a change in student behavior or success.
3. Faragher, R., Brady, J., Clarke, B., & Gervasoni, A. (2008). Children with down syndrome learning mathematics: can they do it? yes they can! Australian Primary Mathematics Classroom, 13(4), 10‐15. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.co
m/docview/61917612?accountid=13158
a. This article discusses a study of children with Down syndrome and their mathematical development. It offers suggestions from the analysis of the data from the study conducted and from the experience of the author. The article 33 offers teaching approaches that can be used to assist children with Down syndrome (DS). This article applies to my inquiry because it gives examples of data collection used, which can be applied in my case study. In addition, the article discusses multiple suggestions for teachers that can be applied as interventions while working through my inquiry. 4. Feeley, K., & Jones, E. (2008, October). Strategies to address challenging behaviour in young children with down syndrome [Electronic version]. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 12(2), 153‐163 a. This case study discusses the possibility that challenging behavior may be associated with the way that individuals respond to the behaviors within their environment. Behavior based intervention strategies are used to show their effectiveness throughout the case studies. This is an article that will provide some guidance for my inquiry in regards to addressing some challenging behaviors that may interfere with interventions being implemented. I will use this article and the strategies mentioned to hopefully overcome some of the behavioral challenges. 5. Gilmore, L. and Cuskelly, M. (2009), A longitudinal study of motivation and competence in children with Down syndrome: early childhood to early adolescence. Journal of Intellectual Disability Research, 53: 484–492. doi: 10.1111/j.1365‐2788.2009.01166.x a. This longitudinal study was conducted to observe and analyze 25 children with DS and their motivation and competence. Early interventions with mastery motivation showed to have later positive impacts in students with DS. This study will be a guiding force during my inquiry to help choose my interventions and provide some reasoning and explanations for specific behaviors shown. 6. J. Harris, personal communication, February 16, 2011. I conducted an interview with Julie Harris, the third grade teacher of D. The interview questions were focused on what adaptations she makes to elicit more feedback and participation in the classroom from the student. In addition, the questions focused on eliciting responses regarding her characteristics as a student and as a peer. This interview offered me prior knowledge on the case study to help understand her more in an environment that I usually do not interact with her. I will use these answers to help set up motivators for my interventions that I plan to conduct. 34 7. Kennedy EJ, Flynn MC. Early phonological awareness and reading skills in children with Down syndrome. Down Syndrome Research and Practice. 2003;8(3);100‐109. a. This article discusses the processes underlying literacy skills in children with DS. Nine children were tested in various areas such as speech perception, hearing acuity, speech production, expressive language, etc. The results showed that children with DS have a harder time with reading acquisition due to reduced phonological awareness skills (in addition to delays caused by cognitive abilities). This study provides great detail into the areas that were tested and how they were tested. It provides data that will give me a broad understanding of D's background, and provide me with a general expectations foundation to begin to intervene at. 8. Losq, C. S. (2005). Number concepts and special needs students: The power of ten‐frame tiles. Teaching Children Mathematics, 11(6), 310‐310. Retrieved fromhttp://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com
/docview/62004239?accountid=13158 a. This article discusses how a common manipulative that teachers are using may not be the most useful tool for building number understanding for many students. This will be a great source for my inquiry because it discusses what one of my interventions will be centered around: math manipulatives. 9. McConnochie, J., & Sneath, G. (2007). Katrina's progress with learning mathematics. Down Syndrome Research and Practice, 12(1), 34‐37. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.co
m/docview/61917612?accountid=13158 a. This document describes a 10 year old female who has DS. It discusses her progress with learning number concepts and arithmetic skills over a few years. It highlights teaching strategies and visual learning supports that helped the child. I believe that this article will be a substantial source in my inquiry to guide me towards motivating and supporting D. 35 10. Rietveld, C. M. (2005). Classroom learning experiences of mathematics by new entrant children with down syndrome. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental Disability, 30(3), 127‐138. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.co
m/docview/61917612?accountid=13158 a. This article discusses a case study of three boys with Down syndrome and the quality of the 'learning process during mathematics.' The study finds that the case studies all experience barriers to learning because teachers were not able to provide the conceptual feedback and work to improve and advance their math understandings. As a result, it discusses the role that teachers need to have as mediators of learning. This article is a great reference that relates to my inquiry because it discusses the delivery that a teacher needs to have when working with a child with DS. It will serve as a great model when I implement my interventions. 11. Roberts, J. E., Price, J. and Malkin, C. (2007), Language and communication development in down syndrome. Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews, 13: 26–35. doi: 10.1002/mrdd.20136 a. This article discusses research in language and communication development in children with DS. It goes into further discussion into the two specific topics of hearing and oral motor skills. It goes through all stages of language development within a child that has DS into adulthood. This article will be a source that is directly related to my big topic because it discusses why there is not frequent or clear communication with Dee. They discuss language development across four different areas which all are areas that interventions can be implemented in during my inquiry. 12. Suh, J. M., Johnston, C. J., & Douds, J. (2008). Enhancing mathematical learning in a technology‐rich environment. Teaching Children Mathematics, 15(4), 235‐
241. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/doc
view/62004239?accountid=13158 36 a. This article discusses co‐teaching mathematics using technology. It discusses how to address the needs of special needs students and give specific examples to show how technology can amplify and extend mathematical thinking. This article relates closely to my inquiry because I plan to implement an intervention with Dee that involves technology usage to elicit more frequent responses from her. 13. S. Thomas, personal communication, February 14, 2011. a. I conducted an interview with Susan Thomas, the Learning Support Teacher for Dee, regarding Dee's history as a student. This teacher has worked with Dee for over four years and has seen her greatly progress since kindergarten. This interview gave me great background knowledge on the student to learn her strengths, her weaknesses, and her likes/dislikes. This will be greatly used throughout my inquiry as a source for planning interventions so that they are catered closely to Dee's needs. 37