susan faucheux janna oetting asha, 2001
Post on 25-Dec-2015
218 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
COLLABORATIVE BASED THERAPY MODEL
• Lab serves 12-16 students per session
• Curriculum based language objectives– Focus on skills needed for school/life– Focus on compensatory strategies to overcome language
deficits
• Daily collaboration between special education faculty, target children, peer models
• Weekly/monthly collaboration with university personnel
GOAL OF THE LANGUAGE LITERACY LAB
• To provide intervention/remediation in receptive and expressive language skills, math problem solving, reading comprehension skills, and written language skills Work station/small group centered Collaborative service delivery model Multisensory instructional approach Curriculum based goals/objectives
LANGUAGE LAB FACILITY
Reading/VisualCenter
Writing/ManipulativeCenter
ComputerCenter
Net TV
ListeningCenter
Role-Play/Game Center
Net TVNetTV
LISTENING CENTER• Novels/stories under
headphones• Grammar and Math
to Rap Music• Computer games/
Internet research via Net TV
• Phonemic Awareness
• Listening Comprehension
WRITING/MANIPULATIVE CENTER
• Written work• Manipulative
activities• Journaling• Board Work• Overhead
Transparencies• Note taking
READING/VISUAL CENTER
• Board Games• Movies• TV/VCR
presentations• Group/Silent
Reading activities
• Accelerated Reader activities
ROLE-PLAY/GAME CENTER
• Role – Playing• Board Games• Net TV Activities• Team Competition• Study Skills• Test Taking• Art Work/Projects• Math activities
COMPUTER CENTER
• Computer Games• Computer Tests• Internet Research• Easy Book/Story
Writer• Grammar activities• E-Books• Teacher Resource
Center
FLOOR ACTIVITIES
• Floor Games• Hop-On Grammar• Living Sentences• Line Dancing• Art Projects• Puzzles• Map Skills• Cable TV viewing
STUDENT MAILBOXES/FOLDERS
• Student Data Folders
• Peer Tutor Sign-in
• Worksheet Mailboxes
• The Learning Tree
THE LEARNING TREE
• Grade level Branches
• Student leaves for 80% > mastery
• Student competition
• Visible accomplishments
• Salient rewards
STUDENT FOLDER FORMS
Student Log Forms
date of attendance
present/absent comments% of mastery
Student Data Form
student identification
IEP/evaluation information
medical information
student schedule
READING ACTIVITY
Orally answer comprehension questions
Determine main idea/predictions
Identify specific story details
•Teacher Directed•Peer tutor aided
MATH/READING/LANGUAGE ACTIVITY
Design Haunted House, draw maps
Internet researchCollect money,
count, make deposit
Write story on Easy Book
•Teacher Directed/•Peer-tutor/Para- Educator Monitored
GRAMMAR ACTIVITY• Teacher Directed• Peer tutor assisted
Identify parts of speechFormulate complex sentencesExpand sentences with
more complex structuresUnscramble sentencesIdentify incorrect sentence structures
FUNCTIONAL/THEMATICACTIVITIES
• Design, construct, and run Haunted House – students collect, count, and deposit money.
• Treasure Island-read story, build the island and characters, draw maps
• Scavenger hunt utilizing maps in the zoo in the rainforest section.
• Rain forest unit – write E-Book• Huckleberry Finn-read novel, take the trip• American Revolution – learn about the
people, customs, politics
Research Questions
• Who is served by the lab?
• Does the lab lead to improved skills of the children?
• How do children classified as language impaired differ from those on the special education caseload who do not receive this educational classification?
Who is Served?
• 44 children on special education caseload
22 Learning Disabled 8 Speech-Language Impaired
9 Speech-Language/Learning Disabled 5 Other
Measures of Student Performance
• Teacher evaluations
• Student evaluations
• Students’ GPA in 5 subjects
• Iowa National Percentiles
Teacher Evaluations
• Anonymous questionnaire collected Spring, 2001 – Have you visited the lab?
– Do you have students who attend lab?
– Did the SLP collaborate with you on a regular basis?
– Do you feel the lab has helped your students?
– Should the lab continue?
– Do you have any suggestions to improve the lab?
Results
• 15 teachers completed questionnaire
• All had visited lab, had students in lab, and reported weekly collaboration with SLP
• All felt the lab should continue
• Suggestions:– Larger facility, incorporate more math into lab
Student Questionnaires
• How does the lab help you with school?
• How does the lab hurt your school work?
• Should the lab be offered next year?
• How would you change the lab?
Results
• 33 students completed the anonymous questionnaire– 28 (85%) provided positive comments about
lab helping them– 28 (85%) felt the lab should continue– Suggestions:
• More advanced help, larger facility, have lab everyday, more tables, more peer tutors, let students select centers, let students work on homework
GPA
1999-2000
No Lab
Average GPA =1.67
5th = 1.81
6th = 1.49
7th = 1.30
8th = 2.08
2000-2001
Lab
Average GPA = 1.87
5th = 1.68
6th = 2.11
7th = 1.53
8th = 2.19
Iowa National Percentiles
• 1998-1999 No Lab (n = 7)
• 1999-2000 No Lab (n = 14)
• 2000-2001 Lab (n=14)
• All analyses involve pair-wise comparisons (child is compared to him/herself)
Results
Iowa Composite Percentiles1999 29.71 (20.68)
2000 28.64 (19.85)
2001 38.57 (15.60) t(13) = 2.70, p = .018 *
Math differences t(13) = 2.61, p = .02 *
Writing differences t(13) = 3.20, p =.007 *
Other Indicators of Success
• 1999-2000 50% of 8th grade students in special education graduated.
• 2000-2001 70% of 8th grade students in special education graduated.
• All students completed Treasure Island Reading Comprehension Test with 80% during Spring, 2001.
Writing from Journals
• Kranz, L. (1999). All about me: A keepsake journal for kids. Flagstaff, AZ: Rising Moon.
• Fall 2000 at beginning of school year
• Spring 2001 at end of school year– 3 journal entries each semester
Results
• Fall, 2000
– Total utterances per entry = 12.80
– Difference word roots per entry = 46.65
– Use of complex syntax in utterances = 4.80
• Spring, 2001
– Total utterances per entry = 16.05
– Different word roots per entry = 60.95
Use of complex syntax in utterances = 6.20
Question 3
• How do children with a history and current classification of speech-language impairment differ from others in special education that do not carry this educational classification?
– 10 speech-language impaired/+/-LD– 10 learning disabled only
Measures
• Standardized language tests– Grey Oral Reading Test– Test of Auditory-Perceptual Skills– Test of Adolescent Language– Clinical Evaluation of Language Functions
• Oral language sample analyses• Written language sample analyses• Teacher ratings of communication skills• Grades
Results
• No statistical differences, but trends
• Standardized language tests – Children with speech-language classification scored lower than
those without classification.
• Language samples – Children with speech-language classification produced more
language with greater complexity and diversity than those without classification.
• Teacher ratings– Children with speech-language classification received higher
ratings than those without classification.
top related