Well-being Conference Presentation 24th November 2008

SUPPORTING PRIMARY SUPPORTING PRIMARY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING STUDENTS WITH LEARNING

DIFFICULTIES:DIFFICULTIES: An ecological perspectiveAn ecological perspective

PHIL READPHIL READ

SUPPORTING PRIMARY SUPPORTING PRIMARY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING STUDENTS WITH LEARNING

DIFFICULTIES:DIFFICULTIES: An ecological perspectiveAn ecological perspective

PHIL READPHIL READ

SUPPORTING PRIMARY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DIFFICULTIES: PERCEPTIONS OF TEACHERS, PARENTS, STUDENTS AND SERVICE PROVIDERS

Thesis title:

Supported by an Australian Research Council Strategic Partnership with Industry Research and Training Scheme Award, with the Department of Education and Children’s Services (DECS) as the Industry Partner.

What are the needs of primary students with learning difficulties?

What are the most effective way of achieving improved outcomes for these students?

Is there a relationship between contextual factors (e.g. type of support, school demographics) and the level of stakeholder satisfaction?

An ecological approach

… examines the interactions between stakeholders and their non-living surroundings, such as the school,

family and external service provider environments

Cole, P. G. and Chan, L. K. S. 1990. Methods and

Strategies for Special Education. Prentice Hall, Sydney.

what the child brings to the learning situation

what the student

brings to the learning situation

the environments in which they learn

the

educational programme

interaction

between stakeholders

Ecological perspective

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

PRINCIPAL

PARENT(S) CAREGIVER STUDENT

CLASSTEACHER

SSO

SPEC.ED. TEACHER OR SUPPORT TEACHER

GUIDANCE OFFICER

EXTERNAL SERVICE PROVIDER

Stakeholders - those with an interest in or responsibility for a

student’s educational program

LAP

present & past

THESE REQUIREMENTS SUGGESTED : • in-depth interviewing of all stakeholders

• school level observation and examination of documentation

• an emergent research design such as Grounded Theory allowing opportunities to re-visit and build upon participant response and observation

REQUIREMENTS:• do not impose a structure upon or delimit participant response but at the same time allow for cross site analysis and comparison

• be capable of and flexible enough to place participant responses within the contexts in which they are formed ie. identify the frames of reference

• provide opportunity for further exploration, as the need arises, of the interactions and outcomes of stakeholder perceptions

Grounded theory designs are systematic, qualitative procedures researchers use to generate a general explanation (called a Grounded Theory) that explains a process, action or interaction among people.

The procedures for developing this theory include collecting primarily interview data, developing and relating categories (or themes) of information, and composing a model that portrays the general explanation.

In this way the explanation is grounded in the data from participants. From this explanation, you construct predictive statements about the experiences of individuals.– John Creswell (2008) – Educational Research 3rd ed. p61

Why does a Gap MAINTENANCE situation exist for third wave students with learning difficulties?

Figure 46 Site 5 student - Reading Age versus Age Expectation Reading Performance

01224364860728496

108120132144156

Year 2 Year 4 Year 6

Ag

e in

mo

nth

s

Age Exp. Perf.(mths)Pia's Neale AnalysisReading Age (mths)

What is gap maintenance?

What might be the reasons for the longevity and

persistence of learning difficulties?

Almost half of the children who had been behind in reading in grade 2 still had reading difficulties at 13-14 years, while almost two-thirds had spelling and /or maths difficulties. Overall, more than 80 per cent had learning

difficulties of one kind or another. Whether or not they had received remedial assistance did

not seem to affect outcome.

Pathways from infancy to adolescence Australian Temperament Project 1983 – 2000 (Results from the longitudinal reading difficulties studies - p42)

If you consider a school community to be a system, an ecological system that reaches or establishes an equilibrium of some form or another, you have a useful basis for approaching the question of why a Gap Maintenance situation existed for the students with LDs in my sample or put another way - explaining the longevity and persistence of LDs

Direct factors: easily recognisable or identifiable as having the potential to affect the quality of a student’s educational programme

Homeostatic factors:• subtle, indirect• capable of combining synergistically with other factors to affect the quality of a student’s educational programme• can mask the presence or effect of other factors.

Factors operating within the system or ecology

Student’s desk partner(s)

Student

Previous year’s class teacher

Class Teacher’s colleagues Class

teacher

System Level support for class teacher

Support SSO

Private tutor

Parents

GO

Key: Substantial and regular interaction = Limited and/or short duration interaction =

Principal

Stakeholder interaction diagram

Examples of homeostatic factors at work:1. A “blank slate”2. Stakeholder satisfaction

YEAR LEVEL TRANSITION:

What was lacking?

• detailed academic achievement / work samples

• information about learning characteristics and needs

• information on the previous year’s learning outcomes/goals

• what major programmes, resources and support modes have been used and their success or failure

SCHOOL REPORT FORMAT

YEAR LEVEL TRANSITION:

What was lacking?

• detailed academic achievement / work samples

• information about learning characteristics and needs

• information on the previous year’s learning outcomes/goals

• what major programmes, resources and support modes have been used and their success or failure

YEAR LEVEL TRANSITION:

What was lacking?

• detailed academic achievement / work samples

• information about learning characteristics and needs

• information on the previous year’s learning outcomes/goals

• what major programmes, resources and support modes have been used and their success or failure

What did stakeholders perceive to be successful outcomes for a student with LDs?

How aligned were their views?

Did they know what other stakeholders thought were successful outcomes for the student?

What did stakeholders perceive to be successful outcomes for a student with LDs?

4 main domains (Curriculum Specific 59%, Affective 20%, Task Related 16% and Social Skills 5%)

How aligned were their views?

Poor in the all domains except Curriculum Specific

- but this only can be claimed at Major curriculum area or strand levels of specificity

Did they know what other stakeholders thought were successful outcomes for the student

Very low in 4 out of 5 sites

- 39% of S/Hs either didn’t know or were unsure

Figure 25 The levels of Specificity for S/H Nominations of successful outcomes

Level of Specificity % of the total Curriculum – domain specific successful outcomes

Major Curriculum Area i.e. mathematics, English

Strands within a major curriculum area i.e. reading, number

Topics or general skill areas within Strands i.e. sight vocabulary, decoding skills

Specific skill, competency or understanding i.e. read at age level expectation, break a word into syllables

24

31

37

8

What did stakeholders perceive to be successful outcomes for a student with LDs?

4 main domains (Curriculum Specific 59%, Affective 20%, Task Related 16% and Social Skills 5%)

How aligned were their views?

Poor in the all domains except Curriculum specific

- but this only can be claimed at Major curriculum area or strand levels of specificity

Did they know what other stakeholders thought were successful outcomes for the student

Very low in 4 out of 5 sites

- 39% of S/Hs either didn’t know or were unsure

YEAR LEVEL TRANSITION:

What was lacking?

• detailed academic achievement / work samples

• information about learning characteristics and needs

• information on the previous year’s learning outcomes/goals

• what major programmes, resources and support modes have been used and their success or failure

SLIP THROUGH THE NET BEHAVIOURS

•not being a behaviour problem,

•being quiet and lacking in confidence,

•tending not to seek help from the teacher when problems are encountered, instead utilising informal peer support (desk partners) to assist in completing work and understanding teacher instructions,

•being selective about or limiting school related information provided to parents,

•having work habits which appear to be good and seeming to be on task, but with a low productivity (spending most time drawing elaborate page headings but little work actually done etc.),

•copying a peer’s work, hanging back/ fiddling at the start of a written task to allow desk partner copying

Lack of

communication between key stakeholders

Slip through

the net behaviours

No transition process

Slow start to the year Š loss of instructional time

Slow start to the year – loss of instructional time

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

PRINCIPAL

PARENT(S) CAREGIVER STUDENT

CLASSTEACHER

SSO

SPEC.ED. TEACHER OR SUPPORT TEACHER

GUIDANCE OFFICER

EXTERNAL SERVICE PROVIDER

Stakeholders - those with an interest in or responsibility for a

student’s educational program

LAP

Who was most satisfied with the educational program received by the student with LDs?

A lack of information about the student’s relative

academic performance

Student classroom coping strategies

A classroom environment that catered

very well for the student’s

affective needs

The student’s unrealistic

perceptions of the severity of

their LDs

The school was providing extra

support

A lack of specificity of

learning outcomes

The nature of primary school

reporting

Low levels of collaboration

between home and school

Level of parent and student satisfaction with the educational

program

Stakeholders who are satisfied with a system are less likely to seek change in that system thereby contributing to

the system’s equilibrium

OVERVIEW

1. Primary students with LDs in this sample show evidence of a gap maintenance situation

2. An ecological perspective explains this in terms of the presence of and interaction between a range of DIRECT and HOMEOSTATIC factors

3. The nature of the homeostatic factors combined with low levels of collaboration and communication between sub-systems result in the establishment of a GAP maintenance equilibrium

4. The system is dynamic and there is evidence that a change even in one factor can significantly change a gap maintenance equilibrium to a gap closure equilibrium

Due to the interaction and presence of a range of homeostatic and direct factors a GAP MAINTENANCE rather than GAP CLOSURE equilibrium is established

key stakeholders are satisfied given the level of available resources and their knowledge of the programme problems, issues or concerns in one part of the system were unlikely to be shared, containment reducing the likelihood of change a failure to build - stakeholder knowledge and experiences about the student’s learning needs and characteristics unshared and poorly documentedlearning outcomes at functional levels of specificity and measurability were rarely set, impeding judgements about the efficacy of instruction

The cycle repeats - new year / new teacher

Consider the Words

Consider the Context

Consider the Internal Consistency

Consider the Frequency of Comments

Consider the Extensiveness of Comments

Consider the Intensity of Comments

Consider the Specificity of Responses

Consider What Was Not Said

Find the Big Ideas

Krueger, R. (1998). Analysing and Reporting Focus Group Results. Californaia:SAGE.