From Access to Incl*sion: A Faculty Learning Community Curriculum
Author: Schley, Sara; Cawthon, Stephanie W; Marchetti, Carol E; Atkins, W Scot
Publication info: The Journal of Faculty Development ; Madison Vol. 35, Iss. 3, (Sep 2021): 44-50.
Abstract:
The Access to Inclusion project designed and implemented a semester-long professional development program that provides a scaffolded, applied approach to strengthening inclusive teaching with respect to students with disabilities in higher education. Faculty in higher education often do not have the training or ready access to teaching strategies that allow for equitable, inclusive learning environments for all students. The program provided instructors an opportunity to work with other faculty and with students to learn about inclusive teaching practices, identify "sticky" challenge points in one of their courses, brainstorm solutions, and design, implement, and evaluate the solution. This project was unique in its setting within a faculty learning community, its feedback process, and its inclusion of students with disabilities who were both trained in inclusive teaching practices and positioned as partners in the pedagogical development process.
Links:
Full text:
Headnote
The Access to Inclusion project designed and implemented a semester-long professional development program that provides a scaffolded, applied approach to strengthening inclusive teaching with respect to students with disabilities in higher education. Faculty in higher education often do not have the training or ready access to teaching strategies that allow for equitable, inclusive learning environments for all students. The program provided instructors an opportunity to work with other faculty and with students to learn about inclusive teaching practices, identify "sticky" challenge points in one of their courses, brainstorm solutions, and design, implement, and evaluate the solution. This project was unique in its setting within a faculty learning community, its feedback process, and its inclusion of students with disabilities who were both trained in inclusive teaching practices and positioned as partners in the pedagogical development process.
FACULTY ARE TYPICALLY hired for their extensive content knowledge and training in a disciplinary field. Few graduate programs have in-depth training to develop the pedagogical skills of future faculty, especially knowledge of how students learn and effective teaching strategies to reach a diverse student body (Robinson & Hope, 2013). Postsecondary classroom diversity is a reality for any college instructor: Nationally in the US, student demographics have changed dramatically over the past few decades. Overall undergraduate enrollment in 2015 included 56% women and 42.1% non-white students (IES/NCES, 2018a), and 56% first generation students (iES/NCES, 2018b). In 2011-12, 11% ofundergraduates reported having a disability (IES/NCES, 2018c). Classroom learning needs regarding information access, learning demonstration, and the process of teaching and learning require that faculty use and respond to new levels of instructional flexibility.
Strategies for engaging diverse students and classrooms need not be complex or burdensome. There are a multitude of pedagogical strategies and "mindsets" that can create more engagement amongst diverse enrolled students, and simultaneously make the job of teaching more effective. In this paper, we summarize a curriculum designed to lead faculty through a semester-long professional learning community where they learned about accessible and inclusive pedagogy, identified sticky "challenge points" within their current courses, devised a strategy to reduce those sticky points, and practiced implementing the strategy.
In the fall of 2016, coauthors Schley and Cawthon launched the From Access to Inclusion project, a three-year grant-funded program (NSF# 1625581) focusing on faculty development of inclusive pedagogy, specifically with co-enrollment of deaf, hard of hearing (DHH) and hearing students at a large university. Via semester-long faculty learning communities, the aim was to work with faculty to identify, develop, and implement a specific strategy to increase inclusion, engagement, and interaction in the post-secondary classroom. Our hunch was that these strategies would have broader positive impacts for many students with communication and interaction diversity.
Disability within the Lens of Diversity
This faculty development model is built upon establishing relationships between students in faculty-mentors role and faculty learning community participants. We chose to partner DHH students with faculty due to the context of our university. Rochester Institute of Technology has multiple degree granting colleges. One of those colleges has a high number of DHH students. This provides an important and unique opportunity to examine inclusive teaching from the lens of disability. We argue that by focusing on challenges and "sticky points" of DHH students in the classroom, these unique pedagogical strategies will benefit all students in post-secondary classrooms.
Legal Context for Access
The Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (ADA, 1990; ADAAA, 2008; US Dept. of Justice, 2014; Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, 1973) requires that post-secondary institutions provide reasonable accommodations to ensure that students with disabilities receive equal access to instruction. Accommodations and services vary depending on disability needs, and include things like ASL/English interpreting and/or speech-to-text captioning, note taking, extended time for exams, and wider doors which accommodate wheelchairs, ramps to access buildings, etc. Students must self-identify with a disability services office and document their needs. Faculty are then informed of the necessary accommodations for any student registered in their course, and asked to support implementation of accommodations.
What faculty do not do typically is vary or modify how they teach course content to fit the needs of registered students with disabilities. Faculty usually have latitude in determining how they teach. However, they do not routinely plan for specific needs of either students with disabilities, or students who have varying communication backgrounds such as non-native English speakers. As a result, classroom activities and interaction can be less inclusive than is necessary for equal access to the content of the course. This project was designed to extend instructor flexibility to meet the specific learning needs of students who enroll in their courses.
From Legal Compliance to Inclusive Pedagogy
While compliance with ADA law offers a level of access to curriculum in higher education, it is access that is, in a sense, retrofitted (Dolmage, 2017). ADA-required retrofit accommodations do not adequately support interaction and engagement for all students. For example, consider ASL interpreting in education. While the ASL/English interpreter translates classroom talk from one language to the other, there is a lag between when the utterance occurs and when the DHH student receives the message. This accommodation works relatively well for lectures. It does not work very well in active classroom discussion and conversations, where talk happens quickly with frequent and speedy changes in who is doing the talking. The lag of interpreted conversation inhibits meaningful discussions and full learning. Access is necessary but not sufficient for inclusion in the learning opportunities afforded by higher education.
Using inclusive teaching strategies, an instructor can reduce the limitations of accommodated learning environments. There are several strategies that can address the conversational lag problem of active interpreted classroom discussions: the class can establish communication ground rules (Marchetti, 2019), and consider implementing strategies such as using a "talking stick" to control the flow of conversation (Blizzard & Foster, 2007). In practice, this results in more inclusive classroom discussion in who fully participates because the discussion slows a bit, and benefits the entire class. Individuals are no longer talking over each other, but instead, implement ground rules and practices to manage classroom conversational flow.
Faculty Learning Communities as Professional Development
Changing one's instructional approach is a challenge for many faculty, particularly when most have little formal training in pedagogy. Making a significant shift in teaching approach requires a shift in attitudes, knowledge, and skills as a teacher. Pedagogical conceptual change (Thorley & Stofflett, 1996) generally refers to a shift in the faculty member's ideas about teaching, which then translates into changes in teaching practice. While faculty acquire content knowledge expertise during graduate training, and then are hired into departments because of that training, graduate programs typically do not include extensive training about pedagogy and how to teach for learning.
Professional development formats that focus on pedagogical conceptual change go beyond the "what" of teaching, and encourage faculty to think about the "why" behind the practice (Keiny, 1994). This process takes time and is not limited to a single workshop or binder of activities. The complexity of teaching requires an equally constructive and complex environment to foster meaningful pedagogical change (Guskey, 2002; Lee et al., 2013).
Faculty learning communities (FLCs) consist of faculty members who agree to participate in groups for at least one semester to learn new instructional practices, skills, and technology (Nugent et al., 2008), and provide group members a safe place to explore new ideas (Cox & Richlin, 2004). The emphasis on community, and on multidisciplinary exploration and innovation, is what makes FLCs distinct from other academic groups. FLCs have shown to improve instructors' interest in pedagogy (Cox & Richlin, 2004; Lesser & Storck, 2001; Magalh&acaron;es & Hane, 2020).
Project: From Access to Inclusion
Because of the unique presence of a substantial number of DHH students on a large multi-college campus, this project is situated on a campus where there are a number of resources to support faculty and their pedagogical efforts with DHH students. Students use a disability services office to qualify for classroom accommodations needs. An access services department provides interpreting, note taking, and real-time captioning services to the college community. There are dedicated content-specialist academic support faculty who are skilled in communicating and teaching DHH students. In addition, several websites provide specific guidelines and resources on general practices which make classroom and learning more accessible for DHH students (e.g. Teach2Connect, https://www.rit.edu/ ntid/teach2connect/, and ClassACT, Foster, Long, & Saur, 2002a, 2002b; see https://deaftec.org/teaching-learning/best-practices-for-teaching/). While this is the case, results from a survey on campus (Schley, 2014) showed that despite orientation and professional development activities, few faculty are aware of these resources on campus, and few implement any instructional adaptations. Accomodations, access services and the availability of faculty resources are necessary but not sufficient to engage faculty in fully exploring inclusive pedagogy strategies for DHH students.
An important note is that student partnerships were built-in to the experience for faculty participants (Cook-Sather, 2014). DHH students were hired to participate in the FLCs, and to partner with faculty participants. These DHH students were not enrolled in the faculty's courses: They were trained to give observational and formative, but not evaluative (i.e., not used for merit or peer review) feedback about their perceptions of interaction, collaboration, and DHH/hearing inclusion. An observation tool was designed to collect information about any barriers to access or interaction with course information and activities (Cawthon et al., 2019; Jassal et al., 2020).
From Access to Inclusion FLC Curriculum
Each FLC in our project ran for 15 weeks and met every other week for 2 hours at a time (7 sessions total). The syllabus included a timeline for all sessions in the semester, topics and session overviews, learning objectives, homework objectives and specific tasks, and DHH student mentor responsibilities. Each session had several background readings and guided reflections for participants, as well as a detailed session agenda for sharing information and for deepening understanding through discussions. Materials were available in our course management system, including a discussion board, downloadable files, due dates, and information summaries. Design of the FLC scaffolded the processes of exploration, design, and implementation to guide faculty in their conceptual change and development of pedagogical flexibility (see Figure 1).
Topics in Exploration included topics of Universal Design for Learning (UDL; Rose et al., 2008), and identification of a "challenge point" in their course. Design involved brainstorming and detailing a strategy to address this challenge. Implementation included applying and evaluating the strategy during a class session. Figure 1 summarizes this curriculum process model. The end of the semester included a reporting phase, where participants provided summaries and reflections of their work over the semester. Online supplemental guides containing more detailed information including readings, specific learning objectives, assignments, and discussion guides (S1), a strategy planning and reflection template (S2), and an end of semester strategy summary template (S3) are available here: https://drive.google.com/ file/d/1tw1BHbU4lbx5 c6ttauXH1n8R8-mKC2u/ view?usp=sharing.
We ran five faculty learning communities between 2016 and 2019, with a total of 21 faculty participants (one participant attended two sessions; session sizes varied from 2 to 7 participants). All sessions paid careful attention to the language access needs of participants with ASL/English interpreters and speech-to-text captioning services, and a detailed participatory discussion about ground rules for access and communication participation. Each faculty participant designed and tried at least one strategy to increase interaction and inclusion in their course.
Through the course of the semester, faculty and DHH student partners developed strategies across three broad categories of approaches to the challenges they identified in their courses: responding to challenges with the physical set up and layout of the classroom, adapting assignment expectations and requirements, and adding a tool or piece of technology to facilitate interaction and collaboration (Marchetti et al. 2019; Cawthon et al., 2019; Jassal et al., 2020; Schley & Marchetti, 2020; see also Schley & Stinson, 2016; Schley et al., 2020). Table 1 has several detailed examples.
Discussion
Course Modalities: Face to Face, Hybrid, Online
The first four FLCs included faculty participants teaching face-to-face and blended courses, with ongoing face-to-face sessions. Typically, course information, assignments, grades, and some discussion occurred online. For the final FLC, we worked specifically with faculty teaching online courses. Strategies that faculty and student partners developed here ranged from adding short video supplements to the online course to give students some "face-to-face"-like connection, to adding a "Question and Answers" section on the course management software where students could submit video questions (which would allow students to use ASL rather than English text to ask their questions). These strategies capitalized on working with communication preferences of students while not unduly stressing faculty capacities with additional class preparation or management.
Impact of FLC Experience
At the end of the semester, faculty participants completed a summary of their strategy development process, a description of the final strategy with implementation notes, and feedback on their experience in the FLC (see Marchetti et al, 2019). In general, faculty participants found the experience "supportive," "helpful," and "inspiring." One commented, "I do expect that my awareness for the multitude of factors that can either inhibit or enhance DHH students' classroom access has been forever heightened" (Marchetti et al., 2019, p. 24). For faculty participants, it was a valuable experience to have a semester to work with deaf education and inclusion experts, consider students' lived experiences in the classroom, and work alongside other faculty trying to improve their pedagogy. At the end of the semester, faculty concurred that the experience positively impacted their pedagogical practices, and was valuable in developing skills and strategies to carry forward to their future teaching efforts.
We started with the thought that learning UDL principles and how to effectively increase inclusion in the classroom involves a mindset, rather than learning a list of applied strategies. The goal was to give faculty a safe, supportive "playground" to deeply reflect on their teaching and learning goals, and to contemplate how to increase interaction and collaboration amongst students with diverse communication abilities and preferences (hearing students via both hearing and vision, and DHH students primarily via visual channels). Faculty participants were able to dig deeply into the topic' work together to reflect, design, implement and evaluate their efforts, and emerge with a new set of skills. Importantly, the semester ended with ideas about specific strategies to carry forward to future courses.
Typically, even in accessible courses for DHH students with ASL interpreters and/or speech to text captioning, the onus is on the student to adapt to the course activities and access the classroom interaction. Dolmage (2017) offers a metaphor of "steep steps" that distinguishes mere ADA accommodations from actual faculty efforts to design and encourage inclusive classroom experiences. Higher education is often viewed as something to attain, and that involves a "climb" to gain expertise. ADA accommodations guarantee access for those who cannot climb the proverbial steps (physically or metaphorically). Inclusion on the other hand builds the learning space without barriers in the first place, and responds with solutions to subvert barriers that appear. Importantly, creating inclusive classroom spaces is not a "one time" effort, but an ongoing process both before and during educational experiences.
While this project focused on the needs of DHH students in college classrooms, we believe that the process and implications apply to a broader set of examples of student diversity characteristics in higher education today. Consider non-native English-speaking students. While the source of the challenge (e.g., conversation flow with a sign language interpreter) may not be the same for students who are second-language learners of English, the strategies to help facilitate conversational interaction (e.g., talking stick toy; white boards; U-shaped seating; 1:1 questions during a poster session rather than an all-group presentation) may well facilitate their learning needs.
The process model is adaptable for any scenario of diversity. Identify a classroom interaction challenge (with the help of a student observer), brainstorm possible solutions with others who are also experimenting in the same pedagogical playground, and then implement and test the solution. Tobin & Behling (2018) recommend a "plus one" strategy for faculty looking to UDL strategies in their college classrooms: Start by making one change to improve inclusion. This FLC gave faculty a process and support to identify, design, and implement a single strategy in their courses. Going forward, these faculty now have a set of tools in their pedagogical wheel house. They spent a semester reflecting on a variety of course challenges (not just their own, but also those in other courses), interacting with students about why addressing these challenges mattered, and not only designing a solution themselves, but also interacting and informing the strategy development process of other faculty. Additionally, these faculty have a process to use in the future, one that results in classroom experiences that are more fully inclusive of student needs with regard to interaction and collaboration in college classrooms.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation, NSF# 1625581 Accessible STEM Instruction with Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students: Supporting Faculty in Pedagogical Exploration and Innovation. We also deeply appreciate the time, effort, and perspectives offered by faculty and student participants in this project.
Sidebar
Sara Schley, Ed.D., is a Professor of Deaf Education at the Rochester Institute of Technology.
Stephanie W. Cawthon, Ph.D., is a Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin.
Carol E. Marchetti, Ph.D., is a Professor of Statistics at the Rochester Institute of Technology.
W. Scot Atkins, Ed.D., is an Associate Professor of Business Studies at the Rochester Institute of Technology.
References
References
Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 328. (1990).
ADA Amendments Act of 2008. Pub. L. No. 110-325, Stat. 3406. (2008). http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adaaa.cfm
Blizzard, D., & Foster, S. (2007). Feminist pedagogy and universal design in a deaf and hearing world: Linking cultures through artifacts and understanding. Feminist Teacher, 17(3), 225-236.
Cawthon, Schley, S., & Davidson, S., 2019. Student observation to improve access to instruction in postsecondary education. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disabilities: In Brief, 32(4), 451-458. https:// eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1247541
Cook-Sather, A. (2014). Multiplying perspectives and improving practice: what can happen when undergraduate students collaborate with college faculty to explore teaching and learning. Instructional Science. 42 (1), 31-46 doi:10.1007/s11251-013-9292-3
Cox, M. D., & Richlin, L. (2004). Building Faculty Learning Communities. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Dolmage, J. T. (2017). Academic ableism: Disability and higher education. University of Michigan Press.
Foster, S., Long, G., and Saur, R., 2002b. Promoting Inclusion and Access for Deaf Students in Postsecondary Education. FIPSE, Funded for 2002-2006, $266,547.
Foster, S., Long, G., and Saur, E., 2002a. Promoting Access and Inclusion for Deaf and Hard of Hearing Students in Postsecondary Education, Demonstration Projects to Ensure Students with Disabilities Receive a Higher Education, US Department of Education, Funded for 20022007, $725,302.
Guskey, T. R. (2002). Professional development and teacher change. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice. https://doi. org/10.1080/135406002100000512
IES/NCESa: Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 2018. Table 306.10: Total fall enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by level of enrollment, sex, attendance status, and race/ethnicity or nonresident alien status of student: Selected years, 1976 through 2017. Data Sources: Higher Education General Information Survey (HEGIS), "Fall Enrollment in Colleges and Universities" surveys, 1976 and 1980; Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), "Fall Enrollment Survey" (IPEDS-EF:90); and IPEDS Spring 2001 through Spring 2018. Retrieved on Oct. 20, 2020 from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_306.10.asp
IES/NCESb: Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics. 2018. First Generation College Students. Data Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2015-16 National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS:16). Retrieved on Jan. 22, 2021 from https://firstgen.naspa.org/files/dmfile/ FactSheet-01.pdf
IES/NCESc: Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, c. 2018. Fast Facts: Students with Disabilities. Data Source: Digest of Education Statistics 2018 (NCES 2020-009), Table 311.10. Retrieved on Jan. 22, 2021 from https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display. asp?id=60
Jassal, Y., Cawthon & Schley, S., 2020 (Summer). Student observations of postsecondary classroom instruction. Transformative Dialogues: Teaching and Learning Journal. 13(1), 79-99. https://joumals.kpu. ca/index.php/td/article/view/437/919
Keiny, S. (1994). Teacher's professional development as a process of conceptual change. In I. Calgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers minds and actions Research on teachers thinking and practice (pp. 235-249). Bristol, PA.
Lee, B., Cawthon, S., & Dawson, K. (2013). Elementary and secondary teacher self-efficacy for teaching and pedagogical conceptual change in a drama-based professional development program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 84-98. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0742051X12001564
Lesser, E. L., & Storck, J. (2001). Communities of practice and organizational performance. IBIM Systems Journal, 40(4), 831-841.
Marchetti, C., 2019 (Oct 25). Effective Student Teamwork. Innovative Learning Institute, RIT. Rochester, NY.
Marchetti, C., S., Zuchegno, A., Elglaly, Y., O'Neil, J., Schley, S., Cawthon, S., Atkins, W.S., & Guardino, C. 2019. Faculty perspectives on developing strategies to improve access in diverse post-secondary classrooms. Learning Communities Journal. 11(1), 6-37.
Magalhaes, R. M., & Hane, E. (2020). Building inclusive classroom practices: A curriculum for faculty learning communities based on metacognition. Journal of Faculty Development, 34(3), 125-132.
Nugent, J., Reardon, R., Smith, F., Rhodes, J., Zander, M., & Carter, T. (2008). Exploring faculty learning communities: Building connections among teaching, learning, and technology. International Journal of Teaching Learning in Higher Education, 20(1), 51-58.
Robinson, T. E., & Hope, W. C. (2013). Teaching in higher Education: Is there a need for training in pedagogy in graduate degree programs? Research in Higher Education Journal, 21.
Rose, D. H., Harbour, W. S., Johnson, C. S., Daley, S. G., & Abaranell, L. (2008). Universal design for learning in postsecondary education. In S. E. Burgstahler & R. C. Cory (Eds.), Universal design in higher education: From principles to practice (pp. 45-60). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press.
Schley, S. (2014, Fall). Survey of RIT Faculty: Instructional Access and Inclusion Practices. Unpublished manuscript. Rochester, NY: Rochester Institute of Technology.
Schley, S., Duckles, B., & Blili-Hamelin, B. 2020. Working Open: F2F/ Online and Synchronous/Asynchronous Flexibility. Journal of Faculty Development, 34(3), 94-95. ISSN 2153-1919 (Online).
Schley, S. & Marchetti, C. (2020). Engaging faculty in designing inclusive and collaborative classroom strategies with students with disabilities: A guide for faculty developers. ETH Learning and Teaching Journal, 2(2), 109-112. ISSN 2624-7992 (Online), https://learningteaching. ethz.ch/index.php/lt-eth/article/view/114
Schley, S. & Stinson, M. (2016). Collaborative writing in the classroom: Online, in-person and synchronous group work. Journal of Postsecondary Education and Disability, 29(2), 151-164. https://eric. ed.gov/?id=EJ1113026
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Pub. L. No. 93-112, 87 Stat. 394 (1973).
Tobin, T. J., & Behling, K. T. (2018). Reach Everyone, Teach Everyone: Universal Design for Learning in Higher Education. Morgantown, PA: West Virginia University Press.
Thorley, N. R., & Stofflett, R. T. (1996). Representation of the conceptual change model in science teacher education. Science Education, 80(3), 317-339.
US Department of Justice, 2014. Revised ADA Requirements: Effective Communication (2014). Retrieved Oct. 20, 2020 from https://www. ada.gov/effective-comm.htm
Subject: Enrollments; Pedagogy; Higher education; Teaching methods; Classroom discussion; Curricula; Handicapped accessibility; Verbal communication; College campuses; Professional development; Americans with Disabilities Act 1990-US; Colleges & universities; Disabled students; Disability; Learning
Business indexing term: Subject: Professional development
Location: United States--US
Publication title: The Journal of Faculty Development; Madison
Volume: 35
Issue: 3
Pages: 44-50
Publication year: 2021
Publication date: Sep 2021
Publisher: Magna Publications
Place of publication: Madison
Country of publication: United States, Madison
Publication subject: Education--Higher Education
ISSN: 21531900
e-ISSN: 21531919
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Language of publication: English
Document type: Journal Article
ProQuest document ID: 2568313868
Copyright: Copyright Magna Publications Sep 2021
Last updated: 2021-09-09
Database: ProQuest Central
Search: Scholarly Journals; 2019-01-01 - 2022; higher education; Article; English
Ensuring Access to Online Learning for All Students Through Universal Design for Learning
Author: Flanagan, Sara; Morgan, Joseph John
Publication info: Teaching Exceptional Children ; Reston Vol. 53, Iss. 6, (Jul 2021): 459-462.
Abstract: None available.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Publication title: Teaching Exceptional Children; Reston
Volume: 53
Issue: 6
Pages: 459-462
Publication year: 2021
Publication date: Jul 2021
Publisher: SAGE PUBLICATIONS, INC.
Place of publication: Reston
Country of publication: United States, Reston
Publication subject: Education--Special Education And Rehabilitation
ISSN: 00400599
e-ISSN: 21635684
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Language of publication: English
Document type: Journal Article
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00400599211010174
ProQuest document ID: 2553718827
Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s)
Last updated: 2021-07-22
Database: eLibrary; ProQuest Central
The development and validation of science digital scrapbook in a universal design for learning environment
Author: Wusqo, I U1; Pamelasari, S D1; Khusniati, M1; Yanitama, A1; Pratidina, F R21 Science Education Study Program, Department of Integrated Science, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Universitas Negeri Semarang, Indonesia2 SMP 9 Salatiga, Salatiga, Indonesia
Publication info: Journal of Physics: Conference Series ; Bristol Vol. 1918, Iss. 5, (Jun 2021).
Abstract:
Traditional learning materials are dominating the pattern of lectures at science teaching and learning. This strategy is not optimal to empower slow learners. This research aims to develop and validate digital scrapbooks based on the universal design for learning (UDL). This is a research and development (R & D) using the 4-D model by Thiagarajan. The data collection and analysis method used in the early stage was the questionnaire method to obtain expert validation data. All data were analyzed descriptively. Furthermore, the data were gathered using the documentation method to obtain videos, images, and sounds as well as questionnaires to obtain expert assessments of science teaching materials contained in the UDL-based science digital scrapbooking. This article reports the development and validation of the UDL-based science digital scrapbook. The research results showed that this teaching media is valid.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Universal design; Data analysis; Research & development--R & D; Learning; Questionnaires; Science education; Instructional design; Data collection; Acoustics
Publication title: Journal of Physics: Conference Series; Bristol
Volume: 1918
Issue: 5
Publication year: 2021
Publication date: Jun 2021
Publisher: IOP Publishing
Place of publication: Bristol
Country of publication: United Kingdom, Bristol
Publication subject: Physics
ISSN: 17426588
e-ISSN: 17426596
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Language of publication: English
Document type: Journal Article
Publication history :
Online publication date: 2021-06-14
Milestone dates: 2021-06-01 (openaccess)
Publication history :
First posting date: 14 Jun 2021
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1918/5/052090
ProQuest document ID: 2540811579
Copyright: © 2021. This work is published under http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ (the “License”). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Last updated: 2021-06-15
Database: ProQuest Central
Toward More Inclusive Education: An Empirical Test of the Universal Design for Learning Conceptual Model among Preservice Teachers
Author: Griful-Freixenet, Júlia; Struyven, Katrien; Vantieghem, Wendelien
Publication info: Journal of Teacher Education Vol. 72, Iss. 3, (May 2021): 381-395.
Abstract: Universal Design for Learning (UDL) holds considerable promise to create inclusive educational environments. Nevertheless, the most recent theoretical UDL model, which includes both teachers' philosophy and praxis of teaching, has never been tested empirically. Therefore, this study aims to validate the UDL model as a "whole" among preservice teachers. Results show that the three philosophical constructs of UDL predict the performance of preservice teachers' practices associated with UDL. These constructs are growth mindset about learning, self-efficacy to implement inclusion, and self-regulation and motivation for teaching. Results also show that preservice teachers think and reason about UDL not as three separate principles (i.e., engagement, representation, action, and expression) but in an interrelated way as the analysis shows them to be a unidimensional factor. Finally, this article discusses the implications of a validated model on UDL for teacher-educators, practitioners, and researchers.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Inclusion; Preservice Teachers; Preservice Teacher Education; Models; Student Attitudes; Access to Education; Equal Education; Self Efficacy; Teacher Attitudes; Ability; Foreign Countries; Self Management; Student Motivation; Students with Disabilities
Location: Belgium
Identifier / keyword: Higher Education Postsecondary Education
Education level: Higher Education, Postsecondary Education
Publication title: Journal of Teacher Education
Volume: 72
Issue: 3
Pages: 381-395
Publication date: 2021
Printer/Publisher: SAGE Publications; 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320; http://sagepub.com; Tel.: 800-818-7243 , Fax: 800-583-2665
Publisher e-mail: journals@sagepub.com
ISSN: 0022-4871
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Peer reviewed: Yes
Summary language: English
Language of publication: English
Document type: Article, Report
Subfile: ERIC, Current Index to Journals in Education (CIJE)
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022487120965525
Accession number: EJ1291584
ProQuest document ID: 2540413353
Last updated: 2021-06-13
Database: ERIC
Ecological Validity in Measuring Parents' Executive Function
Author: Diercks, Catherine M.; Gunther, Kelley E.; Teti, Douglas M.; Lunkenheimer, Erika
Abstract: Parents' executive functions (EFs), or cognitive skills facilitating thought and behavior management, are meaningful correlates of parenting behavior. EFs are theorized to support parents in inhibiting reactive responses, managing information during parent--child interactions, and adapting to novel developmental demands. Less effective EFs associate with risk for harsh parenting and physical abuse, underscoring the importance of research on parental EFs in promoting healthy child development. Yet, despite the strong theory, findings are mixed and reveal only modest effect sizes in relations between EFs and parenting. One explanation may be a lack of ecological validity in measuring parental EFs. Traditional measures of adult EFs have been used, but these are decontextualized and do not reflect the cognitively and emotionally demanding nature of parenting. In this article, we argue that new and adapted measures are needed. We discuss the role of EFs in parenting, review measurement, and offer suggestions for improvements in ecological validity.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Validity; Executive Function; Parent Child Relationship; Correlation; Parenting Skills; Inhibition; Emotional Adjustment; Parenting Styles; Risk; Child Development; Effect Size; Measurement Techniques; Cognitive Ability
Sponsor: National Science Foundation, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (DHHS/NIH)
IES grant or contract numbers: R01HD052809
Publication title: Child Development Perspectives
Volume: 16
Issue: 4
Pages: 208-214
Publication date: 2022
Printer/Publisher: Wiley; Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030; https://www.wiley.com/en-us; Tel.:; 800-835-6770
Publisher e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com
ISSN: 1750-8592
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Peer reviewed: Yes
Summary language: English
Language of publication: English
Document type: Article, Report
Contract number: R01HD052809, R01HD087266, R01HD088566, R01HD097189, T32HD101390, DGE1255832
Subfile: ERIC, Current Index to Journals in Education (CIJE)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cdep.12464
Accession number: EJ1353526
ProQuest document ID: 2732216541
Last updated: 2022-11-06
Database: ERIC
Development of Executive Function-Relevant Skills Is Related to Both Neural Structure and Function in Infants
Author: Zhao, T. Christina; Corrigan, Neva M.; Yarnykh, Vasily L.; Kuhl, Patricia K.
Abstract: The development of skills related to executive function (EF) in infancy, including their emergence, underlying neural mechanisms, and interconnections to other cognitive skills, is an area of increasing research interest. Here, we report on findings from a multidimensional dataset demonstrating that infants' behavioral performance on a flexible learning task improved across development and that the task performance is highly correlated with both neural structure and neural function. The flexible learning task probed infants' ability to learn two different associations, concurrently, over 16 trials, requiring multiple skills relevant to EF. We examined infants' neural structure by measuring myelin density in the brain, using a novel macromolecular proton fraction (MPF) mapping method. We further examined an important neural function of speech processing by characterizing the mismatch response (MMR) to speech contrasts using magnetoencephalography (MEG). All measurements were performed longitudinally in monolingual English-learning infants at 7- and 11-months of age. At the group level, 11-month-olds, but not 7-month-olds, demonstrated evidence of learning both associations in the behavioral task. Myelin density in the prefrontal region at 7 months of age was found to be highly predictive of behavioral task performance at 11 months of age, suggesting that myelination may support the development of these skills. Furthermore, a machine-learning regression analysis revealed that individual differences in the behavioral task are predicted by concurrent neural speech processing at both ages, suggesting that these skills do not develop in isolation. Together, these cross-modality results revealed novel insights into EF-related skills.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Infants; Executive Function; Skill Development; Cognitive Ability; Infant Behavior; Correlation; Neurological Organization; Learning Processes; Brain; Age Differences
Sponsor: National Institutes of Health (NIH) (DHHS)
IES grant or contract numbers: R24NS104098
Publication title: Developmental Science
Volume: 25
Issue: 6
First page: e13323
End page: e13323
Publication date: 2022
Printer/Publisher: Wiley; Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030; https://www.wiley.com/en-us; Tel.:; 800-835-6770
Publisher e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com
ISSN: 1363-755X
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Peer reviewed: Yes
Summary language: English
Language of publication: English
Document type: Article, Report
Contract number: R24NS104098
Subfile: ERIC, Current Index to Journals in Education (CIJE)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13323
Accession number: EJ1353433
ProQuest document ID: 2732216977
Last updated: 2022-11-06
Database: ERIC
Mothers' and Fathers' Executive Function Both Predict Emergent Executive Function in Toddlerhood
Author: Ribner, Andrew; Devine, Rory T.; Blair, Clancy; Hughes, Claire
Abstract: There are multivariate influences on the development of children's executive function throughout the lifespan and substantial individual differences can be seen as early as when children are 1 and 2 years of age. These individual differences are moderately stable throughout early childhood, but more research is needed to better understand their origins. To some degree, individual differences in executive function are correlated between mother and child, but no research to date has examined these associations prior to when children are preschool age, nor have any studies considered the role of fathers' and mothers' executive function in tandem. Here, we use a sample of 484 families (Mothers 89.2% white; Fathers 92.5% white) in three countries (UK, USA, Netherlands) to investigate the role of each parents' executive function on the development of children's (49.7% female) executive function from 14 (M = 14.42, SD = 0.57) to 24 (M = 24.47, SD = 0.78) months, as well as parenting practices that underlie these associations. Results of structural equation models suggest stability in some--but not all--components of executive function and growing unity between components as children age. We replicate extant findings such that mothers' executive function predicts children's executive function over and above stability and extend these findings to include associations between father and child skills. We find an additive role of fathers' EF, similar in magnitude to the role of mothers' EF. Finally, for both mothers and fathers we find that sensitivity and autonomy supportive practices mediate the relations between parents' and children's executive function.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Mothers; Fathers; Executive Function; Parent Child Relationship; Parenting Styles; Child Development; Individual Differences; Cross Cultural Studies; Parent Attitudes; Structural Equation Models; Foreign Countries; Prediction
Location: United States; United Kingdom; Netherlands
Sponsor: National Science Foundation, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) (DHHS/NIH)
IES grant or contract numbers: 1429152
Publication title: Developmental Science
Volume: 25
Issue: 6
First page: e13263
End page: e13263
Publication date: 2022
Printer/Publisher: Wiley; Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030; https://www.wiley.com/en-us; Tel.:; 800-835-6770
Publisher e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com
ISSN: 1363-755X
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Peer reviewed: Yes
Summary language: English
Language of publication: English
Document type: Article, Report
Contract number: 1429152, F32HD10210601
Subfile: ERIC, Current Index to Journals in Education (CIJE)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13263
Accession number: EJ1353398
ProQuest document ID: 2732216617
Last updated: 2022-11-06
Database: ERIC
Innovative Learning Spaces: Class Management and Universal Design for Learning
Author: Sasson, Irit; Yehuda, Itamar; Miedijensky, Shirley
Abstract: Recent and important changes in pedagogy design include flexible learning methods that address student diversity (universal design for learning--UDL) and innovative learning spaces. The goals of this study were (1) to compare pedagogical practices in traditional and innovative learning environments in the context of the management dimension of classroom climate; (2) to measure the correlation between teacher-centered and student-centered learning and number of classroom discipline events; and (3) to measure the effect of select UDL principles and innovative learning spaces on the relationship between the rate of expression of teacher-centered learning and number of classroom discipline events. A total of 507 observations were carried out to document classroom pedagogical and discipline management, 265 (52%) in traditional classrooms and 242 (48%) in the innovative learning spaces of four elementary schools in the same geographical region. The rate of student-centered learning and pedagogical practices that express UDL principles was significantly higher in innovative spaces than in traditional classes. A moderate, positive and significant correlation was found between teacher-centered learning and number of classroom discipline events. In addition, the learning space, integration of tasks that encourage choice, and integration of tasks that address learners' differences were found as significant moderating variables of the relationship between teacher-centered learning and the number of classroom discipline events. The study provides an in-depth understanding of the relationships that exist between the applications of several pedagogical practices and discipline that are important for development of similar innovative learning space initiatives regionally and beyond.
Links:
Full text: Not available.
Subject: Educational Innovation; Classroom Techniques; Access to Education; Classroom Environment; Student Centered Learning; Discipline; Elementary Schools
Identifier / keyword: Elementary Education
Education level: Elementary Education
Publication title: Learning Environments Research
Volume: 25
Issue: 3
Pages: 725-739
Publication date: 2022
Printer/Publisher: Springer; Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004; https://link.springer.com/; Tel.:; 800-777-4643 , Fax:; 212-460-1700
Publisher e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com
ISSN: 1387-1579
Source type: Scholarly Journal
Peer reviewed: Yes
Summary language: English
Language of publication: English
Document type: Article, Report
Subfile: ERIC, Current Index to Journals in Education (CIJE)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-021-09393-8
Accession number: EJ1349237
ProQuest document ID: 2732075704
Last updated: 2022-11-06
Database: ERIC
The content of this guide was created by a librarian, but the views and opinions expressed within it are solely those of the individual librarian and do not necessarily reflect the official stance or policies of East Carolina University.