University of Technology, Sydney

Staff directory | Webmail | Maps | Newsroom | What's on

023881 Special Education Professional Experience 1: Assesment, Programming and Evaluation

Warning: The information on this page is indicative. The subject outline for a particular semester, location and mode of offering is the authoritative source of all information about the subject for that offering. Required texts, recommended texts and references in particular are likely to change. Students will be provided with a subject outline once they enrol in the subject.

UTS: Education: Language Studies
Credit points: 6 cp
Result type: Grade, no marks

Requisite(s): (023151 Professional Experience 1: Beginning Teaching Issues in the Primary School OR 023111 Practicum 1: Beginning Teaching) AND (023152 Professional Experience 2: Developing Classroom Management OR 023112 Practicum 2: Developing Classroom Management)) AND ((023153 Professional Experience 3: Assessment and Evaluating in Education AND 023154 Professional Experience 4: Designing Educational Programs) OR (023113 Practicum 3: Promoting Student-centred Learning AND 023114 Practicum 4: Managing Learning Difficulties)

Handbook description

The subject description is available from UTS: Education.

Subject objectives/outcomes

Students will

  1. Identify and analyse theoretical approaches to programming for students of varying ages who have learning difficulties or mild, moderate or severe cognitive or physical disabilities.
  2. Evaluate ways in which the above approaches have been researched.
  3. Review critically the theoretical and research literature, and use it to:
    • Assess the instructional needs of students referred for special education
    • Select appropriate learning outcomes for students referred for special education
    • Develop instructional strategies for students referred for special education
    • Take data to evaluate the appropriateness of instructional strategies for students referred for special education
  4. In light of theoretical considerations, evaluate current educational trends and issues in program development
  5. Integrate professional reading and reflection on practice, to frame problems relating to the teaching of students with learning difficulties at different levels
  6. Formulate a plan of action to assist with professional problem solving
  7. Implement and evaluate teaching strategies in special education contexts
  8. Effectively document a teaching program within a special education context
  9. Evaluate a teaching program, showing how modifications could be made to enhance the learning of students.

Contribution to course aims and graduate attributes

The subject will examine literature in which approaches to special education programming have been evaluated. As such the subject will form the foundations for other special education curriculum subjects in this degree, it should be noted that further refinement of the objectives of this subject will occur in other special education offerings. The areas of cognitive and physical disability and learning difficulties have been targeted in the subject objectives. The other major area of special education need, challenging behaviour, is dealt with comprehensively in another subject in the course. The practical component of this subject will allow the student to explore the concepts developed in the subject, and reflect on their application of these concepts in a workforce environment. Competence in reading and evaluating research is essential if graduating students are to prepare programs to assist their pupils with special education needs to function in mainstream society. It is also necessary to enable students to assume responsibility for their own continuing professional development in this area.

Teaching and learning strategies

The teaching and learning strategies employed in this subject will include structured input from the lecturer as lectures, workshops and practical activities. In addition students will be required to engage in wide reading in the topic areas. The results of their synthesis and analysis of their reading, and how it relates to their field experience situations will be shared with other students through discussions and seminars. Critical incidents which arise in field experience will be discussed within the framework of the students' learning within this subject. Students will be encouraged to reflect on how people with special education needs learn in educational contexts, and uncover the issues involved in this process.

Mode of Delivery
There will be one three hour class weekly. Students will be expected to complete a range of tasks such as reading, researching or preparing for class activities outside class time.

Content

Content will include the following

  1. Definition of students with special education needs. How homogeneous are groups within special education? How does labelling affect research in the area? What are the effects of labelling on the pupils, their families and their teachers/ Does the labelling process facilitate programming?
  2. Considerations in programming for students with special education needs. What are the social, emotional and financial costs of failure. Notions of different levels of programming: prevention, remediation and compensation.
  3. Assessment in special education What are the uses of normative and criterion referenced assessment in special education? What can/cannot be reliably and validly assessed? When are the most appropriate times to assess? What are the effects on students with disabilities and difficulties of assessment practices used in regular education? What are the issues related to intelligence testing? What are the theoretical issues and research related to initial and formative assessment of students with learning difficulties and disabilities? How do we assess the needs of students with learning difficulties?
    • Determining what students needs to know from curriculum or environmental inventory
    • Operationalising targets
    • Task analysis
    • Broad screening
    • Fine screening
    • Using data to make program decisions
  4. Researching special education programs What is research? Who conducts research in special education? What questions fire research interest? What do they do with the results of research? How useful are the different kinds of research activities? What is the criterion that defines an 'effective' special education program?
  5. Programming bases for students with special education needs What are the philosophical approaches on which program are based (constructivism, skills training, process training)? What are the influences on special education programming? Can we identify causes of learning problems and program accordingly? What are the outcomes in terms of research into different programs? What is an 'individual Educational Program?' Has Australia followed US trends?
  6. Adapting educational outcomes What are the criteria for selecting outcomes? How do we set priorities? What is the source of educational outcomes? Assigning outcomes at levels of acquisition, maintenance and generalisation. Writing outcomes with specific target behaviour, conditions and criteria – How specific do we need to be? Ensuring that outcomes always facilitate acquisition, maintenance and generalisation of learning (fluency where appropriate). Using assessment, and refining assessment to form the basis of outcomes. How can we use data to assist in instructional decisions?
  7. Developing strategies Strategies for developing or adapting programs for students across the life span. Assessing the degree of structure required for different individuals. Techniques for increasing structure at acquisition stage:
    • Demonstration – when and how to use Guided practice - how to prompt (stimulus manipulation cues, verbal cues, time delay, physical assistance), how to fade prompts.
    • Independent practice
    • Identifying tasks that are independent, instructional and frustrational
    • Sequencing task difficulty (match to sample, select from array, name)
    • Distributed trials, massed practice
    • Reinforcement – when to use, successive approximations, how to fade.
    • Techniques to facilitate maintenance and generalisation.
    • Techniques to facilitate student metacognition
  8. Program evaluation What criteria should be used for evaluation? At what points is evaluation most appropriate?

Assessment

Assessment item 1: Weekly Quiz

Weighting: 30%

Assessment item 2: Assignment 1

Objective(s): 1, 3
Weighting: 30%
Assessment criteria:

  1. Submission of the assignment clearly in the above points.

  2. Appropriateness and complexity of chosen syllabus outcome

  3. Identification if goal statement is necessary.

  4. Thorough and logical application of curriculum analysis.

  5. Quality and practicality of assessment design to achieve purpose and the people (and their role) in assisting you to gain the assessment/ data.

  6. Level of analysis of hypothetical data to support starting place for instruction.

  7. Quality of observable instructional objective.

  8. Quality of lesson plan design in accordance to the Practicum handbook guidelines.

  9. Appropriateness and practicality of monitoring tool to progressively monitor student learning.

  10. Appropriateness use of at least three sources/references to support at least five components of the points above.

  11. The written component of the assignment demonstrates acceptable standards of literacy, referencing and the use of appropriate language in relation to students with special education needs.


The written component of the assignment demonstrates acceptable standards of literacy, referencing (APA style) and the use of appropriate language in relation to students with special education needs.

Assessment item 3: Assignment 2

Objective(s): 6, 7, 8
Weighting: 30%
Assessment criteria: All lessons plans written in accordance with guidance set out in Special Education Practicum 1 Handbook, as follows:

  • Where applicable, suitable tools and interpretation of results to guide instructional decisions.

  • Quality of learning outcomes.

  • Detailed rationale for outcome and identification/confirmation of necessary pre-requisite skills.

  • Appropriateness and level of detail of range of specific teaching and resources.

  • Creativity of monitoring design and use-particularly evidence of sequential nature of learning goals.

  • Level of evaluation and reflection and use of same as basis for subsequent decisions.

  • Logical design and organisation of lesson documentation.

  • The written component of the assignment acceptable and appropriate language in relation to students with special needs.


The written component of the assignment demonstrates acceptable standards of literacy, referencing (APA style) and the use of appropriate language in relation to students with special education needs.
Note: It is not possible to resubmitted this assignment.

Assessment item 4: In Class Final Quiz

Weighting: 10%

Required texts

UTS Assessment Policy and Procedures at http://www.sau.uts.edu.au Available from the University Co-op Bookshop.

References

Alberto, P. A., & Troutman, A. C., (2003), Preparing behavioural objectives, In Applied behavior analysis for teachers, (6th Ed, pp. 59-90). NJ. : Merrill. Archer, A. L., Gleason, M. M., & Isaacson, S. (1995). Effective instructional delivery. In P.T. Cegelka, & W.H. Berdine, Eds), Effective instructional strategies for students with learning difficulties, pp. 1-7. NJ.:Merrill. Arthur, M. (1996). Designing effective teaching interventions. In P. Foreman (Ed.), Integration & inclusion in action (pp. 115-143). Harcourt Brace: Sydney. Bley, N. S., & Thirnton, C. A. (2001). Teaching mathematics to students with learning disabilities. TX: Pro-Ed Board of Studies (1997). Interim support document for students experiencing learning difficulties. Sydney: Author. Board of Studies (2000). Human Society and its Environment: Support document for students with special education needs. Sydney: Author Cartwright, G. P., Cartwright, C. A., & Ward, M.E. (1995). Educating special learners. Belmont.: Wadsworth: Ciborowski, J. (1995). Using textbooks with students who cannot read them. Remedial and Special Education, 16, 90-101. Cole, P. ,& Chan, L. (1990). Methods and strategies for special education. New York: Prentice Hall. Committee on Educational Interventions for Children with Autism (2001). Educating children with autism. Washington, DC: National Academy Press Doyle, P. M., Schuster, J. W., & Meyer, S. (1996). Embedding extra stimuli in task directions: Effects on learning of students with moderate mental retardation. Journal of Special Education, 29, 381-389. Ellis, E. S. (1997), Watering up the curriculum for adolescents with learning disabilities: Goals of the knowledge dimension. Remedial and Special Education, 18, 326-346. Friend, M. , & Bursuck, W. (1999). Including students with special needs: A practical guide for classroom teachers (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon: Gersten, R. (1992), Passion and precision: Response to 'Curriculum-Based Assessment and Direct Instruction: Critical reflections on fundamental assumptions", Exceptional Children, 58, 464-467. Gersten, R., Keating, T., & Irvin, L. K. (1995). The burden of proof: Validity as improvement of instructional practice. Exceptional Children, 61, 510-519. Gersten, R., Schiller, E., & Vaughn, S. (2000). Contemporary special education research: Synthesis of the knowledge base oncritical instructional issues. London: Erlbaum Howell, K.W. (2000). Resources for implementing Howell and Nolet's Curriculumbased evaluation: Teaching and decision-making. CA: Wadsworth Howell, K. W. & Nolet, V. (2000). Fundamentals of Evaluation (Chapter 5). In Curriculum-based evaluation: Teaching and decision Making (3rd Ed). CA. :Wadsworth/Thomas Learning Idol, L., Nevin, A., & Paolucci-Whitcomb, P. (1999). Models of curriculum-based assessment: A blueprint for learning. TX: Pro-Ed. Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services, (1994). Handicapping Language: A guide for journalists and the public. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 60-62 Kameenui, E., & Carnine, D. (2002). Effective teaching strategies that accommodate diverse learners. (2nd Ed.. NJ. : Merrill. Kameenui, E. ,& Simmons, D. (1990). Designing instructional strategies: The prevention of academic problems. NJ. : Merrill. Kavale, K. A. (2001). The meta-analysis research in special education. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. King-Sears, M. E., Burgess, M., & Lawson, T. L. (1999). Applying curriculum-based assessment in inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(1), 30-38 Lefrancois, G. R. (1997), Intelligence and creativity. In Psychology for teaching (9th Ed)., pp 231-255). CA: Wadsworth Macmillan, D. L., Siperstein, G. N., & Graham, F. M. (1996). A challenge to the viability of 'mild mental retardation' as a diagnosis. Exceptional Children, 62, 356-371. Malouf, D. B. ,& Schiller, E. P. (1995). Practice and research in special education. Exceptional Children, 61, 414-424. Mastropieri, M. & Scruggs, T. (2000). Enhancing motivation and affect. In The inclusive classroom: Strategies for effective instruction, (pp. 275-305). NJ. : Merrill. Mastropieri, M., & Scruggs, T. (1991). Teaching students ways to remember: Strategies for learning mnemonically. MA : Brookline Books. McConnell, K., Ryser, G., & Higgins, J. (2000). Practical ideas the really work for students with ADHD. TX: Pro-Ed. National Health and Medical Research Council (1990). Learning difficulties in children and adolescents. Canberra: Australian Government Publishing Service. NSW Department of Education and Training (1998). Special education handbook for schools. Sydney:Author Obiakor, F. E. (2000). Intervention techniques for individuals with exceptionalies in inclusive settings. Stamford: JAI Platt, J. ,& Olson, J. (1997). Teaching adolescents with mild disabilities. CA: Brooks/Cole. Prater, M. A., (1993), Teaching concepts: Procedures for the design and delivery of instruction. Remedial and Special Education, 14(5), 51-62. Rivera, D. P. (1998). Mathematics education for students with learning disabilities. TX: Pro-Ed Rosenberg, M.S., O'Shea, L., & O'Shea, D. J. (Eds). (2002). Student teacher to master teacher: A practical guide for educating students with special needs (3rd Ed.). NJ. : Merrill. Ruiz, N. T. (1995). The social construction of ability and disability: II Optimal and at-risk lessons in a bilingual special education classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28, 491–502. Sabornie, E., & deBettencourt, L. (1997). Teaching students with mild disabilities at the secondary level. NJ. : Merrill. Simpson, R.L., & Myles, B.S. (1998). Educating children and youth with autism: Strategies forf effective practice. TX: Pro-Ed Srcuggs,, T.E>, & Mastropieri, M. (2000). Educational interventions. Stamford: JAI Simpson, R.L., & Myles, B. S, (1998). Educating children and youth with autism. TX: Pro-Ed Smith, T. Polloway, E., Patton, J., & Dowdy, C. (1998). Teaching students with special needs in the inclusive settings (2nd ed.) Boston.: Allyn & Bacon. Snell, M., & Janney, R. Modifying schoolwork. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Stein, M., Silbert, J., & Carnine, D. (1997). Designing effective mathematics instruction: A direct injstruction approach. NJ: Merrill Tindal, G. ,& Nolet, V. (1995). Curriculum-based measurement in middle and high schools: Critical thinking skills in the content areas. Focus on Exceptional Children, 27, (7), 1-24. Thompson, S.J. (2001). Alternate assessments for students with disabilities. CA: Corwin Thompson, V. P. , & Gickling, E. E., 1992, A personal view of Curriculum-Based Assessment: A Response to 'Critical Reflections...', Exceptional Children, 58 , 464-467. Tomlinson, C. A., Callahan, C. M., Tomchibn, E. M., Eiss, N., Imbeau, M., & Landrum, M. (1997). Becoming architects of communities of learning: Addressing academic diversity in contemporary classrooms. Exceptional Children, 63, 269-282. Turner, C. S., & Louis, K. S. (1996). Society's response to difference: A sociological perspective. Remedial and Special Education, 17, 134-141. Wehmeyer, M. (2002). Teaching students with mental retardation: Providing access to the general curriculum. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Westwood, P., (1997) Commonsense methods for children with special needs (3rd Ed.). London: Routledge Witt, J.C., Elliott, S.N., Daly, E.J., Gresham, F.M., & Kramer, J.J. (1998). Assessment of at-risk and special needs children (2ne ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Wood, J. (1998). Adapting instruction to accommodate students in inclusive settings. NJ: Merrill. Ysseldyke, J., & Olsen, K., (1999), Putting alternative assessments into practice: What to measure and possible sources of data. Exceptional Children, 65, 175-185.

Other resources

JOURNALS Academic Therapy 371.905/ACAD Australasian Journal of Special Education 371.905 AUST Education and Treatment of Children (*) Exceptional Child 371.905 SLO 1 Exceptional Children 371.9055 EXC 1 Focus on Exceptional Children 371.906 FOC 1 International Journal of Special Education (*) Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps 362.305 JOUR Journal of Learning Disabilities 371.905 JOU 1 Journal of Special Education 371.905 JOU LD Forum (*) Learning Disabilities Research & Practice Ebsco online Preventing School Failure 371.905 POI 1 Remedial and Special Education (RASE) 371.905 REME Special Education Perspectives Teaching Exceptional Children 371.905 TEA 1 (*) not held in UTS library Useful Websites Remember you may need to check the reliability of information from the WWW. These sites provide many useful links. Council for Exceptional Children http://www.cec.sped.org National Information Center for Children and Youth with Disabilities http://nichcy.org Special Education Resources on the Internet (SERI) https://www.hood.edu/seri/serihome.htm. Office of Special Education Programs (USA) http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/index.html LD Online http://www.ldonline.org