Luận án: Tăng cường khả năng đọc hiểu và hiểu biết về tự quyết cho học sinh khuyết tật trí tuệ

CAN DIRECT INSTRUCTION AND VIDEO MODELING INCREASE THE LITERACY AND UNDERSTANDING OF SELF DETERMINATION IN STUDENTS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES? A dissertation submitted to the Kent State University College and Graduate School of Education, Health, and Human Services in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy By Cynthia L. Kenyon December 2018 © Copyright, 2018 by Cynthia L. Kenyon All Rights Reserved ii A dissertation written by Cynthia L., University of Akron, 1986 M., Kent State University, 2010 Ph., Kent State University, 2018 Approved by ________________________________, Director, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Lyle Barton ________________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Joanne Caniglia ________________________________, Member, Doctoral Dissertation Committee Darlene Unger Accepted by ________________________________, Director, School of Lifespan Development and Mary Dellmann-Jenkins Educational Sciences ________________________________, Dean, College and Graduate School of James C. Hannon Education, Health, and Human Services iii KENYON, CYNTHIA L., DECEMBER 2018 LIFESPAN DEVELOPMENT AND EDUCATION SCIENCES INCREASING THE LITERACY OF SELF-DETERMINATION IN STUDENTS WITH INTELLECTUAL DISABILITIES (75 pp.) Director of Dissertation: Lyle Barton, Ed.

The main purpose of this study was to develop and implement strategies to teach self-determination literacy to lay a strong foundation upon which a student could then advance skills. The current study examined the differences in pre- and posttest scores in literacy and understanding of self-determination skills in students with intellectual disabilities. The research question that guided the study was: Can direct instruction and video modeling increase the literacy and understanding of self-determination in students with intellectual disabilities? To assess the effects of the intervention, a quasi-experimental design of pretest-posttest of the experimental group was used. According to the findings, the study found that the experimental group did not demonstrate a significant difference across literacy pre-and posttest scores.

Likewise, there was not a significant difference when looking at the pre- and posttest scores related to individual skills of self-determination. Although the comparison between the pre- and posttest did not show significant change, a descriptive analysis of the literacy indicated that there was noticeable growth in student ability to define problem-solving, goal setting, self-regulation, and self-advocacy. When analyzing comparison of data of video pre- and posttest, there was significant change in participant usage of correct literacy to capture the skills of self-awareness, approaching significance for self-efficacy, and no significant change for self-advocacy. A descriptive examination found that the remaining six skills of problem-solving, choice making, decision-making, goal setting, self-regulation, and goal attainment showed a noteworthy percentage change in participant ability to reflect understanding of observations of skills used in the videos.

DEDICATION To Him who determines deadlines. iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I had no idea where this journey was going to take me, but without my dear friend and colleague Vonnie Michali keeping her hand in the middle of my back, sometimes patting, sometimes pushing, I could not have finished. God may ask me to do things that seem larger than life and this was one of them. He prepared my way with Vonnie at my side.

I would like to thank my dissertation committee who tolerated me during the ups and downs of my progress. Barton, my advisor and chair of my dissertation committee, you never gave up on me. You not only served as my support through the doctoral program but remained a constant in a sea of change since my arrival to Kent State in 2009. You were always available to me and never with judgment.

For that I am truly grateful. Caniglia who has been on this journey from the first year of the pilot. I am blessed to have you by my side and was encouraged by your belief in me that one day I would be called Dr. And yes, you were the first to call me that.

Darlene Ungar who was gracious to join me at the end of my journey at a time when I needed the wisdom and critique to put in the final touches. Your expedience to get me to the end was very much appreciated. I would be remiss if I did not address Dr. He is the reason I accepted this journey and he is the reason I have the passion I have today for preparing students for life after high school.

I did not understand the meaning of transition until I read his book. v To the incredible students I have been blessed to work with in the pilot and the years after taught me that it can be difficult to get out your comfort zone, but with the right supports, and lack of them, it is possible. Nobody has been more important to me in this pursuit than the members of my family. I would like to thank my husband Steve, whose love and guidance has always been with me in whatever I pursue.

During this long journey he knew when to ask, when not to ask, and more importantly when to hush inquisitors. I wish to thank my loving and supportive children, Jack, Mak and Amy, who provided me with unending inspiration. “You got this Mom” was a statement from each of them that got me through to the end. God bless all of you for being willing to be His resource to me.

vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page DEDICATION .v LIST OF TABLES. 1 Intellectual Disabilities Defined. 3 Importance of Self-Determination. 6 Evolution of Self-Determination.

8 Self-Determination Defined. 21 Setting and Participants. 23 Inter-Observer Agreement. 27 Statistical Analyses Related to the Research Questions.

27 Demographic Information of Participants. 27 Participants and gender. 28 Participant residential status. 29 Participant employment status.

30 Pre- and Posttest Analysis. 30 Paired Sample t-Test Across Experimental Group. 30 Individual Skills Analyses. 31 McNemar Pre- and Posttest Analysis of Video Observations.

35 Summary of the Findings. 35 Discussion of Findings. 37 Discussion on Videos. 40 Limitations of the Study.

42 Implication and Recommendation for Practice. 43 Students With IDD Should Receive Self-Determination Instruction. 44 Video Modeling to Increase Understanding of the Literacy of Self- Determination. 44 Using Combinations of Strategies to Make Abstract Concepts More Concrete.

45 Implications for Future Research. SAMPLE VOCABULARY TEST: PRETEST AND POSTTEST. SAMPLE DATA RECORDING SHEET TO RECORD SKILLS OF SELF-DETERMINATION. PROJECT OVERVIEWS AND LESSON MATRIX.

62 viii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Frequency and Percentage of the Participants by Gender. Frequency and Percentage of the Participants by Residency Status. Frequency and Percentage of the Participants by Employment Status.

Across Group t-Test Analysis of Literacy. McNemar Test Between Pre- and Posttest for Literacy of Each Skill. Percentage Change Between Pre- and Posttest for Each Video. 34 ix 1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Over the past decade transition-age students with intellectual disabilities (ID) have become a critical and growing concern for rehabilitation services and local education agencies (LEAs) in Ohio and nationally.

According to the Second Longitudinal Study of Transition, the number of students with ID in regular education settings increased 29% in the past decade, coming mainly from separate special education schools which saw a 31% drop in enrollment (Wagner, Newman, Cameto, Garza, & Levine, 2005). Typically, LEAs have responded to this influx of students with ID by creating self-contained classrooms and transition programs outside of the general curriculum (Wagner et al. The outcomes of these programs, like the programs themselves, have commonly been segregated environments with little opportunity for life-long learning, careers, independent living (Baer, Daviso, Flexer, McMahan Queen, & Meindl, 2011), and community inclusion. The lack of inclusive educational environments is evident in the Thirty-Sixth Report to Congress (2015), which identifies that over half of transition-aged students with ID (51.3) and those with multiple disabilities (53.8) continue to spend over 60% of the day in separate learning environments.

Even though the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (U. Congress, 1990), and the 2008 Amendments Act (Madaus, Kowitt, & Lalor, 2012), in conjunction with the 1999 Olmstead Decision (Rosenbaum, 2000), have led to significant improvements in the community inclusion of individuals with intellectual and 2 other disabilities, progress in terms of higher education and labor market participation has been modest at best. Despite President Obama’s commitment to increase participation in employment among people with disabilities, employment rates for those with disabilities still lag far behind those of non-disabled workers (Arc, 2016). The Bureau of Labor Statistics (2016) identified that 82.1% of persons with disabilities were unemployed compared to that of 34.7% of persons without disabilities.

For students with ID employment rates are even bleaker. A recent survey of 11,599 adults with ID in 16 states found that only 14.7% were competitively employed (Human Service Research Institute [HSRI], 2012), with most students leaving high school and entering into a lifetime of sheltered employment where they earn subminimum wage, or in day habilitation (Siperstein, Parker, & Drascher, 2013). Likewise, The Arc of the United States (2015), a national organization that promotes, protects, and supports the rights of persons with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), finds that the majority of adults with IDD are either unemployed or underemployed, despite their ability, desire, and willingness to work in the community. However, despite decades of investment in special education through legislation such as the Individual with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), little has changed in transition and adult life outcomes for those with ID (Grigal, Hart, & Weir, 2013).

Of all disability groups, persons with ID have the lowest rates of education, employment, or preparation for work after secondary education of all disability groups (Siperstein et al. Moreover, Grigal, Hart, and Migliore (2011) reported that students with ID have the least inclusive educational experiences and the lowest levels of academic 3 achievement with only 11% of high-school students with ID indicating postsecondary goals in their transition plans of attending a two-year or four-year college in their education plan. These dismal outcomes invoke questions concerning what types of barriers might impede greater success and adult outcomes for persons with ID. According to the U.

Bureau of Labor Statistics (Handcock, 2013), the lack of education or training, lack of transportation, lack of effective accommodations, and a person’s own disability were among the barriers reportedly inhibiting persons with ID. Other considerations that greatly limit adult outcomes are low expectations and minimal access to postsecondary education, a need for greater understanding and implementation of self-determined behaviors that improve self-efficacy, self-advocacy, and self-awareness levels, and promoting greater social involvement in order to prepare persons with ID for competitively paid employment and greater quality of life (Think College, 2014). Evidence points to the difficulties experienced by students with ID in realizing better life outcomes. In pondering what barrier has the greatest impact on success in all other areas, it became a great interest for this researcher to examine the barriers related to self-determined behaviors in students with ID; what interventions and strategies are currently in place; and finally the identification of an approach that may lead to improvement of self-determination in this population.

Intellectual Disabilities Defined Before delving in to the topic of self-determination in persons with ID, there is a need to define what an intellectual disability is and its prevalence. ID is identified as the 4 most common developmental disability by the National Center on Birth Defects and Developmental Disabilities (2005) and is the diagnosis for approximately 6.5 million people in the United States (The ARC, 2015). Department of Education reports that more than 400,000 children (ages 6–21) receive special education services in public schools under this category according to IDEA statistics (2015). Department of Education (2010a) reports that 6 in every 100 children who need special education have some form of ID.

Founded in 1876, The American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (AAIDD, 2010) is credited as the world’s largest and oldest organization in advancing the evolution of ideas and approaches with regards to ID.