Tag: edreform

Posted on

Survey: Internet helps education, hurts morality

The Pew Research Center has released results to a poll of relatively new internet users in developing countries that found the internet is viewed pretty favorably, particularly when it comes to education.

Sixty-four percent of the respondents felt that the internet had a positive impact on education and 53 percent said the same for personal relationships. When asked the same thing about the internet’s influence on politics and morality, however, only 36% and 29% had a favorable view, respectively. When you look at the way the internet is utilized in America and other developed nations, I’d say these observations align. There are good and bad aspects — but the potential for increased access to education is great.

I’ve said before that I feel technology can be a great equalizer in P-20 classrooms and this survey adds an international element to that stance. The internet allows access to information in ways that were not even dreamed of a few decades ago. Using internet technology to improve educational access on a worldwide scale is so important to elevating the global economy and knowledge base. Imagine the collaboration that will be possible worldwide between this generation of students because of internet access?

While the internet was considered somewhat of a luxury when it first emerged, I think it is vital that all corners of the world gain access in the coming decade. The internet should not be something elite countries have access to; it should be an educational right for all people. Through this mass adoption, knowledge collaborations will continue to grow and it will benefit all of us as world citizens.

Read all of our posts about EdTech and Innovation by clicking here. 

Posted on

Next Generation Science Standards are Smart

Earlier this month California became the seventh state to adopt a new brand set of K-12 science outlines, dubbed Next Generation Science Standards, or NGSS. The “real world” approach to science mastery focuses on engineering, problem solving, modeling, and cause and effect experiments. Other states that are on-board with the science outlines are Maryland, Nevada, Kentucky, Kansas, Rhode Island and Vermont. The term “science standards” sounds like a positive one as far as learning is concerned, but do schools need really need another tier of learning accountability – and will students really benefi

What are Next Generation Science Standards?

Over the past year and a half, NGSS have been developed by education experts in several states. They are not an official part of the new Common Core standards but are meant to layer on top of the standards in place for stronger science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) outcomes. These standards are intended to teach the overlapping nature of science subjects, rather than to present lessons in topic isolation. In states like California, the value of a strong STEM foundation is critical to individual and state success. Over the past decade, STEM jobs have grown at a rate three times faster than other industries. By equipping K-12 students with better STEM knowledge, the long-term economic outlook will improve.

Why are NGSS controversial?

A report from the Thomas B. Fordham Institute reveals a flaw in the enthusiasm for NGSS. The Common Core math standards and NGSS outlines do not align. The authors of the math review from the Institute say that while there are many strengths on the math side, there are also “a distressing number of weaknesses.” These include science expectations that have math components that are not grade-appropriate, according to an Education Week post by Erik Robelen,

Other critics believe the standards are actually subpar when compared to current state standards. There is also concern that implementing a one-size-fits-all approach to science neglects individual learning initiatives and also regional needs when it comes to science education. Some critics also believe there is a lack of computer learning in the standards which is a disservice to students with how rapidly science technology is changing.

The verdict?

Applying any cookie-cutter standards to any K-12 topic certainly comes with its share of potential problems, as NGSS critics have pointed out. Still, shining the focus on real world STEM learning in real-world settings is necessary to fully equip the present and future workforce. American students also need the extra focus in areas of math and science where they fall behind their peers in other developed nations.

Science, math and engineering topics are also less likely to be discovered by students, in the way that many find a love for reading or music, without some guidance from educators. Let’s face it – science and math are less romantic than other topics and so the “aha” factor takes some navigation. Once students have experienced a science spark of interest, they are more likely to maintain it, particularly if they can see the real-world ramifications.

Like other curriculum standards, NGSS need some tweaking to best impact K-12 learners. The foundation is there though and that is a step in the right STEM direction. The NGSS are a building block of a much larger cultural shift that needs to happen where science and math are concerned. Empowering students with better conceptualization of science in everyday living is necessary for career success and progression as a nation.

Do you like the Next Generation Science Standards? Will students ultimately benefit from these areas of focus?

 

Posted on

3 Ways to Improve U.S. Students Standing Worldwide

The latest international report on student knowledge and success worldwide once again paints U.S. pupils in a bad light. This is not the first time American students have lagged behind their peers on the OECD PISA global education survey that tests and compares student outcomes in areas like math, science and reading. The results are really just more of the same.

While I take issue with particular parts of the test (leader China reportedly only tested students in elite schools in Shanghai), it is a wake-up call nonetheless. When it comes to American K-12 student achievement, it is not enough to be a big fish in a little pond. To really make a splash and gain international footing, a few things need to change in U.S. K-12 education. Here are just a few:

Teacher support. This starts from administration in individual schools and extends into the community at large. Parents must also respect the role of teachers in order for kids to follow suit. Unfortunately many times teachers are pitted as servants, and not put on the pedestal they deserve. Perhaps I’m biased but what is more important than imparting knowledge to our next generation? Today’s best teachers are not simply reciting facts and expecting their students to regurgitate them; the teachers in contemporary classrooms are “showing their work” so to speak by imparting the life skills necessary for students to find answers on their own and be successful citizens in other ways.

Teachers need backup from the other people in their students’ lives and from their own colleagues and superiors. Traditionally high-performing PISA countries like Sweden, Australia and Japan all have one thing in common – high levels of community support for teachers and involvement from teachers in the course of instruction and curriculum. When new initiatives are handed down in the U.S., like the Common Core standards, teachers should have access to resources to help them reach goals. Teachers need more input in decisions, more access to continuing education resources and more faith from the administrators and families impacted by their classrooms.

STEM emphasis. There seems to be a general societal consensus that science, technology, engineering and math subjects are somehow boring, or uncool. A lot of attention has been placed lately on young women and finding ways to encourage them in male-dominated STEM fields, but I’d argue that young men need the same opportunities. Overall, more American students need to take an interest in STEM topics if we want to be able to compete on a global scale. The rapidly changing field of technology makes this part of U.S. K-12 education even more pressing. As the digital age continues to modify life as we know it, the students in today’s classrooms must have the tools to lead the country in discoveries, inventions and communication technology the coming decades.

Equal opportunities. In country that claims to be based on equality for all, there are still too many achievement gaps in our classrooms. While it should be a non-issue, the color of a student’s skin does seem to impact his or her academic achievement. It is not a direct effect, of course, but still something that needs even more focus to overcome. The best work on closing the achievement gap is in individual schools and I think that makes the most sense. No blanket national program will be able to answer all of the intricacies of why an achievement gap exists in a particular place or school. From a federal standpoint, however, schools should be encouraged to develop programs for eliminating achievement gaps and reaching individual students where it is most effective – their own classrooms.

Why do you think American students lag the rest of the world? What would you add to my list?

Click here to read all our posts concerning the Achievement Gap.

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Early Intervention Supports and Strategies

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

How is it determined that a child struggles in a particular area? How can teachers and therapists develop the most effective intervention plans possible? The answer lies with the use of diagnostic tools for data collection and analysis.

To develop an effective early intervention model based on supports and strategies, two distinct elements are necessary. First, early intervention depends on diagnostic procedures, which rest on clear strategies. Second, the system also hinges on distinct rules for selecting and implementing supports and strategies, in light of student needs and diagnostic findings.

Functional Behavioral Analysis

Several investigative tools have been developed to assist early intervention. For students demonstrating emotional, social, and behavioral delays and dysfunctions, one of the most important diagnostic tools is the functional behavioral analysis (FBA). As researchers, Robin Hojnoski and Brenna Wood point out, educators are increasingly aware of the connection between the social behaviors of children and early academic skills.

In particular, research has consistently shown that young children who demonstrate challenging behavior may experience disruption to their learning. Negative conduct may interfere with opportunities to learn and effectively interact with peers in classroom situations. Research also recognizes that certain classroom activities, particularly structured activities, place high demands on children who already struggle with behavioral challenges. Investigative studies show that children may engage in challenging behavior as a means of avoiding demands placed upon them.

As a tool, an FBA is a direct and indirect procedure for collecting data related to problem behaviors. Direct data collection methods include classroom observations, while indirect methods of assessment include interviews with parents and teachers and the use of rating scales to assess actions. The subsequent analysis of such data identifies behavioral triggers and their antecedents, the reasons why the behaviors occur, and the functions and consequences of the behavior.

Tools for Data Analysis

Beyond FBA, other diagnostic tools also make use of observation. Occupational therapists will, for example, generally observe students to identify the daily tasks with which children have difficulty. Some diagnostic tools, such as questionnaires, may also be used for occupational therapy assessment, as well as language and behavioral evaluation. Parent participation and preschool involvement may be important in the use of such tools. However, the best observations and data tend to be collected from individual students in a classroom context, subjected to the academic, social, emotional, and general behavioral demands of the classroom environment. Even self-care and language skills can be better assessed in a classroom than in the home or community, and early intervention acts on this knowledge.

Drawbacks of Diagnostic Tools

Despite the strengths of existing diagnostic tools, they still have their weaknesses. For instance, many school districts administer FBAs indirectly, rather than directly. When FBAs are administered indirectly, they concentrate not on direct observations of children in classrooms, but indirect observations. Indirect observations tend to lack multiple elements that, in regular assessment procedures, would include efforts to gather information about instructional variables and early academic skill development.

Criticism of FBAs conducted within early education settings is that the same interview form is used by parents and teachers for students spanning a wide range of ages, with only a few modifications made for different age groups. The actual developmental differences, and therefore the questionnaires themselves, do not allow parents and teachers to accurately describe specific behaviors in sufficient detail to definitively assess developmental appropriateness.

In their assessment of FBA tools, Hojnoski and Wood note that the two interview forms, the forms used for elementary school and the form used for older children, include two general questions to identify areas where skills are lacking. There is, however, little effort to gather data to identify areas of concern related to the development of academic skills relevant to early-childhood and elementary education.

Assessment Goals

For diagnostic procedures to be effective, a variety of tools should be used, and these tools should reflect age-appropriate analytics for language, social and behavioral interactions. Early intervention might benefit from specifically targeting the problems that most commonly cause academic delays and disruptions in the classroom. With this information in hand, it could be useful to focus on identifying, or otherwise developing, age-appropriate tools to test skills and knowledge. Perhaps even developing a means to identify those students who are most at risk of deficits within certain areas. The goal of early intervention should not be to simply stop or reverse academic delays, but as much as possible, to prevent them entirely.

Are you familiar with the use of diagnostic testing from an early intervention perspective? Would you alter how the evaluation tools are currently being utilized?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Intervention Approach Alternatives

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

How can early intervention programs and school supports increase attentiveness and participation among children?

Just as regular school programs should seek to engage students in regards to their interests, early intervention programs and school-based support systems should, as well. As has often been pointed out, the most effective teachers are those who develop learning environments and relationships that promote the cultivation of individual passions.

MATCH

MATCH is an early intervention program based in Boston, MA, that seeks to give students the tools they need to get into college. Almost all the students in the program are minorities, most are from families below the poverty line, and the vast majority with deficiencies in reading and math. Principal Jorge Miranda says that the school uses rigid discipline and a hefty set of rules to keep students in line. The day begins before 8:00am and ends at 5:00pm. Signs posted around the school regulate everything, the dress code, unexcused absences, tardiness, and poor posture in class, to name a few.

Classes are small at MATCH, a key feature of schools that implement early intervention effectively. Another important element is the one-on-one tutoring for students who specifically request it. The MATCH Corps tutors receive a small stipend that is partially funded through AmeriCorps when they make a one-year tutoring commitment.

Intervention Impact

Though adjusting to the school can be difficult, it has worked for an overwhelming number of students. The program not only turns students’ lives around, it also turns them into stellar scholars. In fact, the school had the highest scores in math on the state standardized test, and many students had scores high enough to obtain free tuition at any state university in Massachusetts. All of the graduates of its first four graduating classes were accepted into four-year universities.

Early intervention programs and school-based programs must align to promote the interests of all students and foster this kind of student-centered learning model in special-learning programs. In particular, if students and specialist staff have the benefit of working within a relatively stable environment, one that does not involve a child transitioning to a new classroom every academic year, then the opportunities for the development of a child-centered learning model and child-centered support systems are endless.

Collaborative Environments

Schools and early-intervention organizations can likely manage the costs of providing special-education supports by enhancing the efficiency of those supports delivered in the early years. However, they must work together countrywide toward the achievement of equal-opportunity, student-centered learning models. With parameters in place and clear guidelines for child-centered supports, schools, and early intervention programs can work together to go beyond budgetary considerations.

If early intervention programs and schools are able to work collaboratively, then the needs of the individual students and their families may be better served. Indeed, some responsibility to remove negative views of early intervention and special-education support must fall on schools and early intervention units. These groups are ultimately responsible for supporting students at either end of the academic spectrum, gifted students and those with learning disabilities.

Inclusive Learning Model

There are ethical considerations regarding the integration of exceptional students in traditional classrooms. The legal requirement to provide a free and appropriate education to all students in the least restricted environment is frequently extended to children with special needs. In turn, this mandate implies that integration or “push-in supports” in a traditional classroom produce higher levels of learning than models that remove students with special needs to separate classrooms where they are taught “life skills.”

While not every student will benefit from an inclusive education, the vast majority will. There is a need for promoting the idea that inclusion is the preferred model for learning. Early intervention programs and schools must work toward this by collaboratively promoting parent education. Supporting programs related to the delivery of special-education services in inclusive environments is key. Opportunities for training teachers and establishing regularly integrated supports for students with special needs are more easily and efficiently implemented in schools that de-emphasize standardized testing and graded learning.

Just as you might connect with a person who has common interests, so may a child to educational strategies designed to appeal to them uniquely. Can you picture a program in which all students are involved, engaged and participation is sky-high? How can we begin to alter our current system so that we are taking steps toward the aforementioned setting?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Thoughts on Intervening Early and Often

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

How challenging do you imagine it is to create a program inclusive of early intervention and special-education supports?

Reconciling the different needs of special education children with “normal” or “gifted” students is sometimes inflammatory. “Special education” has acquired the status of a stigma because of fears and misunderstandings of education and its possibilities.

The efforts to standardize education and students, have not created a culture of acceptance for those who learn differently or who have specific disabilities that impact their learning. Thus, one of the major benefits of a multiage, student-centered learning model for public education is the possibility that all students, whatever their intellectual assets or liabilities, can be helped to reach their full potential. The objective is that students learn within a common classroom, and ultimately, are molded into caring human beings for a productive life.

Inclusive Classrooms

Inclusion, all students in a common classroom, would be that much easier in a multiage learning environment, and for precisely the same reasons that multiage classrooms benefit children and teachers with a background of traditional schooling. In a multi-age learning environment, there is less anxiety associated with the school experience because both student and teacher know they have the opportunity to develop meaningful, durable relationships. At the same time, teachers know that they will have the time and opportunity to learn the requirements of their special needs students.

Research has overwhelmingly supported the notion that early intervention – and the earlier, the better – is the key to helping exceptional students achieve school-readiness and strategies for success. The early intervention model proposed here not only embraces that principle but seeks to celebrate it as a focus of collaboration between those responsible for the early interventions (preschool-age interventions) and the schools, which take charge as a child transitions to school-age programming.

Collaborative Efforts

Promoting collaboration as well as early and frequent interventions is a strategy that builds community support for education, and for public education specifically. It seeks to emphasize the need for supports across all settings and the benefits for that comprehensive support model. The strategy eliminates the need for children to be segregated based on special needs. Rather, the only streaming that should be practiced would be based on academic abilities and learning preferences. Schools could easily support the streaming of groups with certain abilities without targeting students with special needs.

Student-Centered Focus

A student-centered focus allows for a flexible and ethically sound approach to supporting students with exceptional needs, whatever they may be. While it is well established in law, for instance, that there can be no discrimination against students based on a variety of factors, including age, family background, disability, and economic status, the reality is that there is at least indirect discrimination within our education system. School-district funding is highly competitive, and there are certain districts around the country that essentially act without regard for the best interests of students or higher principles of equality established by law.

In the current system, the “politics” of public education can be detrimental to the needs of exceptional students, and very often is. The problem is largely the result of the emphasis on test-taking and on increased levels of support for schools that test well. Of course, supporting students to produce exceptional results in standardized tests is not the domain of specialized instruction. The realm of that educational model is to support students to ensure that they can obtain an education – free, appropriate, and minimally restricted.

The proposed model of frequent and intensive interventions, especially in the early years, allows for a focus on quality education beyond such false parameters as tests. The emphasis can be placed on skills for learning, rather than static knowledge. This allows that students may learn best throughout their careers if they are supported in the development of solid reasoning skills, critical thinking skills, and a range of fundamental skills that relate to actual function within the school environment.

Can you imagine if the proposed model of intensive interventions were the norm for American children? How much better off would our education system be if we were able to effectively address delays and disabilities prior to children entering elementary school?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: The Importance of Early Intervention

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

How important do you feel early intervention programs are? Should more resources be put toward these types of programs, focused on reaching children with delays or disabilities, before they begin their academic careers?

Pre-School Intervention

The importance of early intervention has to do with the relationship between academic success and the ability to function – behaviorally, emotionally, socially, physically, and intellectually – in one’s environment.

It is well documented that students can experience disruption to their learning as a result of behavioral issues and lack of skill in key learning domains. In other words, they may struggle academically because they can’t function well in their environment. This is especially true for young children entering school for the first time. In the areas of language, early literacy, mathematics, socialization, and self-care, young children may experience delays that cause them to lag behind in their studies. For children with diagnosed disabilities, including the now astonishing number of students with autism spectrum disorder, the supports of early intervention help to prevent additional developmental difficulties and make existing development conditions better.

Early Intervention Benefits

Beyond this, there are also the positive and direct aims of early intervention, which include the promotion of early learning opportunities and the enhancement of basic knowledge and skills for students. Early intervention strategies, according to available research efforts, support these positive aims. A significant amount of research confirms the success of all types of early intervention programs. As a result of their successes, early intervention programs of various types are widely accepted as having both a preventative and a positive impact on child development, with particular emphasis on the management of special needs and promotion of school-readiness.

Other specific benefits of early intervention programs include fewer referrals to special-education services in schools. At least one major study suggests that there are gains in developmental outcomes for all children in inclusive early childhood settings. The success of early intervention is not unqualified, though. With most programs, obvious challenges exist with intervention implementation and effectiveness.

The Key to Success

There are two keys to unlocking intervention strategy success. First, the support programs depend on identifying children early on who need extra help. Second, they depend on providing some ways for students to receive that necessary support. There is growing evidence that intervention programs can prevent problems from occurring in later grades.

The importance of identifying issues early on is logical. The earlier a challenge is identified, especially with regard to development and its relationship to learning, the faster it can be resolved. By establishing any academic issues related to the delay, problems can be addressed, or even prevented.

Most developmental issues have a direct impact on learning. The importance of early intervention is simply that it can decrease certain problems, limiting academic delays caused by the developmental issue. Indeed, this is one of the reasons why early intervention from birth to three years, and even between three and five, is so crucial.

Most children do not enter a formal school setting until around the age of five or six. This depends on a variety of factors, but primarily on calendar age and maturity. A child who receives intervention to address delays before he or she enters formal schooling, is far more likely to succeed academically than a child who does not receive such interventions. Unfortunately, interventions introduced later in a child’s school career, when he or she is already struggling, have limited impact.

Do you feel most parents are aware of the importance of early intervention? Are enough resources available to parents of pre-school aged children, regarding developmental delays, assessments and early intervention?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Early Intervention and School Partnerships

social promotion in schools

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

“Teamwork makes the dream work.” A catchy saying that holds a lot of validity when talking about early intervention programs and school-based services.

In order for early intervention to serve students better, an appropriate relationship between early intervention organizations and schools is absolutely necessary. The transition procedure from early intervention to school should be streamlined. There is also a need for far greater consistency between early-intervention programs and school-age programs, as well as between programs in different regions, including across school districts and states.

A Working Partnership

Early intervention and school-based service providers must work together to support children because of the unavoidable, but often unaddressed, reality that children do not arrive at school with empty minds. The educator’s task is not to fill the mind (it is already full), but to enlarge its capacity – the capacity for knowledge and critical thinking, for analysis, and for understanding. For this to be achieved, though, and for children to truly be the subject of their educational journey, a working partnership must be developed. Early-intervention service providers and programs that take on the challenge of supporting children beyond the early developmental phases, will need to foster a collaborative spirit.

Well-Defined Standards

However, a partnership between early intervention and schools cannot occur without an appropriate knowledge foundation. It is crucial that educators at all levels understand how early experiences and early-childhood development are essential to later learning. The broader point is that there needs to be a relationship between the curriculum and the realities that children construct for themselves. This depends on clear collaboration between school and early intervention, beginning with the establishment and maintenance of clear standards for supports.

While early intervention programs and school-based programs must continue to address students as individuals, the specific needs of each child should also be addressed. Standards may dictate the type of supports to be used, and what kind of services are to be offered. They may also, for the sake of managing resources, dictate what levels of supports are to be offered to students based on need assessments. The types and levels of support may be customized within parameters defined at a higher administrative level.

Intervention Protocols

Ideally, there should be protocols for requesting that certain procedures be overlooked on a case-by-case basis, so that individual students receive supports tailored to their needs. A child might, for instance, receive more behavioral supports in school or their early childhood environment than would be warranted based on assessment results and diagnostic findings. The reason for this could be that the child was demonstrating a behavior of particular concern and that needed additional support.

Additional Considerations

Although it is hardly possible to do away with budgetary considerations in the planning of early intervention and school-based supports, the general rule should be established that early intervention services and supports in early school years are likely to produce a much higher return on investment than those applied later in a child’s school career. All educators, but especially special education teachers, must respect the long-term consequences of withholding services and supports that they require to succeed in school, as well as curtail disruptive or self-destructive behavior.

Even with the removal of graded systems and an end to the problems of retention and social promotion, school failure will persist because of counterproductive pressures and inadequate support. Children do not arrive with empty heads; they have expectations, standards of thinking, and processes of learning that, if ignored in the school setting, will cause academic failure and, perhaps, the decision to drop out of school. Students who cannot find the intersection between the curriculum and the structures in their heads – and this includes students with special needs – are likely to become part of that estimated 10 percent of the school population that either drops out of school altogether, or fails to graduate from high school.

Do the costs of early intervention programs outweigh the costs to parents, teachers, society and the student themselves, if they are not adequately prepared academically?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Training Teachers in Areas of Developmental Delay and Inclusion

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

As a teacher, you really can only do so much. What would you want parents to know if their child had a developmental delay or disability?

The strength of strategies and special-education support resources can only do so much to promote the academic success of students who have a developmental delay or disability. Regular classroom teachers remain vital touchstones for early intervention, not only as key figures in the diagnostic process, but also as supporters of early intervention models and implementers of certain early-intervention strategies.

Trained Educators

Teachers must receive training to spot students who could benefit from special-education supports. Likewise, all teachers involved in the teaching of preschoolers who are within the age range for early intervention, need to have specific training and knowledge to understand student needs clearly enough to be able to spot potential developmental or learning issues. All teachers and general educators, and not just those working in early childhood, should receive specific training in teaching special education programs. All teachers need to understand how to provide support in a holistic way.

Learning Outside the Classroom

One of the biggest challenges for effective early intervention is the development of a system that provides consistent supports across all settings. School success depends on the ability of children to function on many levels and their ability to adapt to change and manage stress. Learning opportunities exist for children everywhere, especially young children. Early intervention should be able to take advantage of this and teach the natural caregivers and supporters how to use these opportunities. There are many programs that can inspire parents to help their children learn. For instance, many public libraries offer reading programs over the summer, partly to help parents minimize loss of skills over the summer months. Such programs are not always as well supported as they might be. Teachers and special-education professionals are well placed to offer parents information about these sorts of programs.

Parent-Teacher Communication

Teachers should be encouraged to share information about how the child can be supported in their learning outside the classroom. Feedback and insights about the child’s needs and their experiences at school, as those experiences relate to and affect the home environment, are also important. Parent–teacher communication, where early intervention and school-based supports are needed to facilitate a child’s learning, are crucial. Early-intervention and special-education systems should help teachers understand family concerns and the needs of exceptional students. This assistance will help teachers meet those needs and communicate with parents about their students’ knowledge and skills.

Beyond highly trained teachers and well-informed and involved parents, what can be done to maximize the effectiveness of early intervention programs? How would our current system need to change in order for those elements to receive top priority?

Posted on

Pass or Fail: Challenges for Early Intervention Services

pass or fail

In this multi-part series, I provide a dissection of the phenomenon of retention and social promotion. Also, I describe the many different methods that would improve student instruction in classrooms and eliminate the need for retention and social promotion if combined effectively.

While reading this series, periodically ask yourself this question: Why are educators, parents and the American public complicit in a practice that does demonstrable harm to children and the competitive future of the country?

What drawbacks have you observed within the early intervention process? What elements do you find to be most effective?

Although there are differences between early intervention and school-age supports for children with disabilities or special education needs, there are also obvious similarities. Supports provided by early intervention programming have less of an academic focus. Granted, there is the long-term goal of promoting academic success, but these goals are pursued indirectly. There’s awareness that prevention is a workable strategy and students need the best possible developmental balance.

For early intervention opportunities to be successful, some of the existing procedures and parameters need to be reviewed and revised. The suggestion here is that early – and often – intervention is the appropriate strategy for promoting academic success for all students. It offers a relatively cost-effective and helpful approach for promoting quality education, as well as offering necessary supports for academic success. That said, there is still a need to ensure maximum efficiency.

Childhood Early Intervention

Within the parameters of early intervention, a healthy student exhibits an appropriate level in areas of development. He or she can enjoy a healthy, active, and productive existence inside and outside of learning environments. The multidisciplinary approach for early intervention is holistic.

In addition to using a broad range of professionals to provide early intervention services, most early intervention programs offer support across a broad range of developmental domains. In their approach to disabilities, which are defined as dysfunctional interactions between an individual and his environment, early intervention again goes further than most school-age programs. Early intervention programs tend to work on those disabilities that hinder students in areas outside of education, as well as within it. Impairment of interaction with the environment, which is not limited to school, broadens the scope of interventions that can be offered.

School-Age Supports

Most school-based services operate on the understanding that there must be a quantifiable delay for a child to receive support. There are also limits as to how supports can be used. School-based programs are less proactive and preventative, tending to approach special-education resources and opportunities with an “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it” mindset.

While there may be occasional support in schools, the principal service provider of school-age supports is the teacher and, ideally, the regular education teacher. This is not always the case with early intervention.

Early Intervention Obstacles

The basic elements are already in place for early intervention programs to be a success, but the logistical issues associated, including the transition to school, are difficult to overcome.

According to various research, the educational environment needs specific mechanisms or processes in a concrete system, such that it is capable of bringing about or preventing some change in the system as a whole or some of its subsystems. At the same time, mechanisms can be related to human development. Examples of such development-focused interventions include maternal responsiveness, parental monitoring, cognitive development, and school and community support.

Successful Outcomes

Research was conducted in which the success of early intervention was tracked and important program elements were identified. Measurements of preschool participation (in years), of the duration of program participation (in years), and of extended program participation for four to six years were the measurements that correlated with academic success. Students were found to be more successful when they had high participation in all three areas. Parent participation in preschool was also found to be an important factor, as was school quality.

In other words, early intervention programs should emphasize these elements – opportunities for students to participate in preschool environments before enrollment in school, opportunities for parent engagement, and opportunities for the preschooler to participate in the program.

At the same time, early intervention programs are governed by financial and logistical considerations. No matter how much they might wish it, school districts and states can spend only so much on early intervention support services. Budgetary considerations must have some weight, not necessarily in determining rigid service parameters, but certainly in creating service guidelines.

The success of early intervention tends to weigh heavily on involving children as early as possible, during pre-school years. With this in mind, who should be raising awareness for early intervention?