Sample Daily Home Schedule for a 3 Year Old - PowerPoint by izu13039

VIEWS: 46 PAGES: 58

Sample Daily Home Schedule for a 3 Year Old document sample

More Info
									Project DIRECT
       Laurie Dinnebeil &
      William McInerney
      University of Toledo
          MEPI Planning Model

IEP Intervention Planning with Consultation Partner

• Maturation - Biological Influence
• Environment -
       Facilitative effect of materials, routines, etc.
• Peer Mediation - Structured peer interactions
• Intensive - Direct intervention necessary
M = Maturation / Biology
  Evaluate learning objective to
   determine if ‘target’ behavior / skill is
   likely to improve as a result of biological
   development and experience without
   significant teacher or peer involvement
  (e.g. minor articulation problems,
   grasping of objects, dressing skills,
   response to peer communication bids)
E = Environmental Support
    Evaluate learning objective to determine if
     ‘target’ behavior / skill is likely to improve as
     a result of child access to materials or teacher
     ‘engineering’ of learning (or home)
     environment’. Will securing items in a variety
     of containers and placing out of child’s reach
     result in increased opportunities for fine
     motor skill development and communication
     (e.g. seeking desired toy/item with or w/o
     request for assistance)?
P = Peer Intervention/Support
    Evaluate learning objective to determine if
     ‘target’ behavior / skill is likely to improve as
     a result of child interaction with competent
     peers. Teacher organization of ‘peer buddies’
     and cooperative activity groups will increase
     opportunities for imitation learning (via peer
     modeling). Also peer ‘expectations’ for social
     interaction and communication may provide
     ‘motivation’ to target child to improve skill or
     behavior
I = Intensive/Direct Intervention
     Evaluate learning objective to determine if
      ‘target’ behavior / skill requires IMMEDIATE
      intervention and/or will enhance child’s
      acceptance in learning community. Examples
      would include aggressive behavior, very
      limited communication skills, very limited
      personal mobility, and toilet training (if
      developmental indicators present). Child
      would not be expected to make reasonable
      progress toward acquisition of this
      skill/behavior without DIRECT and consistent
      teacher intervention.
Benefits of Matrices
in Planning Intervention
     ECE teacher, parents and administrators can
      see the link between daily schedule, daily
      routines and priority IEP objectives
     INCIDENTAL and DIRECT instruction
      opportunities can be identified
     Appropriate strategies and opportunity for
      instruction linked with opportunities
Activity-Based Intervention Matrix

     DAILY SCHEDULE   Objective #1:            Objective #2:            Objective #3:            Objective #4:
     OF ACTIVITIES




                      # Opportunities: _____   # Opportunities: _____   # Opportunities: _____   # Opportunities: _____
adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix A
DAILY SCHEDULE                IEP Objective #1:Making
OF ACTIVITIES                 Choices (Level E, P)
Center Time                   Block center or housekeeping?
Classroom Chores              Water plants or feed fish?
Snack/Cooking Activity        Pudding or milkshakes?
Small Group-Art               Which art materials to use?
Going to Park with Parents    Slide or swing?
                              # Opportunities: 5




adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix B
HOME - SCHEDULE               IEP Objective #1:Making
                              Choices (Level E, P)
Breakfast                     Block center or housekeeping?
Laundry w Mom                 Water plants or feed fish?
Lunchtime Preparation         Pudding or milkshakes?
Reading Time                  Which art materials to use?
Playing with my Brother       Slide or swing?
                              # Opportunities: 5




adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix C
DAILY SCHEDULE               IEP Objective #2:Reach and Grasp
OF ACTIVITIES                (Level M, E)
Center Time                  Build tower w/ blocks
Classroom Chores             Reach for/grasp attendance slip –
                             place on desk in office
Snack/Cooking Activity       Reach for/grasp cooking utensils
Small Group-Art              Reach for/grasp built-up paintbrush
                             handle
Going to Park with Parents   Reach/grasp to hold onto
                             swing/side of slide
                             # Opportunities: 5
adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix D
HOME SCHEDULE              IEP Objective #2:Reach and Grasp
                           (Level M, E)
Breakfast                  Build tower w/ blocks
Laundry w Mom              Reach for/grasp attendance slip –
                           place on desk in office
Holiday Baking w Mom       Reach for/grasp cooking utensils
Gluing Stuff w Mom         Reach for/grasp built-up paintbrush
                           handle
Play Games with my         Reach/grasp to hold onto
Brother                    swing/side of slide
                           # Opportunities: 5
adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix E

DAILY SCHEDULE           IEP Objective #3: Initiate Social
OF ACTIVITIES            Interaction (Level P, I)
Center Time              Greet other children – vocalize or eye
                         contact`
Classroom Chores         Initiate contact with office personnel
Snack/Cooking Activity   Eye contact w/ peers – their turn to stir

Small Group-Art          Initiate interaction w/ adult – ask for
                         assistance
Going to Park with       Eye contact/vocalize – to let know what
Parents                  she wants to be pushed
                         # Opportunities: 5
adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
Activity-Based
Intervention Matrix F
DAILY SCHEDULE               IEP Objective #4: Cause/Effect (Use
OF ACTIVITIES                of Switch) (Level E,P or I)
Classroom Chores             Use switch to turn on toy (dump
                             truck @ blocks center ‘building site’)
Snack/Cooking Activity       Switch to activate blender etc
Small Group-Art
Going to Park with Parents   Switch to turn on music box

Classroom Chores
                             # Opportunities: 3


adapted from Grisham-Brown and Hemmeter, 1998
       Discussion

Gail is 4-year old with mild cognitive
delay. She needs help in using words to
express her needs.
   How would you use a consultative
     approach to help her teacher recognize
     opportunities for Gail to practice use of
     words skill throughout the day? How
     would you help her mother recognize
     opportunities at home?
        Discussion

Jaron is 5-year old with mild autism (PDD-
NOS). He needs to use Boardmaker pictures to
improve his activity transition skills in
preparation for kindergarten.
   How would you use a consultative approach
     to help his teacher to recognize / create
     opportunities for Jaron to practice this skill
     throughout the day? Could you do the same
     for his parents? How?
        Discussion

Michael is 4-year old with Down Syndrome
and mild CD. He needs to improve his verbal
communication with peers with the use of
American Sign Language.
   How would you use a consultative approach to
     help his teacher or parent to recognize / create
     opportunities for Michael to practice this skill
     throughout the day?
Critical Factors in Effectiveness
of Consultation Process

   Time Demands (e.g. caseload, travel,
    planning time)
     • Create released time (volunteer relief, university
       students, subs)
     • Schedule meetings
     • Establish consultation logs / information
       exchange (e.g. listserv)

   Administrative Support
     • Letters of Introduction
     • ‘Contract’
Factors that Affect
Consultation Process continued…

 Administrative Support of LEA and ECE
  Program Administrators
 This can be addressed, initially, through
  formal ‘Letters of Introduction’
    – Parent
    – Partner Teacher/Consultee
    – IECSE/CC Administrator
    – IECSE Supervisor/CC Administrator
Components of a Formal
Agreement for IECSE Services
  Formal Agreement should include:
   Description of services including
    emphasis on consultation model
   Name/contact information for
    immediate supervisor of ICESE
    professional
   Name, credentials and experience of
    IECSE teacher
continued…
   Relationship between IECSE
    collaboration with ECE partner and
    addressing of child IEP requirements
   Anticipated frequency and duration of
    scheduled visits
   Interactive professional development
    ‘contact’ (IECSE professional & ECE
    professional)
continued…
   Need for meetings with ECE partner
    teacher/consultee re: child progress
   Plans for communication with parents
    re: child progress
   Description of related responsibilities
    of IECSE professional
      – Sample IECSE Services Contract
Discussion

   What are the benefits of communicating,
    before itinerant services begin, the role
    and responsibilities of the Itinerant ECSE
    teacher to:
    • Director of the ‘receiving’ preschool or child
      care center?
    • Parent of the child receiving Itinerant ECSE
      services?
Discussion…continued

  What are the benefits of communicating,
   before itinerant services begin, the role and
   responsibilities of the Itinerant ECSE teacher
   to:
    • ECE partner teacher/consultee?

  What are the limitations of failing to
   communicate the role and responsibilities of
   the Itinerant ECSE teacher?
 What  Helps Make
  Consultation Work?
 What Are The Major
  Challenges?
 How Can We Address
  The Problems?
 What Are Some
  Possible Solutions?
WHAT MAKES
CONSULTATION WORK?

  Positive relationship/rapport
   with the partner teacher
  Working as a team, collaborating
  Communication with parents
  Explicating role of itinerant teacher
KEY POINTS -
OHIO Focus groups
                 between IECSE
     Relationship
     and ECE teachers

     Systems   Elements
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN IECSE
AND ECE TEACHERS

   –Educational
    Backgrounds/Experiences
   –Personal/Professional
    Characteristics
   –‘Working Together’
 Educational  backgrounds &
    experiences of the teachers
   Gap between education levels  lack of
    knowledge/familiarity with jargon -- need to adjust
    consultation style, strategies (e.g., „cheat sheet‟ re:
    jargon, acronyms)

    – “Because I’m new, some don’t take me
      seriously.”
         –Hiring practices; training

    – “It is important to have trust, rapport and
      longevity between ECE teachers and itinerants.”
         / Professional
 Personal
 Characteristics

 – “Consultation works best with teachers who are open to
   growth and new ideas.”

 – “It seems like newer teachers are more receptive; [they]
   are like a sponge and want new ideas.” - partner teachers
   want IECSEs to be the „expert‟ even though IECSEs often
   reject the label

 – “I’m so laid back and the teachers are used to me just
   coming in and going with the flow. Maybe I need to be
   more assertive. They’re so busy that I hate to make
   demands on them.”
 ‘Working   Together’
Student needs direct instruction
 because partner teacher cannot or
 will not implement intervention
 – Respite – break for the teacher
 – “Consultation does not work as
   effectively in a chaotic environment. A
   teacher who has less noise volume and
   teaches children to behave responsibly,
   has a better grasp and is able to
   implement ideas.”
          OASIS OF
         EXCELLENCE




 When itinerant teacher feels that she/he is the only
  one who can deliver quality instruction, therefore
they must take advantage of the time they are there
 Consider     ….
 If child is achieving IEP goals under pull-out
  and small group instruction of IECSE teacher,
  why adopt a more complex model of
  intervention such as consultation?
 There are factors other than the effect of
  massed teaching sessions (60-90 minutes),
  once per week, that may account for child
  progress …
 Children with special needs may be „learning‟
  skills and behaviors as a result of other factors
  that are addressed in the MEPI model (see next
  slide) for analysis of learning factors
Working Together continued:
 “The  teacher is not comfortable. She is
  threatened or thinks she will be criticized.”
 “I always try to validate what teachers are
  doing. I let them know that I’m learning
  from them too. I write positive comments
  regarding things that I’ve observed the
  teacher doing in notes to parents, on the
  IEP.”
 “Have lots of back-up plans so if they shoot
  me down, I have something else to try.”
 “Using  this [consultative]
  approach gives you credibility to
  the [ECE] teacher because they
  see you know them.”
 “It’s consistency that makes it
  work….”
         follows through, asks
 “teacher
 questions, etc.”
   Challenges to
   Consultation
–TIME!!
–Tradition of Direct Services
–Professional Preparation of
 ECE/SPED Teachers
–Personal Comfort and
 Professional Expectations of
 IECSE Teachers
–Administrative Support
Tradition


– If direct approach has been always used
  in the past, transitioning to consultative
  approach is difficult

– Lack of knowledge about itinerant
  services in general, especially at
  administration level
       Introductory letters to parents,
        ECE administrators, teachers
Professional     Preparation

– Most IECSE teachers were not exposed
  to CONSULTATION / COACHING
  models or skill training as undergraduate
  students
Personal Comfort and
 Professional Expectations

– Most IECSE teachers expect to work with
  children vs. other adults. They define the
  role of teacher as direct instruction of
  children not coaching of other adults
– Some IECSE teachers are uncomfortable
  working with a number of adult partners
  vs. children
Administrative       Support
            don‟t get support that classroom
 “Itinerants
 teachers get.”
     –Training/Professional Development
     –Evaluation
        PIECES

        Knowledge and Skills Inventory for

         Consultants (Buysse & Wesley,
         2007)

– Monitoring Child Progress on IEP
     Data responsibility, legal perspective
PIECES: Performance Indicators for ECE
Specialists
     Designed for two primary purposes:
      – Provide SUPERVISORS with tool to support
        high quality Itinerant ECSE service delivery
        and guide professional development
      – Provide Itinerant ECSE teachers with tool
        to enhance reflective practice and guide
        professional development
     Developed by a team of ECSE
      supervisors, Itinerant ECSE teachers,
      and Higher Education faculty
           Parts of the PIECES
   Part A: Requisite knowledge and skills related to
    ECSE service delivery
   Part B: Communication skills and specialized
    knowledge related to coaching and information
    sharing in order to develop family, professional, and
    community relationships that support learning in the
    pre-K LRE
   Part C: Specialized knowledge to coordinate and
    facilitate integrated service delivery (embedded
    instruction) to support learning in the LRE
Identifying Critical Knowledge
and Skills for IECSE Teachers
     Each Part is
      organized around
      specific
      performance
      indicators that
      have been described
      with the use of
      observable examples
Rubrics to Assess Knowledge
and Skill Level
  Each indicator is described using a
   continuum of rubrics: Basic, Proficient
   or Distinguished
  A 2-page checklist provides an easy-to-
   read overview of the Itinerant ECSE
   teacher’s performance in each of the 3
   major parts and subsections of PIECES
Part A: Requisite K & S Related to
ECSE Service Delivery
                   Part A:
                   1. Knowledge of the
                      organizational
                      context of the
                      child’s environment
                   2. Ability to design
                      and implement
                      child-focused
                      interventions
Part B: Requisite K & S Related to
Coaching and Information Sharing
  1.   Ability to build a collaborative team
  2.   Ability to establish and implement a plan for regular
       communication among team members
  3.   Demonstrates appropriate use of specific
       interpersonal communication skills to establish
       ongoing relationships with families and providers.
  4.   Helps others develop skills and use strategies via a
       coaching model.
  5.   Provides information to support the child’s success
       in the community-based program.
Part C: Requisite K&S to Coordinate
&Facilitate Integrated Service Delivery
   1.   Coordinates and
        monitors service
        delivery.
   2.   Designs and
        implements
        professional
        development (PD)
        activities.
For Discussion…Evan Is Too
Aggressive

  Jill is an itinerant ECSE teacher working
  with Mary Jo, an early childhood teacher
  who is Evan’s teacher.

  Evan is 5 years old and has autism.
  Evan has been on Jill’s caseload for 4
  months and in Mary Jo’s classroom for a
  month.
Evan Is Too Aggressive cont…

Mary Jo is concerned because Evan has limited
verbal skills which creates ‘problems’ (e.g.
screaming, scratching, pushing) in his interaction
with his peers

Jill and Mary Jo are meeting to discuss Evan’s
progress and the topic of Evan’s ‘negative
behavior’ is at the top of the agenda!
Evan Is Too Aggressive cont…

 What should Jill say and do during this visit
 with Mary Jo to help Evan to be successful in
 this early childhood environment?
Evan Is Too Aggressive cont…

 Prepare to discuss recommendations
   with the rest of the group, including
   specifics related to:
    • Information that might help Mary Jo
    • Skills that Mary Jo may need to learn
    • Expectations for IEP-focused
      interventions to be managed by Mary Jo
Evan Is Too Aggressive cont…

 Role play the situation with a partner
  and be prepared to discuss the things
  that Jill should say and do to provide
  Mary Jo with the professional support
  that she needs (and expects).
Evan Is Too Aggressive cont’d…

 How would your recommendations be affected
  by this information re: Mary Joe and Jill
  (Itinerant ECSE Teacher)

 Scenario #1
    • Mary Jo is 40-year old ECE teacher who
      holds BS Degree in ECE and has 10 years of
      experience
    • Jill is 24-year old with BS in ECE and 2 years
      experience as Itinerant ECSE
        Evan Is Too Aggressive
        cont’d…
How would your recommendations be affected
 by this information re: Mary Joe and Jill
 (Itinerant ECSE Teacher)

Scenario #2
   • Mary Jo is 30-year old with AA Degree in
     Child Care Technology and has 2 years of
     experience in PreK.
   • Jill is 26-year old with BS in ECE, M.Ed.in
     ECSE and 3 years experience as Itinerant
     ECSE
       Evan Is Too Aggressive
       cont’d…
How would your recommendations be affected
 by this information re: Mary Joe and Jill
 (Itinerant ECSE Teacher)

Scenario #3
   • Mary Jo is 29-year old with H.S. Degree and
     has 7 years of experience in PreK
   • Jill is 40-year old with BS in ELEM ED, 4
     years experience as Grade 4-5 teacher and 2
     years experience as Itinerant ECSE
        Evan Is Too Aggressive
        cont…
How would your recommendations be affected
 by this information re: Mary Joe and Jill
 (Itinerant ECSE Teacher)

Scenario #4
   • Mary Jo is 45-year old with High School degree
     and CDA and has 16 years of experience in Head
     Start
   • Jill is 35-year old with BS in SPED, 4 years
     experience as Middle School SPED teacher, and
     this is her 1st year as Itinerant ECSE teacher
        Evan Is Too Aggressive
        cont’d…
How would your recommendations be affected
 by this information re: Mary Joe and Jill
 (Itinerant ECSE Teacher)

Scenario #5
   • Mary Jo is 35-year old with High School degree
     12 years of experience in PreK.
   • Jill is 52-year old with Master’s degree in
     ECSE,10 years of experience in classroom-based
     ECSE and 9 years of experience year as Itinerant
     ECSE teacher

								
To top