RUNNING HEAD: TEACHING METHODS PAPER
Teaching Methods Paper
Kristi Harris
Virginia Commonwealth University
SEDP 601
Methods I: Teaching Students in Special Education-General Education
Ms. Andrea Prisco
August 6, 2014
1
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
2
Rationale
This paper will focus on Universal Design for Learning and Direct Instruction, two
teaching methods that are widely implemented in the field of education, with positive effects in
the area of special education. The rationale for choosing these methods is I feel as though they
are two teaching methods that I will practically employ within my classroom. Therefore these
methods should be researched and studies so that they are implemented both correctly and
effectively in the classroom.
Introduction
In order to learn more about the implementation and effectiveness of Universal Design
for Learning, the article “The Three-Block Model of Universal Design for Learning
Implementation in a High School” was chosen. This study shows how the proper and supported
implementation of this teaching method improved the effectiveness of learning in a small high
school in South Eastern Manitoba Canada. This article provided insight and ideas of how to use
this method to increase the level of learning that occurs in the classroom.
The second article, “The Effects of Direct Instruction on the Single-Word reading Skills
of Children Who Require Augmentative and Alternative Communication,” not only addressed
the effective use of direct instruction in the classroom, but it specifically focuses on students with
disabilities. The article explores how this teaching method was applies to improve the reading
skills of students with severe speech impairments across several schools and grade levels in rural
central Pennsylvania.
Universal Design for Learning
Purpose
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
3
The purpose of this study was to examine the process by which one high school
effectively implemented inclusive education and universal design for learning and how that
process was facilitated by the school principal (Katz & Sugden, 2013).
Method
Participants
Participants for this study came from a small high school in South Eastern Manitoba,
Canada (given the name Park West for anonymity). The school consists of 243 students in
grades 7-12 and 34 staff members, including the principal.
In Manitoba, students are funded at three levels:

Level 1- students are block funded, and fall into high incidence diagnostic categories
such as students with learning disabilities, attention issues, etc.

Level 2- support is funded based on the student’s profile of need and level of support
required for a major portion of the day, and full time attendance.

Level 3- supports are provided based on the student’s profile of need and level of support
required for the entire school day, additional specialized supports provided by the school
division/district, and programming requirements significantly beyond those established
for level 2 supports.
Park West has 25 students at levels two and three, and a significant number of students who
needed supports from student services who did not meet official diagnostic criteria, resulting
in student services involvement for over a third of the student population (Katz & Sugden,
2013).
Procedure
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
4
Teachers completed surveys exploring the changes in instructional practices, self-efficacy
related to inclusion, and perceived student outcomes (Katz & Sugden, 2013). Teachers then
received training on the three block UDL model, as well as, how it should be implemented in the
classroom. Block 1 sets the foundation for inclusion through the Respecting Diversity program
to build a class climate that respects diversity and encourages interaction through democratic
classroom management (Katz & Sugden, 2013). Block 2 includes a planning framework and
teaching practices that allow for student choice so that students are able to develop conceptual
understanding, and access activities and materials in ways that work for them (Katz & Sugden,
2013). And finally, in Block 3, the systematic and structural reforms needed to increase the
efficacy of inclusion are delineates and the role of the principle in supporting teachers’
professional development, distributing leadership, and the importance of collaborative practices,
such as co-teaching, are highlighted (Katz & Sugden, 2013).
Once the program was implemented the staff at Park West saw great results. Engaged
behavior improved significantly in the high school settings involved in the study when the Three
Block Model of UDL was introduced as compared to the control group. Students in the UDL
classrooms were actively engaged 44 out of 60 minutes versus the control group which were
only engaged for 16 out of 60 minutes. Data was collected using field notes (brief note taking,
direct quotations, and direct dialogue), video observations and interviews, and photographs.
Design
Park West is a small rural high school that implemented the use of UDL throughout its
middle years (7-9) and high school (10-12) programs. The school met great success and this was
due in large part to the support of the principal and the willingness of the staff to embrace
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
5
change. The implementation of the three block UDL model is in continued practice and the
school continues to yield positive results.
Direct Instruction
Purpose
The study implemented a single-subject, multiple-probe-across-subjects design to
investigate the effects of direct instruction in single word reading on the performance of students
who use AAC (Drager, Fallon, Hammer, Light, & McNaughton, 2004).
Method
Participants
Participants included five children, 4 boys and 1 girl, between the ages of 9 yrs, 5 months
and 14 yrs old. All participants: were from low-middle to middle class socioeconomic
backgrounds, attended schools in rural central Pennsylvania, and were placed in self-contained
special education classrooms.
Participants were recruited based on nominations from teachers, speech-language
pathologists, and families via phone contact and direct mailings (Drager et al, 2004).
Participants in the study also had to meet a certain set of criteria. Participants must: be at least 6
years old, have a severe congenital speech impairment, demonstrate the ability to identify at least
60% of the drawings representing vocabulary words included in the intervention program and
100% of drawing following pre-intervention training, demonstrate the ability to identify a
minimum of 50% of target letters when named and 100% of target letters following preintervention training, demonstrate the ability to identify a minimum of 50% of the sounds that
corresponded to target letters and 100% of sound-letter correspondences following pre-
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
6
intervention training, have normal vision and hearing acuity, and have parental permission and
support to participate.
Procedure
At least three baseline sessions were conducted with each participant until a stable
baseline was observed. In order to reduce the amount of time each participant remained in
baseline phase before intervention began, intervention was implemented across one set of 3
participants, with replication across a second set of 2 participants.
The reading instruction program consisted of three components: matching single sounds
to the initial sound of words; telescoping sounds into words; reading single VC and CVC words.
The instructional tasks and procedures were based on those proposed by Carnine et at (1997) for
use with children who do not have severe communication disabilities. The tasks and procedures
were adapted so that they did not require spoken responses from the participants. Each
instructional session targeted 15 words, 5 for each instructional task-initial phoneme matching,
telescoping, and single-word reading. A correction procedure was used to address incorrect
responses by providing explicit instruction on incorrect items. The procedure involved a modelprompt-check sequence in which the instructor, provided an explanation of the correct response
(model), led the student in making a correct response (prompt), and provided the student with an
opportunity to select the correct response independently (check). Positive verbal feedback was
provided throughout the program both to praise correct responses and to motivate students to
continue participating sessions.
Design
To determine if students were able to generalize single-word reading for targeted words
to reading of novel, single words, participants were asked to read words that had not been
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
7
included in the program but were composed of target letters. The effectiveness of the reading
instruction program was evaluated through probes of the dependent and generalization measures.
The dependent measure was the number of targeted single VC and CVC words containing
targeted letter-sounds read correctly (Drager et al, 2004). Data on the dependent measure was
collected during baseline phase and through repeated probes during the training period. Probes
to measure reading of targeted words consisted of 10 words per probe and were collected every
two sessions at the beginning of the instruction. Maintenance probes were conducted 2 weeks, 1
month, and 2 months after instruction was completed to determine whether newly learned skills
were maintained over time once the instruction ceases. All participants demonstrated a
continued ability to read at least 80% of targeted words up to 2 months after instruction.
Additionally, those participants who demonstrated generalization of reading skills to book
contexts and novel words during the instruction phase maintained these skills for up to 2 months
post instruction as well (Drager et al, 2004).
Results/Summary
I believe that the results from each of these studies provide solid information that will be
applicable and useful in my future role as a special education teacher. The study on Universal
Design for Learning shows that when the model is implemented with fidelity and supported by
administration and staff, there can be a positive change in the amount of engagement and
learning that takes place in the classroom. The direct instruction study proves that one on one
instruction over time can improve the reading skills of students with disabilities. The study was
only tested on students with speech impairments but I feel as though the results can be
generalized to other disabilities as well.
TEACHING METHODS PAPER
8
References
Carnine, D.W., Silbert. J., & Kameenui, E.J. (1997). Direct instruction reading (3rd ed.).
Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Drager, K., Fallon, K., Hammer, C., Light, J., & McNaughton, D. (2004). The effects of direct
instruction on the single-word reading skills of children who require augmentative and
alternative communication. Journal of Speech, Language & Hearing Research, 47, 14241439.
Katz, J & Sugden, R. (2013). The three-block model of universal design for learning
implementation in a high school. Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and
Policy, 141, 1-28.