Beyond Access: Self-Advocacy is a Measurable DS Outcome
(That You Need)!
Presented by:
Mikael Snitker-Magin, PhD, CRC, LPC
Ferris State University
Gavin Steiger, MS, Trinity University
About your presenters
Mikael Snitker-Magin
• 19 years working with PWD
• PhD in Rehabilitation
Psychology from UW-Madison
• Research interests include youth transition & self-efficacy measures with PWD
• Asst. Professor/Counselor at
Ferris State U. in Big Rapids
MI
• LPC/CRC
Gavin Steiger
• 10 years working with PWD
• M.Ed. In Higher Ed from the
University of Georgia
• Research interests include methods of promoting self advocacy in PWD and the transition to employment
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 2
Our Collective Interests —Old
Wine?
1. Facilitating successful academic and vocational transitions
2. Effective, strategic, and innovative DS office management practices
(image of moldy wine bottles)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 3
•Facilitating transitions-- providing accommodations, learning, and measurement
•Innovative, strategic--limited resources with need to increase support for you, and students who need it!
BUT, HOW DO WE APPLY
THESE CONCEPTS?
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 4
Interests Cut Across Strata
(image of colorful artwork depicting various layers of sediment)
Students
Parents
DS Coordinators
Administrators
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 5
Reduce Floundering
“ Transition is better defined as "a period of floundering that occurs for at least the first several years after adolescents leave school and attempt to assume a variety of adult roles in their communities”
A. Halpern, 1991
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 6
We ask a lot from students!
From flounder to the frying pan
(image of flounder fish camouflaged in sand)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 7
Dispense with esteem
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 8
Assessments should be achievable
(image of large jet turbine engine, partially disassembled)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 9
Research Problems
• You’re not in the research business, and don’t want to be (e.g. DS counselor and/or
Coordinator)
• Are tasked with showing some evidence of your work, preferably to demonstrate student learning (access or success?)
• Student self-disclosure is voluntary (selfselection bias)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 10
Q & A: Measure What Students
Learn —Self-Advocacy (SA)?
Q: How do you practically measure what students learn about Self-Advocacy?
A: Build it in.
Q: Which approach works best for your office?
A: You likely have strong insight on this.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 11
Q & A: Measure What Students
Learn —Self-Advocacy (SA)?
Q: Is there a pre-made tool I can use?
A: Yes
Q:Do you have the time to conduct the learning assessment?
A: Most often not!
Q: Are tools valid and reliable?
A: Some are. Choose wisely!
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 12
Self-Report Methods of Assessment
• Satisfaction and behavior surveys
• Behavior checklists
• Pre/post testing
• Criterion referenced tools
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 13
Sample Questions for Behavior Checklists
Agree Disagree Strongly
Disagree
I understand my disability and how it affects me.
I can clearly and effectively identify my disability-related needs.
I can clearly and effectively communicate my disability-related needs to others.
Strongly
Agree
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 14
Sample Questions for Behavior Survey
How likely were you to meet with your professors and discuss your accommodation needs with them before attending this presentation?
Not Likely 1 2 3 4 5 Very Likely
How likely are you to meet with your professors and discuss your accommodation needs with them after attending this presentation?
Not Likely 1 2 3 4 5 Very Likely
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 15
Sample Questions for Behavior Survey
How frequently did the following happen?
I approached my notetaker to get the notes.
My notetaker approached me to give me the notes.
My notetaker consistently provided the notes to me.
Always Sometimes
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012
Rarely Never
16
Subjective Methods of Assessment by Staff
Systematically
• Part of the intake or accommodation renewal process
• Built in through paperwork process, cues for DS coordinator
Anecdotally
• DS staff member observations
• Discussion with student about SA
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 17
Sample Rubric for
DS Staff Observations
Understanding of disability
Communication
Skills
Advanced = 3
Can easily and effectively explain the disability.
Clearly recognizes appropriate accommodations
Can clearly and effectively explain disability-related needs
Intermediate = 2 Beginner = 1
Has some difficulty explaining the disability.
Has some difficulty recognizing appropriate accommodations.
Has some difficulty explaining disability-related needs.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012
Has significant difficulty explaining the disability.
Has significant difficulty recognizing appropriate accommodations.
Has significant difficulty explaining disability-related needs.
18
Considerations when
Developing Questions
• Should have enough specificity
• Should have “face validity”
– Statistical Validity and Reliability
• Shouldn’t be too wordy or technical in jargon
• Consider the audience of respondents (e.g., reading ability, disability types, online survey sites’ compatibility with AT, etc.)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 19
Assessment Method Concerns
METHOD
Pre/Post w-w/o intervention
Post-only
Case studies
Manualized intervention
Group processes
CONCERNS
Attrition, confounds, cooperation
No baseline
Too time intensive
Training and enforcement
Attrition, confounds, group effects
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 20
Consider Multiple Minority
Group Membership
• Athletes • Socio-economic
• LGBTQ status
• Race
• Gender identity
• Ethnicity
• Age
• Religious beliefs
• Veterans
• National origin
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 21
Try it in your office
During your next appointment with a student, try role playing.
It takes just a moment, and is telling, even it goes poorly!
Use humor, including at yourself, to challenge potential barriers
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 22
Discussion
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 23
Assessments should relate to:
• Program goals
• Needs of specific student population
(readily usable)
• Ethical guidelines, best practices, and professional standards
• Any related legal standards
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 24
Professional Standard(s)
• AHEAD 5.1: Use a service delivery model that encourages students with disabilities to develop independence —educate and assist; promote self-determination
• OCR: No Mandate for this but can be readily incorporated into your program model, and measured.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 25
Myth: If we teach legal knowledge, they will use what they know
• Generally Busted: not as likely as teaching the specific skills (low correlation)
• Confidence in knowledge of disability law isn’t a sufficient
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 26
Myth: If we teach legal knowledge, they will use what they know
• Erroneous information doesn’t help, either!
• Learning specific accommodation request behaviors was strongly related to behavioral expectancy
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 27
Best Predictor: Specific Skills
Mediating Relationship of Task-Specific Self-Efficacy Between Confidence in Knowledge
Related to Disability Accommodations and Behavioral Expectations (Snitker-Magin,
2010)
Task-Specific
Self-Efficacy
β=.49
β=.79
Confidence in legal knowledge
Behavioral
Expectations
β=.11
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 28
You can do this!
• Technique used (verbal persuasion)
• You may even like including self-advocacy learning as part of your unit’s learning measures
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 29
you
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 30
It Is
• Measurable
• Attainable
• Observable
• Learnable
• Formative
• Dynamic
• Flexible
What is (and is not) self-advocacy?
It is (probably) Not
• A panacea for all ills
• Universally effective
• Always welloperationalized
• Static
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 31
Related to, but different than
• Self-determination
• Self-regulation
• Self-assessment
• Self-esteem
• Self-efficacy
• Self-initiating
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 32
But, wouldn’t it be nice?
A. Bandura, 2005
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 33
Is measuring self-advocacy learning meaningful?
• Moral obligation to teach self-advocacy
• Professional obligation (AHEAD standards)
• Ethical obligation
• Not legal obligation
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 34
Self-advocacy and program success
• Recognize that success and access are different (i.e.: self advocacy is not success, but may help lead to success!)
• Institutional #’s tracking – GPA, retention, graduation
• DoE retention data= # of students who show up at the beginning of SO year
• Descriptive data from self-studies is interesting, but not causal nor predictive.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 35
Self-advocacy and program success
• Success of your program should not be predicated on the absence of OCR complaints, lawsuits, etc. although avoiding these is preferable.
• Other measures are for other purposes, but maybe not yours!
• Success is difficult to attribute to a specific intervention— too many variables.
• You can not, nor should you, attempt to be something you’re not equipped for!
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 36
Is what you do measurable?
• Yes. You probably are already teaching self-advocacy skills when you meet the students, so what not claim the credit for your good work?
• It could help you get additional resources for you and your students!
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 37
Academy, Level II, OST
Programs?
• Usually focus part of the curriculum on teaching self-advocacy
• Level II programs usually aim to teach SA skills, at added cost, and may use different title —Learning Differences,
• Teach ‘life skills’, residential
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 38
Academy, Level II, OST
Programs?
• Occupational/Voc Skills training programs may incorporate self-efficacy and advocacy efforts as part of the on site job training
• Place/train v. Train/place debate
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 39
Program Examples and
Curricula
• Academy, Level II, etc., —SA usually built into the curriculum, or stand alone courses
• May or may not be formally measured -but are usually professed
• Programs may focus on specific subpopulations —i.e., Bellevue (IQ<70),
Marino (Downs Syndrome)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 40
2. Effective, Strategic
DS Office Management
• Start at the top and bottom using the organization’s overarching mission and specific unit objectives
• Incorporate and assess learning outcomes
• Don’t reinvent the wheel. Someone else has probably already done that!
• Get additional resources
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 41
Through the hierarchy
1. Universal aim (Top)
“Ferris State University prepares students for successful careers, responsible citizenship, and lifelong learning…[and serves] our rapidly changing global economy and society”
(Sounds good, doesn’t it!?)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 42
Departmental or College level
• “University College: Our purpose is to provide developmental courses, educational counseling, and academic support services that will empower students enrolled at Ferris
State University to achieve their educational and career goals”
• Reach out to developmental faculty, advisors, and other staff
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 43
Unit Level
• Our mission is to assist Ferris students, faculty, and the community with services related to academic success and career counseling. Additionally, we provide classroom accommodations for students with documented disabilities.
• Collaborate with colleagues on developing consistent approaches within the unit
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 44
From Thought to Action
“Having adopted an intention and an action plan, one cannot simply sit back and wait for the appropriate [accommodations] performances to appear” A. Bandura,
2001
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 45
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• “FSU…prepares students for successful careers, responsible citizenship, and lifelong learning. Through its many partnerships and its career-oriented, broad-based education, Ferris serves our rapidly changing global economy and society.”
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 46
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• No exceptions made for students with disabilities
• Cuts across the strata of student services and academic units, including teaching modalities (on-line, hybrid, satellite campuses)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 47
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• Accessibility and advocacy continue to make progress through accreditation bodies —Quality Matters, Learning
Commission, etc.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 48
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• Criterion Two: Preparing for the Future:
The organization’s ongoing evaluation and assessment processes provide reliable evidence of institutional effectiveness that clearly informs strategies for continuous improvement.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 49
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• Criterion Four: Acquisition, Discovery, and Application of Knowledge
• The organization assesses the usefulness of its curricula to students who will live and work in a global, diverse, and technological society.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 50
Getting buy-in: Mission and
Accreditation
• The organization provides support to ensure that faculty, students, and staff acquire, discover, and apply knowledge responsibly.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 51
Standards of Service
• Align with CRCC, ACA, and APA ethical guidelines to foster independence and autonomy
• Consistent with AHEAD Program
Standards and Performance Indicators
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 52
Trinity’s Division of Student
Affairs’ Mission
• As educators in the spirit of the liberal arts tradition, the members of the Division of
Student Affairs are committed to serving, supporting, and challenging students in their development as individuals and as responsible global citizens.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 53
TU Student Affairs
Strategic Plan
4 Goals
1. Integrate curricular and co-curricular learning through programs and services.
2. Develop global citizenship via intercultural competency and a commitment to service.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 54
TU Student Affairs
Strategic Plan
4 Goals
3. Nurture leadership development through programming that is rooted in the theoretical framework of the Social Change Model of
Leadership Development.
4. Develop Common Learning Outcomes and utilize assessment techniques to measure student learning.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 55
TU Common
Learning Outcomes
4 Clusters
A. Personal and Leadership Development
B. Health & Wellness
C. Intercultural Understanding and Diversity
D. Social Responsibility
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 56
Trinity DSS Departmental
Mission
“Disability Services for Students (DSS) supports Trinity
University’s mission to promote human and intellectual diversity by providing equal access and equal opportunity through fostering an inclusive environment for all students with disabilities within the Trinity community…Through collaboration and support of the entire Trinity community, DSS promotes selfunderstanding and self-advocacy within students with disabilities…”
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 57
Trinity DSS Departmental Goals
• Assist students with disabilities in recognizing their disability as one of many important demographic characteristics which will shape their identities and influence how they perceive the world.
• Promote self-advocacy skills within students with disabilities.
• Create a diverse, inclusive, and pluralistic campus climate which fosters respect for and appreciation of the inherent worth of all individuals, at all times, and in all ways.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 58
Teaching students SA
, 1977)
Mastery
Vicarious
Verbal
Persuasion
Anxiety
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 59
Teaching & Mastering SA
• Mastery experiences—demonstrating the desired behavior
• Vicarious Experiences—peer modeling
• Verbal persuasion-from peers, faculty, or staff
• Anxiety produced—most likely to create avoidance behaviors
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 60
Mastery of some tasks is important —but which ones?
• Different than intentions because intentions don’t account for unforeseen events, problems, etc.
• Efficacy can help re-shape the future behavior in light of new feedback (failures)
• Helps shape pro-social behavior
• Future behavior motivated by ‘projected goals’ and
‘anticipated outcomes’, rather than just along for the ride to an undefined future
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 61
Using Bloom’s Taxonomy
Bloom et al (1956) categorized cognitive skills to develop learning objectives, goals, and outcomes to guide instruction and assessment. Revised in
2001 by Krathwohl and
Anderson.
Anderson, L.W. & Krathwohl, D.R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives . Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 62
Defining Learning Outcomes
Learning outcomes or “learning objectives” are statements describing the changes in behavior or performance that are the desired outcome of the learning interaction between the students and the facilitator of the learning process.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 63
Classifying Outcomes
Primary
– The core learning of a program; of central or dominant importance; gives meaning, clarity, and unity to all learning activities in the unit or program
Enabling
– Help in attainment of the primary objective; contributory knowledge, sub-skills, principles or elements of the larger primary skill
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 64
Categorizing Outcomes
Information : require learner to recall knowledge
Mental Skills: require learner to analyze, classify or solve problems that involve cognitive processes
Physical Skills: require learner to perform a physical or manipulative activity involving fine or gross motor skills
Attitudes : require learners to make choices reflecting beliefs such as ethical behavior
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 65
Constructing Learning
Outcomes
• A udience – who are the learners?
• B ehavior – what should they know, do, or believe?
• C ondition – under what conditions should they perform?
• D egree – what standard is successful?
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 66
SMART Learning Outcomes
• S pecific
• M easurable
• A ggressive but Attainable
• R esults-oriented
• T ime bound
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 67
Verbs for each level
Level
Creating
Evaluating
Analyzing
Example verbs
Assess, critique, evaluate, prioritize, verify
Combine, construct, generate, prepare, synthesize
Calculate, compare, differentiate, examine, solve
Applying Apply, develop, perform, produce, use
Understanding Compare, describe, explain, illustrate, summarize,
Remembering Choose, identify, match, name, repeat
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 68
Outcome Example
Behavior: Learners will be able to…
Conditions: Given the tools, materials, environment….
Criterion: So that… (consistent with standards or measures)
Behavior: Write learning objectives
Conditions: Given access to the appropriate subject matter expert(s), access to task analysis data, and criteria for success
Criterion: So that the objectives are specific, behaviorallybased and measurable.
Program-related Outcomes
• Students (A) who participate in the DSS
New Student Orientation (C) will:
– become interdependent and utilize campus resources (B&D). [ DO ]
– Identify (B) one (D) new method of advocating for themselves. [ KNOW]
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 70
Service-related Outcome
• Students (A) who have received individual academic counseling (C) will report they have gained knowledge of test-taking strategies (B&D) which they can utilize in the future.
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 71
Assessing Outcomes
• Student assessment involves the evaluation of student learning through assignments, exams, and portfolios.
• Begin your assessment with careful planning , followed by gathering data and then reporting results .
http://www.utexas.edu/academic/ctl/assessment/iar/
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 72
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 73
Contact
Contact information:
Mikael Snitker-Magin, snitkem@ferris.edu
,
231.591.3057 (voice)
Gavin Steiger, gsteiger@trinity.edu
210.999-7411 (voice)
Snitker-Magin & Steiger, 2012 74