Search results

The study aims to qualitatively analyze how faculty can mobilize the intellectual capital of higher education institutions (HEIs), comprising human, structural and relational capital to enable the education and learning of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Drawing upon the extant literature, the researcher conducted a qualitative study through written, in-depth interviews with a sample of 40 academic staff/faculty members having prior experience in teaching individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. The data was collected through a set of questions formulated as key questions, to be asked to all participants for their responses.

Results of the analysis demonstrated that intellectual capital’s contribution to higher education of individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities can be best understood in terms of its three components/dimensions. Accordingly, three main themes, with each comprising two sub-themes were uncovered. The first theme, leveraging human capital comprised: faculty acumen and faculty training as sub-themes; the second theme, resourcing structural capital comprised: tangible and intangible structural capital as sub-themes; and the third theme, nurturing relational capital comprised: in-class engagement and the second is ex-class connection as sub-themes.

The paper collects data from 40 faculty having prior experience in teaching individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities to explore and reveal a completely new perspective of looking at intellectual capital as a means of providing accessible and inclusive higher education to differently-abled students, making them a part of the mainstream.

This chapter sought to answer the following questions: (a) what does special education means for students with intellectual disability?, (b) what is being done, and (c) how do we maintain tradition? The answers, while complicated, suggest special education for students with intellectual disability historically and currently involves attention to what, how, and where, with the how being the key elements of special education for students with intellectual disability. This chapter discussed the what, how, and where for students with intellectual disability in a historical and current framework while also providing evidence-based practices for students with intellectual disability to implement to maintain the tradition of high-quality services.

Children with developmental disabilities (e.g. learning disability and autism) often struggle with handwriting skills. This study aims to implement an adapted handwriting programme for children with developmental disabilities to improve their handwriting skills.

Six children with developmental disabilities aged 9–15 years received an adapted Handwriting Without Tears® (HWT) programme in small groups over eight weeks. The programme was delivered by typical teaching staff (i.e. paraprofessionals) at a special education school following a brief training session and with ongoing supervision. A range of measures assessed the children’s handwriting and related skills. Social validity interviews were conducted with school staff following the intervention to evaluate the programme’s acceptability.

Typical teaching staff implemented the handwriting programme with 92.3% average fidelity and delivered a minimum of three sessions per week. Social validity interviews demonstrated the acceptability of the intervention to school staff. After eight weeks of intervention, all children improved their handwriting on various assessments. Improvements were only partially maintained at follow-up.

This study supports the feasibility of using an adapted HWT programme to teach handwriting to children with developmental disabilities in special education settings. Typical teaching staff can be trained to support the delivery of the programme to children in small groups.

Values have long guided special education services and supports for students with extensive support needs; over the past four decades, those values have been backed by research evidence demonstrating the critical nature of values related to inclusive education, self-determination, and seeking strengths and assets. In this chapter, we investigate these values and their supporting research, documenting strengths and needs in extant research. We emphasize the need to continue to embrace and maintain these values while pursuing research that addresses research gaps while centering the priorities, perspectives, and preferences of people with extensive support needs.

Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) has been used to combat reading challenges, namely reading accuracy and rate for learners with intellectual, developmental and learning disabilities (IDLD). Whilst most reading CAI effectiveness has been studied in English, other transparent languages have less evidence. This study provides a systematic review and meta-analysis of CAI effectiveness for transparent language reading for K-3 learners with IDLD.

This study systematically reviews academic peer-reviewed studies from 2010 to 2023 with either randomised controlled treatment (RCT) or single-case treatments. Articles were searched from the ACM Digital Library, Google Scholar, IEEE Xplore, ERIC, PsychINFO and Science Direct databases, references and systematic review articles. Reading component skills effect sizes were computed using the random effect sizes model.

11 RCT studies of reading CAI for transparent languages with 510 learners with IDLD were found. A random effect sizes (Cohen’s d) of CAI on individual reading component skills were d = 0.24, p-value = 0.063 and confidence interval (CI) 95% (−0.068–0.551) for phonics and phonemic awareness d = 0.41, p-value = 0.000 and CI 95% (0.175–0.644). Given an average intervention dosage of 1.8 h weekly for a maximum of 16 weeks, CAI had better retention with d = 1.13, p-value = 0.066 and CI 95%(−0.339–2.588). However, these results must be interpreted with a concern of only using published studies.

The study contributes to quantitative CAI effectiveness for transparent language reading components for learners with IDLD.

This study aims to describe patients presented in an interprofessional, virtual education program focused on the mental health of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD), as well as present interprofessional recommendations for care.

In this retrospective chart review, descriptive statistics were used to describe patients. Content analysis was used to analyze interprofessional recommendations. The authors used the H.E.L.P. (health, environment, lived experience and psychiatric disorder) framework to conceptualize and analyze the interprofessional recommendations.

Themes related to the needs of adults with IDD are presented according to the H.E.L.P. framework. Taking a team-based approach to care, as well as ensuring care provider knowledge of health and social histories, may help better tailor care.

This project draws on knowledge presented in a national interprofessional and intersectoral educational initiative, the first in Canada to focus on this population.

This paper aims to serve as a commentary on the paper titled “Implementation of an Adapted Handwriting Without Tears® Programme for Children with Developmental Disabilities in a Special Education Setting.”

It provides an overview of educational strategies that can be used in school settings to support professionals in acquiring skills relevant to their practice and promoting the acquisition of new abilities for their students.

It explores three critical aspects of education: measuring academic progress, using evidence-based methods and enhancing educator training.

This work represents the personal perspective of a professional working in the service delivery field for children with developmental disabilities in schools and rehabilitative centres.

Global developmental delay (GDD) is highly prevalent among patients at child psychiatry clinics. However, preschool day treatment centers are currently scarce. As such, this study aimed to evaluate a program that was designed for children with GDD in order to improve their global skills and prepare them to join the school system.

This study utilized an observation retrospective design with a comparative group sample and included all children aged between 3 and 6 years who participated in the program for at least one academic year (experimental group). Their GDD diagnoses were based on the DSM-5 criteria (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Children with similar diagnoses who were on the waiting list constituted the control group. Pre- and post-scoring of the Children’s Global Assessment Scale (CGAS) were conducted by the children’s teacher and blinded investigator for the experimental group, while the children’s mothers conducted the post-CGAS scoring for the control group.

The pre- and post-CGAS scores for the experimental group were 49.5 ± 12.8 and 58.3 ± 12.7 and 47.3 ± 17.3 and 66.6 ± 17.3 for the control group, respectively (p = 0.001). The children in the experimental group scored significantly better than the control group with respect to securing places in integrated, regular classes in the education system (p = 0.001).

This study had certain limitations. First, the number of children in the control group was relatively small. Second, the baseline skill levels of some of the children in the control group may have been lower than those of the children in the experimental group at the beginning of the evaluation; this may explain why they had been put on the waiting list. Third, the information was gathered retrospectively; this is a method that is known to have its own limitations.

The clinical implications of the study are that the early identification and referral of GDD are key elements in the rehabilitation of these children and that early intervention programs are necessary for cases of moderate and severe GDD. Primary care physicians should follow up with GDD patients to ensure that referrals are being appropriately sought (Choo et al., 2019).

The program was effective in both increasing the general functioning skills of the children in the experimental group and preparing them to attend regular, integrated classes. The program should be expanded and made available to more children with GDD.

Insecure and unresolved attachments have been linked to poorer psychological health and interpersonal functioning for people with intellectual disabilities (IDs), but research in this area is limited, especially for adults. Studies using the Adult Attachment Projective (AAP) have been restricted to clinical samples, where insecure and unresolved attachments are typically more prevalent. The purpose of this study is to compare clinical and non-clinical groups of adults with IDs on the AAP, plus measures of psychological health and interpersonal functioning, to investigate whether group differences found in the typically developing population are also present for adults with IDs.

A cross-sectional, between-group design was used. Adults with IDs (clinical group n = 11 and non-clinical group n = 13) completed measures of attachment, psychological distress/positive well-being and interpersonal functioning. Attachment classifications were compared in the clinical versus non-clinical groups. Measures of psychological distress, positive well-being and interpersonal functioning were compared between those with insecure-organised versus unresolved classifications.

No participants were classified as secure, and there were high rates of unresolved attachment. There were no differences between clinical and non-clinical groups with regards to the distribution of insecure-organised (i.e. dismissing or preoccupied) versus unresolved classifications. There were no differences between groups with regards to psychological distress, positive well-being or interpersonal functioning. The authors consider limitations in the method of group differentiation and suggest further research to better understand the development of internal working models of attachment in this population.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study is one of only three to examine attachment state of mind in adults with IDs using the AAP and the first to examine differences between clinical and non-clinical groups.

This study introduces an ecological framework for disabilities meant to provide a new model of viewing and learning about disabilities and special education. This model projects a multi-systemic view of factors that influence a person's life, where people with disabilities are active actors in the development of the world. The increased awareness about interconnectedness, globalization, inter- and trans-disciplinarity, influences on human experience, greening, sustainability, inequality, inequity and lack of opportunities is shifting how people think about potential and growth.

The methodological approach is qualitative, interpretive research.

In disability studies, the Ecological Model of Disabilities helps reframe this uniqueness as part of the spectrum of human experiences. In special education, the Ecoducation Model helps reframe the learning experience.

This research is conceptual, but it is also all-inclusive, rendering itself to a wide application in educational settings.

The Ecoducation Model for Special Education is specific to the education of children and adults with disabilities, and it is directly compatible with the broader Ecological Model of Disabilities. These ecological models can be applied to all levels of the ecological system, and to different ecodemes of population. Nevertheless, the ecological models need to be locally implemented, with general principles tailored to national traditions, laws and resources.

Advocating for the pursuit of individual well-being within the larger society, both models call for practical changes in a multitude of areas, including legislation and policy, training of professional personnel, sufficient financial input in programs designed for the care of children and adults with disabilities, change in societal mentalities to fight discrimination, disempowerment and isolation. Because the scope of ecological frameworks is incommensurate, being both interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary, further research possibilities are countless. The ecological perspective opens the fields of disability studies and special education to new theoretical and empirical possibilities.

Two epistemological models are described as new frameworks in disability studies: the Ecological Model of Disabilities and the Ecoducation Model for Special Education. Both are original models that look into the education and inclusion of the person with disabilities.