Search results

Over the past three decades, there has been considerable change in the education of children with disabilities in Canada. Children with developmental disabilities attend inclusive classrooms and are educated alongside their non-disabled peers, receiving services and supports to optimize their participation (Hutchinson, 2014; Slee, R. (2001). Social justice and the changing directions in educational research: The case of inclusive education. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 5(2), 167–177). In Canada, occupational therapists have provided services in schools for over three decades with the aim of supporting participation of children with disabilities (Graham, D. R., Kennedy, D., Phibbs, C., & Stewart, D. (1990). Position paper on occupational therapy in schools. Canadian Journal of Occupational Therapy, 57(4), 1–6; Reid, Chiu, Sinclair, Wehrmann, & Naseerl, 2006). This chapter presents examples from case study research conducted in Ontario, Canada, on the delivery of school-based occupational therapy (SBOT) for two young children (focal participants) with developmental disabilities. Case study research was used to describe the nature of SBOT service delivery from multiple stakeholder perspectives. Data were gathered over the duration of one school year using a combination of observation, document analysis, and interviews involving participants directly involved in the delivery of SBOT with each focal participant. Common characteristics in these two cases enabled cross-case analysis to identify features of collaborative working that facilitated educational programming and outcomes for students with developmental disability.

Consideration can be defined as the process of giving careful thought to something. When an IEP team considers the instructional programming and related goals and objectives for a student identified eligible for special education services, the process gives careful attention to a multitude of factors from different perspectives that result in individualized instruction for that student. Similarly, when assistive technology is considered for students with certain learning characteristics, careful attention must be given to ensure that the recommended assistive technology is required for the student to be successful and reflects an appropriate match between him/her and the tools (Zabala, 1995, 1996). For example, given that prescription eyeglasses can be considered assistive technology, and that a certain degree of visual acuity is generally needed in order for an individual to visually access print, one can see the importance of ensuring that the prescription is indeed required for an individual to perform and is appropriately matched to the visual needs of the individual. If eyeglasses are arbitrarily assigned to an individual, they may serve as an obstacle for the individual to see properly, thus, hampering his/her overall performance.

To describe how low-stakes writing can assist teachers in eliciting greater student engagement and involvement in their own writing by focusing the stages of the writing process more on student thinking than on the surface structure of their writing.

This chapter examines some of the important research literature addressing process writing in general and low-stakes writing in particular. The authors’ experiences with teaching English in the secondary classroom inform their analysis of implementing low-stakes writing assignments as part of the writing process.

The authors describe how using non-judgmental feedback on low-stakes writing assignments allows the teacher and students to have conversations on paper which are intended to help students explore, expand, and clarify their own thinking about a topic. By establishing a continuing conversation on paper with the students about their writing, the teacher takes on the role of “trusted ally” in the writing process, rather than the more traditional role of an arbiter of writing conventions.

Although the presumptive focus of writing instruction for the last two decades has been on the writing process, the tendency to turn the individual steps of the writing process into discrete writing products in a formulaic manner can cause many important parts of the writing process itself to be either overlooked or given short shrift. This chapter provides useful descriptions of ways in which low-stakes writing assignments can afford teachers the means by which to focus their students’ attention on key portions of the writing process so that their writing products are ultimately improved.

To review and synthesize findings from peer-reviewed research related to students’ sources of ideas for writing, and instructional dimensions that affect students’ development of ideas for composition in grades K-8.

The ideas or content expressed in written composition are considered critical to ratings of writing quality. We utilized a Systematic Mixed Studies Review (SMSR) methodological framework (Heyvaert, Maes, & Onghena, 2011) to explore K-8 students’ ideas and writing from a range of theoretical and methodological perspectives.

Students’ ideas for writing originate from a range of sources, including teachers, peers, literature, content area curriculum, autobiographical/life experiences, popular culture/media, drawing, and play. Intertextuality, copying, social dialogue, and playful peer interactions are productive strategies K-8 writers use to generate ideas for composing, in addition to strategies introduced through planned instruction. Relevant dimensions of instruction include motivation to write, idea planning and organization, as well as specific instructional strategies, techniques, and tools to facilitate idea generation and selection within the composition process.

A permeable curriculum and effective instructional practices are crucial to support students’ access to a full range of ideas and knowledge-based resources, and help them translate these into written composition. Instructional practices for idea development and writing: (a) connect reading and writing for authentic purposes; (b) include explicit modeling of strategies for planning and “online” generation of ideas throughout the writing process across genre; (c) align instructional focus across reading, writing, and other curricular activities; (d) allow for extended time to write; and (e) incorporate varied, flexible participation structures through which students can share ideas and receive teacher/peer feedback on writing.

Purpose: To describe how a reading response unit that encourages students to generate their own questions to assigned reading using sequenced instruction can serve as a basis for literary analysis, providing students with a much needed sense of purpose for and authentic engagement with a writing assignment.

Design: Educational reform efforts have focused significant attention on engaging students in assignments, –with the implication that educators connect the purpose and relevance of assignments to the students’ backgrounds and interests. Although educators have typically attempted to forge this connection via the topic or material around which an assignment is centered, the authors argue that purpose, relevance, and engagement are achieved more readily through developing the students’ own thinking about a given topic; their own thinking rather than a given topic, thus becomes the basis for the assignment.

Findings: The authors detail the sequence of instruction they employed to implement a reading response unit in an accelerated sophomore English class, the goal of which was to help students develop a literary analysis essay. The authors discuss how the structure and sequencing of the assignment led to increasing student purpose and engagement.

Practical Implications: Detailing the steps of a reading response unit designed to prepare students for literary analysis based on their own ideas can provide insights to current writing teachers and teacher educators regarding ways in which they can design/modify their assignments to be more purposeful and therefore more engaging for those they teach.

Research models and practices change rapidly. While evidence of such changes includes cross-campus collaborations and multi-authored scholarship, faculty development opportunities also signal what is to come. In this case study, authors representing diverse disciplines examine what faculty development programs reveal about the future of academic research. The authors offer an analysis of faculty support programs across the country as a foundation, and then provide an examination of initiatives in place at their four-year regional comprehensive institution in the United States. The authors then report on the outcomes of these programs for research productivity, with a focus on opportunities that were available to all faculty across the university. Finally, the authors offer perspective on the future of academic research based on findings from examining these programs. The authors suggest that the future of research will focus on (1) collaborative design(s) of research-related support, (2) support structures and programs that encourage and facilitate cross-campus and interdisciplinary research collaborations and sharing, (3) incentive for integrating areas of research with teaching and service, and relatedly (4) programs that encourage faculty to span academic research with industry or community partnerships and collaborations, especially ones that can generate revenue or produce future research, development, or funding streams.

Children of recent refugees and immigrants are the fastest growing student population in the US public education system. Thus, it is imperative to create research-based pedagogies that value linguistic diversity, provide academic and social–emotional support and embrace life experiences that are often vastly different from those of the teachers and typical students. The goal of this study was to examine the effects of an instructional model designed to address specific academic and social–emotional competencies of linguistically and culturally diverse students on the writing of eight and nine-year-old students (n = 10) enrolled in an afterschool programme serving students from refugee families. The model of explicit writing instruction implemented in the study included culturally responsive literature, mindfulness practices, and differentiation in teaching genre-specific text structure and academic vocabulary. Pre- and post-test personal essays were scored for holistic quality of writing and use of academic vocabulary. The findings indicate that explicit and differentiated instruction in both writing organisation and vocabulary use was effective in increasing the holistic quality of students' personal writing and their ability to integrate academic vocabulary appropriately and meaningfully in independent writing. Implications for culturally responsive instruction for refugee students are discussed.

To describe the role of teaching “the paragraph” in furthering literacy goals. The study considers one concept, the Claim-Support-Conclusion Paragraph (CSC) as a curricular and pedagogic intervention supporting writing and academic success for the marginalized students in two classrooms.

While this study corresponds to a gap in the literature of writing instruction (and paragraphing), it takes as its model the development of comprehensive collaborations where researcher-scholars embed themselves in the real practices of school classrooms. A fully-fledged partnership between researcher, practitioners, is characteristic of “practice embedded educational research,” or PEER (Snow, 2015), with analysis of data following qualitative and case study methodology.

Practice-embedded research in this partnership consistently revealed several important themes, including the effective use of the CSC paragraph functions as a critical common denominator across rich curricular choices. Extensive use of writing practice drives increased literacy fluency for struggling students, and writing practice can be highly integrated with reading practice. Effective writing instruction likely includes analytic and interpretive purposes, as well as personal, aesthetic writing, and teaching good paragraphing is intertwined with all of these genres in a community that values writing routines.

Greater academic success for the marginalized students in their classroom necessitates the use of a variety of scaffolds, and writing instruction can include the CSC paragraph as a means to develop academic literacies, including argumentation. Collaborative and innovative work with curriculum within a PEER model may have affordances for developing practitioner and researcher knowledge about writing instruction.