Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T11:06:01.099Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Effective Instruction for Adults who have Intellectual Disabilities: What Really Happens?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 February 2016

Zanetta Hinton  and
Keith D Ballard
Zanetta Hinton*
Affiliation:
NZSIH (Inc.), Central North Island Region
Keith D Ballard
Affiliation:
University of Otago
*
Enquiries or correspondence relating to this article should be directed to Ms Zanetta Hinton, IHC Taranaki Branch, PO Box 445, New Plymouth, New Zealand.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to describe the strategies used by four staff when teaching people who have intellectual disabilities in residential and vocational facilities, and to compare their teaching methods with the strategies taught in staff training courses. Data was collected during three months of participant observation, and showed that effective instruction occurred through a range of strategies which emphasised teaching as an interactive process based on a close knowledge of the client. While the participating staff used aspects of behavioural instruction techniques, they did not write programs or record, collect or graph data, even though their training courses suggested they should do so, indicating a discrepancy between usual practices and staff training.

Type
Article Commentary
Information
Australasian Journal of Special Education , Volume 15 , Issue 1-2: Contemporary Behavioural Perspectives in Special Education , 1992 , pp. 32 - 40
Copyright
Copyright © The Australian Association of Special Education 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ballard, K.D. (1987). The limitations of behavioural approaches to teaching: Some implications for special education. The Exceptional Child, 34 (3), 197–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennie, G., & Munford, R. (1985). Linking assessment and training: Changing focus of staff development efforts. Mental Handicap in New Zealand, 10(1), 22–26.Google Scholar
Bogdan, R. (1983). A closer look at mainstreaming. Educational Forum, 47, 425–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, L., Nielupski, J., & Hamre-Nietupski, S. (1976). The criterion of ultimate functioning and public school services for the severely handicapped student. In Thomas, A., (Ed.), Hey. Don’t forget about me! Education ‘s investment in the severely, profoundly and multiply handicapped (pp2–15). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
Glynn, T. (1987). Effective learning contexts for exceptional children. In Mitchell, D.R., & Singh, N.N., (Eds.), Exceptional children in New Zealand (pp158–167). Palmerston North: Dunmore Press.Google Scholar
Guess, D., & Noonan, M.J. (1982). Curricula and instructional procedures for severely handicapped students. Focus on Exceptional Children, 14(5), 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guess, D., & Siegel-Causey, E. (1985). Behavioural control and education of severely handicapped students: Who’s doing what to whom? And why? In Bricker, D. & Filler, J. (Eds.), Severe mental retardation: From theory to practice (pp230–244). Reston, VA: Council for Exceptional Children.Google Scholar
Heshusius, L. (1982). At the heart of the advocacy dilemma: Mechanistic world view. Exceptional Children, 49 (1), 6–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heshusius, L. (1984). Why would they and I want to do it? A phenomenological-theoretical view of special education. Learning Disability Quarterly, 7, 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holvoet, J., O’Neil, C., Chazdon, L., Carr, D., & Warner, J. (1983). Hey, do we really have to take data? Journal for The Association of the Severely Handicapped, 8, 56–70.Google Scholar
Jenkins, J., & Jenkins, L. (1985). Peer tutoring in elementary and secondary programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 77, 1–12.Google Scholar
Lampert, M. (1985). How do teachers manage to teach? Perspectives on problems in practice. Harvard Educational Review, 55(2), 178–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, J.W. (1984). How shall we individualise instruction - or should we? Remedial and Special Education, 5, 7–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacArthur, J. (N.D.) Assessment of program effectiveness: Using data to make decisions in the education of severely handicapped students. Unpublished paper, Education Department, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.Google Scholar
McDermott, R. (1977). The ethnography of speaking andreading. In Shuy, R., (Ed.), Linguistic theory: What can it say about reading? (pp153–185). Newark, Del.: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
Minnis, J.R. (1985). Ethnography, case study, grounded theory, and distance education research. Distance Education, 6 (2), 189–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peck, C.A. (1985). Increasing opportunities for social control by children with autism and severe handicaps: Effects on student behaviour and perceived classroom climate. Journal of the Association for Persons with Severe Handicaps, 10(4), 183–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, D.H., & Favell, J.E. (1984). Group instruction with persons who have severe disabilities: A critical review. The Journal for the Association of the Severely Handicapped, 9(3), 167–177.Google Scholar
Reisberg, L., & Wolf, R. (1986). Developing a consulting program in special education: Implementation and interventions. Focus on Exceptional Children, 19 (3), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, M.F., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1984). Another kind of evaluation. Journal of Extension, 22, 5–10.Google Scholar
Snell, M. (1983). Systematic instruction of the moderately and severely handicapped (2nd ed ). USA: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Woodyard, J. (1985). The progress assessment for life skills (PALS). Wellington: New Zealand Society for the Intellectually Handicapped (Inc.).Google Scholar